MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7115933779 · doi:10.5287/ora-jnmekmbom

Death of the Covenant Code: evaluating the translation of laws with capital punishment in Old Greek Exodus 21.1-23.19 in light of Graeco-Egyptian law

2022· dissertation· en· W7115933779 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHebrewPunishment (psychology)Hebrew BibleCapital (architecture)Scope (computer science)Capital punishmentPoint (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation examines the biblical book of Exodus in its Greek translation from the 3rd century BCE. The focal point of analysis is on laws that involve the death penalty, whether in the Hebrew or Greek texts. Using a method which prioritizes the evaluation of the translated text in comparison to its source text, this thesis argues that laws involving the death penalty in Greek Exodus in no small way depart from the Hebrew text’s contents. This conclusion becomes clearer when the language, syntax, and traits of the Greek legal genre are combined with this comparison of the translation to its parent text. Through creative translation practices, the translator of Exodus takes steps to remove or obscure capital punishment in some laws, add this penalty to another, or otherwise render a Hebrew law’s content in such a way that minimizes the scope or practicability of the capitally punishable offence. One such innovative measure of the translation is in the use of a Ptolemaic legal-syntactic trait that limits the practicability of a given legal command. Here the translator draws on the scribal habits and rules of Graeco-Egyptian law from the 3rd century. In other cases, the translator renders with terms or phrases that superficially represent the Hebrew source text but do not semantically correspond to the Hebrew text in the Greek translation. This project points out these occurrences by means of comparison with the literary and documentary source materials from around the time of the translation. A particular interest is given to Greek legal materials. Out of this translation-technical data emerges the hypothesis that the translator of Exodus rendered these laws in such a way that they might coincide with the legal values and potentially the legal practices of the ethnic superpower of the day (the Greeks). Relevant comparisons are made in order to substantiate this observation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.052
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Research Archive (ORA) (University of Oxford)→Same topicBiblical Studies and Interpretation→French-language works237,207→