[b-greek] Re: Fwd: Re: Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon

From: Ted Mann (theomann@earthlink.net)
Date: Sun Dec 23 2001 - 13:45:49 EST


I'm sticking my oars in where I'm unqualified, but I wonder if it would be
fair to say that the Thayer lexicon is fine as far as it goes, but probably
doesn't go far enough for the purposes of current lexical studies, given the
information that has come to light since the 19th Century. That is, a great
deal of information can now be added to lexical entries about which Thayer
knew little or nothing - information that is now available in more recent
works (BDAG, etc.).

Ted
Dr. Theodore H. Mann
theomann@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~theomann

----- Original Message -----
From: "Harry W. Jones" <hjbluebird@aol.com>
To: "Biblical Greek" <b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu>
Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2001 2:55 PM
Subject: [b-greek] Re: Fwd: Re: Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon


> Dear Carl,
>
> I'm getting exactly the responses that I was interested in. That is,
> that no one can point to any of the main definitions of Thayer and
> say that they are incorrect in comparison to for example BDAG. I wasn't
> asking anybody to do research or anything like that. I was asking
> only that if they knew of any definitions in Thayer that were incorrect
> that they say which one. In fact no response to my post at all would
> have been very helpful.
>
> Thanks,
> Harry Jones
>
> > At 6:15 AM -0500 12/22/01, Harry W. Jones wrote:
> > >Dear Paul,
> > >
> > >I appreciate everone's help on my question. And all
> > >I'm trying to do is find out if anyones knows of
> > >any "main" definition of Thayer's being incorrect
> > >due to any discoveries of papyri after Thayer's
> > >lexicon was published? So far, it looks like according
> > >to the current consensus that no "main" definition of
> > >Thayer's is incorrect.
> >
> > Harry, I'm sorry you're finding what people have said in response to
your
> > query "helpful" but fundamentally unresponsive to what you seem to want
to
> > know. I really thought Paul Wendland's response hit a lot of nails on
the
> > head--at least with regard to what I would be looking for in a lexicon.
I
> > can't judge what it is that you're really after here, only
> > speculating--that you want to be assured that Thayer's is "perfectly
> > adequate" to your needs in studying the GNT. I thought Paul responded to
> > that too, saying:
> >
> > >Does Thayer err? Well, let's put it this way: if you don't have BAGD
or
> > >BDAG, you won't be aware of some possible meanings that are out there.
> > >And you might, at times, be led into believing something wonderful
about a
> > >word through Thayer's etymologizing, which nevertheless might not be
true.
> > >Still, it all depends what you want from a dictionary, and how precise
and
> > >complete you want it to be. My guess is that 99 times out of a 100,
> > >Thayer will be just fine. And if Thayer is all you have, and you like
him
> > >(familiarity with a dictionary is also no mean thing), well then: use
him
> > >with joy.
> >
> > I think it really depends upon what YOUR "needs in studying the GNT"
> > actually are. Is what has been learned from epigraphical and
papyrological
> > and straightforward philological research in the past century
negligible? I
> > for one would want to know all that can be known about words used in the
> > GNT, particularly words used less frequently or even very rarely. You'd
> > need to do some comparison of information offered on some particular
words,
> > e.g. hARPAGMOS, a word found only once in the GNT at Phil 2:6; it's not
a
> > common word in extant extra-biblical literature, but where found it
seems
> > to mean "rape" or "robbery", yet in Phil 2:6 it is argued that it's
> > equivalent to hARPAGMA, which also tends to mean violent seizure but may
> > mean, judging from the scant evidence available, "prize catch." I think
you
> > might compare what Thayer's has on hARPAGMA with what you'll find in
BDAG
> > and in Louw & Nida. Or you might take a word like LOGOS and compare
entries
> > in Thayer's, BDAG, L&S, and Louw & Nida.
> >
> > Perhaps this is a matter of tastes, or perhaps it is a matter of
judgment.
> > For my part and my needs with regard to studying the GNT, I wouldn't
want
> > to be without BDAG, L&N, and LSJ, and I would really like to be able to
> > consult the Diccionario Griego-Espanol which has reached its 5th volume
> > and is not yet halfway through the Greek alphabet. I certainly wouldn't
> > want to rely upon a dictionary that hasn't been revised for nearly a
> > century. But one must decide for oneself what one's needs are; certainly
> > one needs to be careful with reference works upon which one hopes to
rely.
> > But when you ask questions like the current one, you're not really
asking
> > for "the truth" so much as advice and opinions, and I think the
responses
> > you've gotten ought to be sufficient to help you reach your own
conclusions.
> > --
> >
> > Carl W. Conrad
> > Department of Classics/Washington University (Emeritus)
> > Home: 7222 Colgate Ave./St. Louis, MO 63130/(314) 726-5649
> > cwconrad@artsci.wustl.edu
> > WWW: http://www.artsci.wustl.edu/~cwconrad/
>
> ---
> B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
> You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [theomann@earthlink.net]
> To unsubscribe, forward this message to
leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
> To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu
>
>


---
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:37:14 EDT