1 Kelber, Werner H., The Oral and the Written Gospel (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1983).
2 Kelber, Werner H., The Kingdom in Mark (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1974); ed., The Passion in Mark (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976); Mark's Story of Jesus (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979).
3 Ong, Walter J., The Presence of the Word (New Haven: Yale University, 1967); Interfaces of the Word (Ithaca: Cornell University, 1977); Orality and Literacy (London: Methuen, 1982). Eric Havelock, A., Preface to Plato (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1963); The Greek Concept of Justice (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1978).
4 Farrell, Thomas J., ‘Kelber's Breakthrough’, Semeia 39 (1987) 27–45. Though somewhat more cautiously, most of the reviews of the book welcomed the oral approach as promising for New Testament studies.
5 Finnegan, Ruth, ‘What Is Orality – If Anything?’, Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 14 (1990) 130–49.
6 Street, Brian V., Literacy in Theory and Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1984).
7 Tannen, Deborah, ‘The Myth of Orality and Literacy’, in Linguistics and Literacy (ed. William, Frawley; New York: Plenum, 1982) 37–50.
8 Harris, William V., Ancient Literacy (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1989).
9 Roberts, C. H., ‘Books in the Graeco-Roman World and in the New Testament’, in The Cambridge History of the Bible 1: From the Beginnings to Jerome (ed. Ackroyd, P. R. and Evans, C. F.; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1970).
10 Lord, Albert B., ‘The Gospels as Oral Traditional Literature’, The Relationships among the Gospels (ed. Walker, William O. Jr; San Antonio, TX: Trinity University, 1978)33–91.
11 Charles H. Talbert, ‘Oral and Independent or Literary and Interdependent? A Response to Albert B. Lord’, The Relationships among the Gospels, 93–102.
12 Roberts, ‘Books in the Graeco-Roman World’, 48.
13 Among the references I have been able to find to audience participation in oral performances in nonliterate societies, there are no instances of anything that could be perceived as dialogue. The normal pattern of audience participation is occasional words of encouragement or approval – ‘amens’ or the equivalent. See, for example: Biebuyck, Daniel P., ‘The African Heroic Epic’, Heroic Epic and Saga (ed. Oinas, Felix J.; Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, 1978) 336–67; Clark, J. P., The Ozidi Saga (Ibadan, Nigeria: Ibadan University and Oxford University Nigeria, 1977); Finnegan, Ruth, Limba Stories and Story-telling (Oxford: Oxford University, 1967); Ibid., ‘What Is Orality – If Anything?’, Albert B. Lord, The Singer of Tales (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1960); Notopoulos, J. A., ‘Homer and Cretan Oral Poetry: A Study in Comparative Oral Poetry’, AJP 73 (1952) 225–50; Okpewko, Isadore, The Epic in Africa (New York: Columbia University, 1979); Ron, and Scollon, Suzanne B. K., Narrative, Literacy and Face in Interethnic Communication (Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1981); Tedlock, Dennis, The Spoken Word and the Work of Interpretation (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1983); Wrigglesworth, Hazel, ‘Sociolinguistic Features of Narrative Discourse in Ilianen Manobo’, Lingua 41 (1977) 101–24.
14 Scott, Bernard Brandon, Hear Then the Parable (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1989) 35–7.
15 Edmonson, Munro S., Lore (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1971); Chadwick, H. Munro and Chadwick, N. Kershaw, The Growth of Literature (3 vols.; Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1932–1940); Finnegan, Ruth, Oral Poetry (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1977).
16 Jeremias, Joachim, The Parables of Jesus (New York: Scribners, 1972).
17 Boring, Eugene M., Sayings of the Risen Jesus: Christian Prophecy in the Synoptic Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University, 1982).
19 Clearly the abundance of sayings in Matthew and Luke is due to their incorporation of Q. Interestingly, without the Q material, the later evangelists would have proportionately fewer sayings than Mark.
20 See discussions of these issues in Aune, David E., Prophecy in Early Christianity and the Ancient Mediterranean World (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1983); Dunn, James D. G., ‘Prophetic “l”-Sayings and the Jesus Tradition: The Importance of Testing Prophetic Utterances within Early Christianity’, NTS 24 (1977/1978) 175–98; Richard Edwards, A., A Theology of Q (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1976); Hill, David, New Testament Prophecy (London: Marshall, Morgan and Scott, 1979); Kloppenborg, John S., The Formation of Q (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987).
22 A random comparison of the first 25 verses of Chapters 9 and 15 shows a slightly greater number (19) of subordinate clausal forms in 9 than in 15 (17).
23 Meagher, John C., Clumsy Construction in Mark (Toronto Studies in Theology 5: New York: Edwin Mellen, 1979).
24 Yet I might observe that the earliest clearly literate poets in the Hellenic tradition, such as Archilochus and Sappho, are very life-oriented, indeed celebrants of life in contrast and conscious opposition to epic thanatopsis.
25 The Growth of Literature 3.854.