Martijn replied. It appears that he doesn't know the answer about which manuscripts in Fayyumic or Mesokemic attest this word, i.e. ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲥ. He suggested that I contact the CDO.
Here is his full response, which he suggested could be published in full:
Here is his full response, which he suggested could be published in full:
A few comments appear to be necessary, given your post and email - feel free to publish any of this, preferably all of it together
1. "This word" evidently is misrepresenting the data as well as my case: these are two different words, clubbed together into one single entry in the CDO - which has two separate entries for Xrhstos and Xristos, as noted further on
2. The CDO uses many sources / dictionaries, and also links to "the scriptorium": it is a collection, perhaps focal point, of "many things Coptic". ANNIS is one of those, and the scriptorium I referred to:
https://annis.copticscriptorium.org/annis/scriptorium
2a. ANNIS is not a source, it is best thought of as a target; it annotates Coptic texts, and like INTF it is a work in progress - it will practically never be complete
2b. Crum is naturally the main source of the sources; there are additional dictionaries, and in alphabetic order this is the list:
• J. Černý - "Coptic Etymological Dictionary", Cambridge, 1976
• P. Cherix - "Lexique copte sahidique", V.19.1, 2006-2019
• W. E. Crum - "A Coptic Dictionary", Oxford, 1938
• W. Vychicl - "Dictionnaire Étymologique de la langue Copte", Leuven, 1983
• W. Westendorf - "Koptisches Handwörterbuch", Heidelberg, 1965 / 1977
3. It is most puzzling how you ignore the manuscript tradition that I so elaborately and fully provide throughout my book, in this case with regards to both words ⲭⲣⲏⲥⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲥ as well as ⲭⲣⲓⲥⲧⲓⲁⲛⲟⲥ, by referring to the both of them via "this word" - while you now would seem to insist on a manuscript tradition in order for you to accept something that is provided by the CDO!
If you have any queries regarding data provided by the CDO, I suggest you contact the CDO - while the book contains some 750 hyperlinks to original data, one can't expect me to provide the data behind the data for everything, I would think.
A likely explanation for the absence in ANNIS is that the bulk of Coptic texts is in Sahidic and Bohairic, as is to be expected, and that is reflected in the scriptorium - moreover, I am fairly certain that it currently is exclusively limited to both these dialects alone
In related news, footnote 161 is of interest regarding your earlier posts pertaining to colostrum / leaven
Statistics: Posted by Peter Kirby — Tue Jan 23, 2024 2:25 am