Atkinson — On a South-Coptic Text of M. Bonriant. 271 



KaTa^oXea-xqa-ei ; dSoXeaxi^a was a difficult idea to express]. It is 

 alternated with eusobe in Mingarelli, p. 116a 5, "laughing or 

 jokififf." 



So it is bad to say n^es-tu pas diacre . . ., pour savoir ou trouver 

 tant de sagesse? Por the text has, eksown ton nteinoc nsophia, 

 " whence knowest thou this great wisdom ? Art thou a deacon &c. ?" 



It is not il y a une autre mort qui s'abat sur les idoldtres, for ke 

 ehrai means "is appointed for" [226, 10] ; cf. 246, w; 252, 4. 



Again [226, 13], aihise eitiso er ok means, " I have become tired 

 of sparing thee"; not,y«? supporte et soiiffert tes paroles (!) 



And it is wrong to render si je m'y suis refuse for the text [226, zj 

 esje mpiarna mmof , which means, 'if I have not denied Him.' 



129. Here again, it is impossible to understand the grammatical 

 system by means of which he has contrived to extract the following 

 translation: JusqiC oil persisteras-tu dans ta folie? Tu mourras en pleine 

 jeunesse. The sense is correct enough, but it is equally certain that 

 the Editor has no notion whatever of the grammatical relations of the 

 passage! How on earth could sante w sope ekmen ebol mean 

 " how long wilt thou persist ?" He has missed the point, for the text 

 should be punctuated differently [228, 5]; sante w ce sope being the 

 expression for the LXX ews ttotc, " how long is this to go on ?" cf. 

 Ps. vi. 3 KoX (TV TLvpie ews ttotc, ntok de pjoeis sante w sope; 

 Jerem. xiii. 27 Iws rtvos ert, sante w ce sope, i.e. ^'tmtil what 

 happens?'^ "^hat did M. Bouriant take sante to be? A preposition, 

 governing "w[!!], "until when"; in fact satnau! Then the 

 remainder of the passage is clear; ekmen ebol hn teimntsoc 

 knamw hn tekmntseresem, " if thou persist in this folly, thou 

 wilt die in thy youth". 



130. And his grammar is bad at [229, 5], where he reads eaf tamie 

 hethnos nim ebol hn wa , Itii qui d'un seal (homme) a forme tons les 

 peuples. His text would rather mean, "who has formed all nations 

 out of somelody'''' \ cf. Gen. xiii. 16 esje wn scom n-wa eop mpso 

 mpkah , et Swarat rts. His text should probably be hn w - af , ' out 

 of one flesh', e^ kvo<; atjuaros. His translation would have needed wa 

 n- wot. 



So again, the grammar is quite wrong [231, 10], jro ntecmcom, 

 is assuredly not affermis ta force; for cimcom is not a noun 'force', 

 and te does not mean 'thy'! The words are a representation of 

 Ps. xxvi. 14, av^piCov koX KparaiovcrOoy rj KapSia (tov, nte cm com, 

 ' that thou mayst prevail'. 



131. And at [231, 11] we have another Biblical reference, to 



