Please sign in to comment.
- Submit - Added various corrections proposed by Lewis, Youtie, Hagedorn, Sänger and by me. At line 20 the question mark after the proposed (uncertain) regularized form in the apparatus is not shown in the preview: I do not why. (Roberto Mascellari) - Vote - AcceptText - In l. 4 divide into two separate corrections: ἐπεὶ instead of λέγει and οὐ κατήντα ἐπὶ τὸν instead of οὐκ ἀνιέναι καὶ τὸν and just use BL references; In l. 6. just correct κέ[λευσ]ον to κε[λε]ῦσαι. Since there are no changes to the wording, I suggest changing underdots is unnecessary, In l. 7: Since there are no changes to the wording, I suggest changing underdots is unnecessary; In l. 8: Just use BL reference; In l. 20 use an |alt| tag for the two alternatives suggested at p. 374 and get rid of cf. (giuditta mirizio) - Vote - Return-Straight-to-Sender - Thank you but please resubmit, since a few changes are needed, as noted by Dr Mirizio. There is a in problem of l. 20, which warrants a commentary note: how can we justify a genitive or an adverb (in an irregular form)? I find this difficult, and my preference would be to leave the text as it is for now. (Nikolaos Gonis) - Submit - I have made the suggested changes. I agree on l. 20: too uncertain to replace the previous text (and it’s better to wait an inspection on the papyrus). (Roberto Mascellari) - Vote - Accept-Straight-to-Finalization - See previous comments. This is now fine. (James Cowey) - Finalized - Ready. (Nikolaos Gonis)
- Loading branch information...
Showing with 11 additions and 0 deletions.