
Tobias Gerbothe
- Etwas schade ist, dass diese Revision so intransparent ist: Wer sind die Revisoren? Nach welcher Textgrundlage wurde revidiert?
- Interessante Fragestellung - ich habe sie zum Anlass genommen, Google Bard danach zu fragen. Bard hat mir lauter schönes und plausibel klingendes Zeug geantwortet, mit DBG, Professorennamen usw. War alles halluziniert, CLV hat das herausgegeben und das mE inhaltsleere Vorwort des Verlages ist hier einsehbar: https://www.leseplatz.de/media/c0/8a/27/1686662590/256020_vorwort-des-verlags.pdf
- ... sorry, Korrektur: deine letzte Teilfrage ist im Vorwort behandelt, BHS und NA28, wobei in Einzelfällen auch mal eine MT-Variante benutzt wird (keine Details)
- Das war mir entgangen, Danke! (Ich hatte die Befürchtung, dass (wie bei Schlachter) nun nach TR revidiert worden wäre.
- There seems to be an error: The book is not by R. Payne Smith, but by his daughter Jessie. (The 1st ed. was published in 1903, Robert died in 1895) (BTW: Please make the Thesaurus Syriacus (which is by R. Payne Smith) happen in Logos!)
- Thank you for sharing this . I have asked our team to investigate this further.
- Jessie's contributions are acknowledged above in the "Key Features" section,
- It should be corrected in the bibliography (not just on the product page)
- Some first thoughts about this Logos edition. I own the 2nd german ed. with Schall's Appendix in print (1966) (I'd love to have this in Logos, but I'm not dreaming, that there are enough people wanting that to produce it.) Based on the description of the Logos edition one will think to only buy the english translation of the 2nd ed. In fact there is also a translation of Schall's appendix (which are Nöldeke's handwritten notes in his own copy.) That's great, BUT what is missing is a link (or at least some sign) that there is a note (addition or correction.) In my printed copy there are bold numbers in the margin, the english translations says to give F plus page number of the appendix. I didn't found that in the main text. It would be great, if there was a link to hover over (like a footnote) and read the note. In the present form the only use case I am aware of, is that the text of the appendix is searchable and may give an unexpected result, if you e.g. search "all books". P.S. I hope such linking gets done for all "corrigenda", at least in grammars and lexicons