[osis-core] OT Quote in NT

[Troy A. Griffitts]

Hey Chris,
	Thanks for the pertinent, articulate reply.  However, I still disagree. 
  Through many ages of English grammar, a QUOTE (") has meant a small 
set of specific things.  I think assigning this traditional meaning of 
the English term QUOTE to our usage of our tag <q> is a wise thing.

	The NASB and other Bible translations did not feel that QUOTE (") was 
proper to use for these entities in Scripture, and neither do I.  They 
are a very specific and different thing, and it would not be intuitive 
for an encoder to use <q> for such a thing, as he would think that using 
<q> would assign an attribute to the text which was more, or rather 
different, than what he wants to assign.

	Just to sum up:

	I believe that <q> SHOULD always be renderable with QUOTE (", ', `, et. 
al.)

	I believe that when literal translations render a segment as SMALL CAPS 
in the New Testament what they feel is a reference or allusions to the 
Old Testament, they assign a meaning that, when one thinks of QUOTE ("), 
is only dangerously in error.


	-Troy.


Chris Little wrote:
> Troy,
> 
> We did discuss this and Todd's suggestion is correct.  There's no 
> substantive difference between a writer quoting a speaker and a writer 
> quoting another written work.  <q> covers spoken quotations, block 
> quotes (we specifically discussed this and decided to collapse 
> <blockquote> into <q>), & written quotations--in other words, any 
> incidence of an external work being copied in part into the work at hand.
> 
> You can't blindly render all <q>'s as quotation marks anyway, because of 
> block quotes, which use <q> but are rendered, instead, with wider margins.
> 
> I think <q> has always been intended for this purpose since 1.1, when 
> <otPassage> & <ntProphecy> were dropped.
> 
> Possibly we should add more types to osisQuotes, which currently 
> includes only "block", such as "otPassage", "ntProphecy", "spoken" (set 
> as the default?), & "written".  We could even add "inscription" to the 
> enumeration and eliminate the <inscription> element.
> 
> --Chris
> 
> Troy A. Griffitts wrote:
> 
>> This is not an _actor_ in the narrative speaking a quote, this the 
>> _author_ citing the Old Testament.  I don't agree with using <q> to 
>> mark anything other than the former.  In fact I strongly disagree with 
>> your mentioned usage within a commentary.
>>
>> I'm using <cite type="OT"></cite> for now, until we decide.  I'm sure 
>> we've spoken about this.  I had thought it was included in the most 
>> earliest incarnations of OSIS.
>>
>>     -Troy
>>
>>
>>
>> Todd Tillinghast wrote:
>>
>>> Troy,
>>>
>>> I don't recall specifically talking about OT quotes in the NT, but we do
>>> have a clear way to attribute a quote as a quote of scripture (or any
>>> other work with a reference system).
>>>
>>> With OSIS 2.0 we added osisRef to <q>.  When we added it we were talking
>>> about quotes of scripture within a commentary that are not the topic of
>>> the commentary (which would be covered by <catchWord> rather than <q>).
>>> This seems to be the natural solution to the need you described. 
>>> Further, if the translators want to attribute the quote to the Greek
>>> translation of the OT (is this the LXX) they are free to do so.  (There
>>> are notes in the CEV everywhere there is a quote of the OT in the NT
>>> because the text quoted in the NT is not the same words that appear in
>>> the OT and they want to give some indication of why.)
>>>
>>> Do you agree that this is the best way to handle an OT quote in the NT?
>>>
>>> Todd
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> osis-core mailing list
> osis-core@bibletechnologieswg.org
> http://www.bibletechnologieswg.org/mailman/listinfo/osis-core