Jump to content


Photo

LSJ supplement?


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1 Abram K-J

Abram K-J

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,552 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Boston, MA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 26 June 2013 - 11:35 AM

I understand that the LSJ supplement (1996, I believe) is not included in the Accordance LSJ that is currently on sale. There are some updates/revisions in the supplement, etc.

 

What I'm curious about (from anyone who has used LSJ with and without supplement)--is there a major functional difference if one were to use LSJ pre-supplement? I.e., for work in the LXX and New Testament (and occasional but rare delving into classical Greek), would the pre-1996 version suffice?

 

Also, could someone on Accordance staff speak to whether or not the supplement may some day come available in Accordance?


Abram K-J
Pastor, Writer, Freelance Editor, Youth Ministry Consultant, Blogger
Web: Words on the Word


#2 Rick Bennett

Rick Bennett

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,792 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay, FL
  • Interests: gadgets, coffee, running and cycling, Rays baseball
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 26 June 2013 - 11:43 AM

If the publisher has an e-text for it, we might be able to license it. But, last I heard that was not the case.


Rick Bennett
Director of Content Development
iOS Working Group


#3 Unix

Unix

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 102 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 26 June 2013 - 12:53 PM

There is also a ~1968 supplement, and I wonder if it's included in the Accordance Edition?: http://www.abebooks....642107-_-isbn10 (Change the top-domain in the URL to .com if You are not paying in U.K. £.)

I got the LSJ with supplement in Logos real cheap over phone when I talked about it with a sales representative. That was while there was also a one-day-only sale (although that sale price was not nearly as good as the price I got). There were however some conditions in order to get the extra low price, conditions for which most don't qualify.

 

The integration level of the supplement is good, revised/supplemented entries are marked with a star before the lemma in Logos.

 

Quickly looking at this, I found one infrequent word which LSJ marks as an LXX-specific case: the word πρόσταγμα occurring in Dan 9:10. That word is under several, all revised/supplemented, entries.

 

I don't know whether the supplement is sold separately as printed matter, but it might? Find out! That might be an option if You would have great use for LSJ in Accordance.

 

You could also manage without the supplement:
 

I understand that the LSJ supplement (1996, I believe) is not included in the Accordance LSJ that is currently on sale. There are some updates/revisions in the supplement, etc.

 

What I'm curious about (from anyone who has used LSJ with and without supplement)--is there a major functional difference if one were to use LSJ pre-supplement? I.e., for work in the LXX and New Testament (and occasional but rare delving into classical Greek), would the pre-1996 version suffice?



#4 Enoch

Enoch

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 443 posts

Posted 26 June 2013 - 04:30 PM

I bought the huge L&S in ~ 1976.  Thus my L&S has a Supplement. I don't know about any later supplement.  Without dragging the tome off the shelf, as I recall the sup is not very long.  It could have been added chiefly to let the publisher put a recent date on an old Lexicon. I recall this book on Archaeology which got a supplement probably for that purpose.  The author chose to add a short treatis against the practice of drinking alcohol!

 

Of course we wait for Accordance to produce the first great Lexicon-Substitute for NT Greek by producing a single document that has all the Greek texts dated from 200 BC through 200 AD.  Then it will be easily searchable for whatever Greek word you want -- you will neatly have a list of all the instances of a word, lexeme, or specific form, complete with translations and Instant details.  Accordance could start by using the Greek Loeb Classics for that time period.  This document would instantly become the best koine dictionary available.  Probably after that is done, a computer program could turn it into a Lexicon in Lexicon form.


Edited by Enoch, 26 June 2013 - 04:36 PM.


#5 Matthew Burgess

Matthew Burgess

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Charlottesville, VA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:12 PM

I understand that the LSJ supplement (1996, I believe) is not included in the Accordance LSJ that is currently on sale. There are some updates/revisions in the supplement, etc.

 

According to the product page, the Accordance module of LSJ is based on the ninth edition, which was published in 1940.  Between 1940 and 1968, additions and corrections to the text were included in a section of addenda at the end of the volume.  In 1968, OUP began publishing this material as a separate supplement of about 150 pages.  As far as I'm aware, the most recent edition of the supplement was published in 1996; it's about 300 pages.  (I'm not aware of any other editions; these are the only two that UVa owns.) 

 

What I'm curious about (from anyone who has used LSJ with and without supplement)--is there a major functional difference if one were to use LSJ pre-supplement? I.e., for work in the LXX and New Testament (and occasional but rare delving into classical Greek), would the pre-1996 version suffice?

 

I don't think that the difference is a functional one.  The supplement simply provides some additional information (for example, words and meanings culled from discoveries since 1940) and corrects some mistakes.  If I were writing an article that included lexical analysis, or preparing a conference presentation, I would definitely consult the supplement in addition to the lexicon itself.  But for everyday use, the Accordance module seems more than sufficient.  I highly recommend it, especially if you have any interest in the LXX, the works of Philo and Josephus, or classical Greek.   


  • Abram K-J likes this

#6 Matthew Burgess

Matthew Burgess

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Charlottesville, VA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 26 June 2013 - 05:38 PM

There is also a ~1968 supplement, and I wonder if it's included in the Accordance Edition?

 

Based on the product page, I don't think the Accordance module includes either edition of the supplement.

 

I don't know whether the supplement is sold separately as printed matter, but it might?.

 

Both editions of the supplement have been bound and sold separately.  Some copies of the first edition are available here.  Some copies of the second edition are available here. 



#7 James Tucker

James Tucker

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 644 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 26 June 2013 - 09:50 PM

One would do wise work to consult Muraoka and Tov's comments regarding the use of LSJ for LXX lexicography.



#8 nicklaurence

nicklaurence

    Bronze

  • Active Members
  • PipPip
  • 58 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 27 June 2013 - 07:29 AM

One would do wise work to consult Muraoka and Tov's comments regarding the use of LSJ for LXX lexicography.

Could you point us in the right direction to source these?

 

Thanks.



#9 Matthew Burgess

Matthew Burgess

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 116 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Charlottesville, VA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 27 June 2013 - 01:56 PM

Quickly looking at this, I found one infrequent word which LSJ marks as an LXX-specific case: the word πρόσταγμα occurring in Dan 9:10. That word is under several, all revised/supplemented, entries.

 

It seems that a number of entries included in the first edition of the supplement were drawn from the vocabulary of the LXX, and some of these were criticized for introducing new, potentially questionable senses for various words.  See J. A. L. Lee, "A Note on Septuagint Material in the Supplement to Liddell and Scott," Glotta 47 (1969), 234-242.

 

 

 

One would do wise work to consult Muraoka and Tov's comments regarding the use of LSJ for LXX lexicography.

 

Certainly... however, it's important to note that both Muraoka and Tov have been involved with other lexical projects (Muraoka with his A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, and Tov with Lust, Eynikel. and Hauspie's A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint, which was born out of the CATSS project he headed with Robert Kraft).  So, neither one is an impartial, outside observer.  As we would say in Virginia, they both have dogs in this fight.

 

In sum, LSJ's classical focus means that it may not be the ideal choice if you're in search of a single Greek dictionary, particularly if your interest is limited to biblical studies.  (On the other hand, if you want the dictionary with the broadest coverage, then it's the clear winner.)  In my opinion, it's an excellent resource to pair with BDAG and/or LEH, especially at the current sale price.  






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users