In an earlier post on the NA28, I mentioned that I wanted to do a post on orthographic variation in NA28.
I might be weird, but when reading the front matter (p. 51*), I noticed the following change to the text in 1 Peter:
- 1Pe 2.25, αλλʼ (ECM/NA28) <= αλλα (NA27).
I hadn’t noticed this change mentioned elsewhere, and I knew (based on lots of previous, boring, pedantic, obsessive-compulsive examination of all the αλλα in the NA27) that there were other spots outside of the Catholic Epistles where I’d noted an αλλα that, following most rules of orthography, should probably be αλλʼ instead.
So I thought I’d peek at the book of Mark, examining orthography between NA27 and NA28. What I found was interesting. Note I’m lazy, so I’m not typing accents/breathing marks.
- Mk 1.27: NA27 πνευμασι => NA28 πνευμασιν
- Mk 1.44: NA27 αλλα => NA28 αλλʼ
- Mk 2.4: NA27 χαλωσι => NA28 χαλωσιν
- Mk 2.17: NA27 αλλα => NA28 αλλʼ
- Mk 2.22: NA27 αλλα => ΝΑ28 αλλʼ
After chapter 2, I got bored, so I didn’t check much further. My guess is that most changes are from αλλα to αλλʼ. I have not reviewed punctuation carefully, I was focused on a quick scan of words. But it is clear that the INTF paid a lot of attention to the upper-text as well as the apparatus. The text, even outside of the Catholic Epistles, has been extensively reviewed (as the front matter indicates) and the product is better, I think. Thanks and Kudos to them for this work — unmentioned and by most likely unnoticed — that improves the product.
For the record: I don’t think orthographic changes are actually changes to the text (which is why I was surprised the difference in 1Pe 2.25 was listed on p 51*). The text is no different, the units of meaning are the same, and it communicates the same thing. The words parse/decline the same. I just find this stuff interesting.
Anyone else find any other “undocumented” (at least in the front matter) variations?