3
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 3:
Line 3: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
no edit summary
The book was called a [[codex]] in Latin, and it was a [[Roman]] improvement over the scroll. By the fourth century the codex had gained wide acceptance, and many scrolls that were not converted to codex form were lost to posterity.
The book was called a [[codex]] in Latin, and it was a [[Roman]] improvement over the scroll. By the fourth century the codex had gained wide acceptance, and many scrolls that were not converted to codex form were lost to posterity.
===Corrections===
I hate to point this out but a collection of written words is a sentence, or paragraph. A book is a collection of pages, indeed the definition of a book necessitates no particular need for words, viz. a 'picture' book. A book may also contain 'blank' pages, though of course, some particular (of or pertaining to particles) is bound to have been deposited there. Initially books did not contain paper, as it was not invented until approximately 1300 AD, Gregorian not Julian calender, not of course correcting for Jesus' birth date, which, bibically, was prior to Herod's death in 4 BC. Books were instead made of papyrus, and subsequently, vellum.
You are correct; the bible is a book, however, the word bible derives from the Latin biblia, meaning, unsuprisingly, book. The Latin, is itself, based upon a much earlier Greek word implying holy book; however, this was pre-biblical. I would like to point out that inaccurate information cannot be used for educational purposes, merely diseducational. The peer review system does remove most inaccuracies in text books however. I would also like to use this opportunity to comment on the past participle of the verb to bind, which is bound; not bounded, which would be a textual inaccuracy.
The book was not called a codex in Latin, it was called a biblia, however as noted earlier, this implied, at this time, a holy book. I would also like to draw your attention to the remainder of the paragraph's shameless plagerism from Wikipedia. HERETIC!
The next section's inanity knows no bounds, about which I will commennt no further, however, please feel free to copy and paste the, gramatically correct, section below in it's place.
"Types:
Books are classified hierarchically. The two most general categories are [[fiction]], meaning an imaginative or feigned narrative <ref>{{cite web|url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/FICTION|accessdate=2007-11-12|format=HTML|language=English|work=Dictionary.com|title=fiction}}</ref>, and [[non-fiction]], a composition believed to be truthful. Further types of fiction books include science fiction, historical fictions or myths. Non-fiction books would include accounts, textbooks and biographies. Books can also be classified by media, such as audio or print."
I'm not entirely certain how much you want the last one in there. "One of the most notable genres is the holy book." I not sure that I'd agree on notable, though admittedly that last is solely a point of perspective, but holy books have certainly been the most influential. I would like to point out that this would include the following:
The Torah, The Nevi'im, The Ketuvim, The Koran, The Gnostic Gospels, The Vedas, The Smritis, et cetera.
==Types==
==Types==