Tuesday, June 28, 2011
A Misprint
James Willis, Latin Textual Criticism (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1972), has an appendix consisting of "One Hundred Passages for Conjectural Emendation" on pp. 191-213, as well as "Trial Passages" for emendation following several chapters.
Sometimes one finds in classical texts errors introduced not by medieval scribes but by modern editors or typesetters. Emendation is needed here, too. One such error appears to lurk in Ovid, Ex Ponto 1.7.23, as printed in Ovid, Tristia. Ex Ponto, tr. Arthur Leslie Wheeler, 2nd ed. rev. G.P. Goold (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988; rpt. with corrections 1996 = Loeb Classical Library, 151), p. 300:
Newer› ‹Older
Sometimes one finds in classical texts errors introduced not by medieval scribes but by modern editors or typesetters. Emendation is needed here, too. One such error appears to lurk in Ovid, Ex Ponto 1.7.23, as printed in Ovid, Tristia. Ex Ponto, tr. Arthur Leslie Wheeler, 2nd ed. rev. G.P. Goold (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1988; rpt. with corrections 1996 = Loeb Classical Library, 151), p. 300:
nec tamen inrumpto quo non licet ire.For "inrumpto" read "inrumpo," an easy correction. Apparently the misprint first appeared in G.P. Goold's revised edition. I've seen at least one earlier printing (before the revision) of this Loeb Classical Library volume with the correct text.
Labels: typographical and other errors
