지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 저널정보
- 대한성서공회 성경원문연구 성경원문연구 제49호
- 발행연도
- 2021.10
- 수록면
- 214 - 240 (27page)
- DOI
- 10.28977/jbtr.2021.10.49.214
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This essay compares and analyzes of the Book of Jeremiah in The NKRV Study Bible; Stuttgarter Erklärungsbibel (hereinafter Stuttgart) and NKRV, Erklärt-Der Kommentar zur Zürcher Bibel (hereinafter Zürich).
First of all, Stuttgart and Zürich are distinguishable in form and contents. Formal differences appear in the introduction part, paragraph division, and general outline. Differences in content are found in addition to historical, archaeological settings and the other additional contents. Furthermore, Zürich is emerged a number of controversial arguments considerably.
The formal differences are as follows: First, in the introduction part, Stuttgart is written only in descriptive form, while Zürich is occupied by schematic and descriptive forms. Second, in the division of paragraphs, Stuttgart subdivided each content microscopically whereas Zürich macroscopically divided sections and presented the whole picture, and then commented each content in light of the big picture. Third, Stuttgart is focused more on the content of subdivided paragraphs than Zürich, which puts more emphasis on the general overview of inclusive several chapters.
The content differences are as follows: First, Zürich is added many of historical settings comparatively. Second, Zürich supplements a number of recent geographical and archaeological settings. Stuttgart is published in Germany in 1992; Zürich in Switzerland in 2010, reflecting research results over the past two decades. It has many controversial arguments, however, in the introducing and reflecting of recent research.
Stuttgart was translated in Korean in 1997, and The Good News Study Bible in 2001, and both are ground-breaking Bible commentaries which presented historical-critical Bible interpretation to Korea, where it has been forming of dominated literalism interpretation. Zürich resolutely accommodated and argued for the recent historical-critical interpretation, which is rather taking a step forward to the former two bible interpretation in earnest. The contents are to be a stumbling block for some or a stepping stone for others. The superior one-volume commentary, Zürich is not only a daunting challenge but also an outstanding achievement.
First of all, Stuttgart and Zürich are distinguishable in form and contents. Formal differences appear in the introduction part, paragraph division, and general outline. Differences in content are found in addition to historical, archaeological settings and the other additional contents. Furthermore, Zürich is emerged a number of controversial arguments considerably.
The formal differences are as follows: First, in the introduction part, Stuttgart is written only in descriptive form, while Zürich is occupied by schematic and descriptive forms. Second, in the division of paragraphs, Stuttgart subdivided each content microscopically whereas Zürich macroscopically divided sections and presented the whole picture, and then commented each content in light of the big picture. Third, Stuttgart is focused more on the content of subdivided paragraphs than Zürich, which puts more emphasis on the general overview of inclusive several chapters.
The content differences are as follows: First, Zürich is added many of historical settings comparatively. Second, Zürich supplements a number of recent geographical and archaeological settings. Stuttgart is published in Germany in 1992; Zürich in Switzerland in 2010, reflecting research results over the past two decades. It has many controversial arguments, however, in the introducing and reflecting of recent research.
Stuttgart was translated in Korean in 1997, and The Good News Study Bible in 2001, and both are ground-breaking Bible commentaries which presented historical-critical Bible interpretation to Korea, where it has been forming of dominated literalism interpretation. Zürich resolutely accommodated and argued for the recent historical-critical interpretation, which is rather taking a step forward to the former two bible interpretation in earnest. The contents are to be a stumbling block for some or a stepping stone for others. The superior one-volume commentary, Zürich is not only a daunting challenge but also an outstanding achievement.
목차
1. 들어가는 말
2. 형식적 차이
3. 내용적 차이
4. 그 밖의 추가 내용
5. 논쟁이 되는 견해
6. 나가는 말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
『취리히성경해설 성경전서 개역개정판』의 성서 해석 모델 ― 요한복음을 중심으로 ―
성경원문연구
2022 .04
-
『취리히성경해설 성경전서 개역개정판』 구약을 중심으로 - 대한성서공회, 2021 -
Catholic Theology and Thought
2022 .06
-
『취리히성경해설 성경전서 개역개정판』의 특장점과 평가 - 서신서 중심 -
성경원문연구
2021 .10
-
Erklärt. Der Kommentar zur Zürcher Bibel
성경원문연구
2017 .04
-
Geldgeschichten der Bibel (D. Bauer, Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2006); 111 Bibeltexte, die man kennen muss (A. Malessa, Stuttgart: emons; Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 2021)
성경원문연구
2023 .10
-
성경번역물의 저작물성과 실질적 유사성 판단
교회와 법
2020 .01
-
조선그리스도교련맹 ?성경전서?(1990/2010) 신약성경에 대해 분석적 평가(V): 요한계시록
대학과 선교
2021 .01
-
영어 성경 번역의 역사
성경원문연구
2018 .04
-
1912년 간행된 중국어 성경의 언어 특징 연구 — 『쉐레쉐브스키 쉬운 문리역』과 『관화체화합본』의 마태복음을 중심으로
중국문화연구
2022 .08
-
한글 성경 시편 5편의 번역 변화 연구 : 『시편촬요』(1898)부터 『개역개정판』 (2005)까지
성경원문연구
2016 .04
-
『개역개정』 성경 개정을 위한 문체 논의
성경원문연구
2022 .04
-
츠빙글리의 종교개혁과 『취리히 성서』
Canon&Culture
2017 .10
-
Bible: Les récits fondateurs : (S. Bloch, F. Boyer, Montrouge: Bayard, 2016)
성경원문연구
2021 .04
-
한글번역성경들의 원문충실도 비교연구 (Ⅱ) : 본 교단이 사용하는 성경번역(신약)들을 중심으로
신학지남
2017 .12
-
<기쁜소식성경>(Good News Bible)의 1992년 개정과 그 배경
성경원문연구
2020 .04
-
남북한 교회 성경 일치를 위한 제안
개혁논총
2022 .12
-
존 웨슬리와 성서
신학과세계
2023 .06
-
북한어 사역 성경의 방향성 제안: 모퉁이돌 선교회, 성경전서/ 남북한병행성경 빌레몬서를 예시로
기독교와 통일
2022 .12
-
십계명(출 20:1-17)의 중(中) · 한(韓) 성서 비교 연구
구약논단
2019 .09
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2021-233-002134451