THE BOOK OF EZEKIEL Moshe H. Goshen-Gottstein Shemaryahu ...

Introduction
abbrev variant assumed to have resulted from an abbreviation 62
add added; additional 63
app
cross-reference to an entry in another apparatus
apt
contrary to appearance, the rendering is suitable
aram
exegesis based on Aramaic (usually with ‘etym’)
atten
attenuation in the choice of a word; use of a ‘weaker’, viz., less
specific word
condens a longer expression in x reduced to an equivalent shorter translational
phrase, especially in cases of repetition or parallelism
connect a difference relating to the connection between clauses or sentences
ditt dittography 64
dupl textual doublet 65
ed(d)
printed edition(s)
etym
interpretation based on a particular etymology
evid
‘main evid’(ence), when the printed text of the edition is based on
a minority reading
ex variance due to direct influence or borrowing from another text 66
exeg
exegetical change, sometimes specified as due to geography, theology,
etc.; combined with ‘synt’ indicates different syntactic exegesis
67
expans expanded rendering (sometimes creating new parallel)
formula variant concerning a fixed expression or phrase recurring in different
forms 68
gloss
explanatory gloss entered by editor, scribe or translator, which
sometimes leads to ‘dupl’ 69
62 Cf. G. R. Driver, “Abbreviations in the Massoretic Text,” Textus 1 (1960) 112–131; idem, “Once
Again Abbreviations,” Textus 4 (1964) 76–94; M. Fishbane, “Abbreviations, Hebrew Texts,”
IDBSup, 3–4. Cf. also Tov, TCHB, 256–257.
63 Including exegetical additions from a similar text or texts. An excessively long addition is indicated
by ‘add’ in the apparatus, with the added text given in the notes (cf. e.g., 24:14).
64 Cf. ‘hapl’.
65 Also indicates double translations, e.g., 1:4, n. 2. Cf. S. Talmon, “Double Readings in the Massoretic
Text,” Textus 1 (1960) 144–184; idem, “Conflate Readings (OT)”, IDBSup, 170–173; idem, in
Talmon-Cross, 321–400. Cf. also Tov, TCHB, 241–243.
66 In contrast with the general reference ‘cf’.
67 In Ezek 40–48, several apparent differences were qualified as ‘architectural exegesis’ (cf., e.g.,
40:12, 13; 42:3).
68 Cf., e.g., 2:7, n. 1; 25:15, n. 2.
69 Cf. E. Tov, “Glosses, Interpolations, and Other types of Scribal Additions in the Text of the Hebrew
Bible,” Language, Theology, and the Bible: Essays in Honour of James Barr (ed. S. E. Balentine and
J. Barton; Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994) 40–66 [=Greek & Hebrew Bible, 53–74].
xxvi