Jump to content


Photo

Another flashcards question


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 greekgeek85

greekgeek85

    Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 11 August 2013 - 02:08 PM

I am trying to find all the words in the LXX1 and LXX2 that do not occur in the GNT-T.  Is there a way to do this?



#2 Helen Brown

Helen Brown

    Mithril

  • Admin
  • 8,427 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:heart in Israel
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 11 August 2013 - 02:48 PM

Easy! Open the GNT-T in one tab, and search for Words with an asterisk to highlight every word.

 

Open the LXX1 in a second tab and search it for Words with *@-[HITS GNT-T]. Do the same for LXX2.

 

The search string means "all words except those that are found in the tab GNT-T."


Helen Brown
OakTree Software

#3 Steve King

Steve King

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 406 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hoddesdon, Hertfordshire, UK
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 11 August 2013 - 03:08 PM

Helen.

 

I was just testing this out before you answered and one of the words that is indicated as not being in GNT-T is εἶπεν 

 

I am not a Greek expert so is there a reason that this form of λέγω does not match? In the LXX it appears that εἶπoν is tagged as a separate lemma which is not the case in GNT-T.


Steve King Running Accordance 11.0.2 on:

Mac 10.9.5 (Mavericks), mid-2010 Macbook Pro, 4Gb RAM

IOS 8 (iPad 2 and iPhone 5)


#4 Ken Simpson

Ken Simpson

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,720 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Interests:Astronomy
    Archaeology
    Physics
    Hebrew and Greek
    Papyrology
    Orthopædic Surgery
    Yosemite 10.10.1
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 11 August 2013 - 04:13 PM

HI Steve,

I am no LXX expert, but εἶπον is generally considered the 2nd aorist form of λέγω. I think I remember that there is some speculation as to it's form, and that it may have come from a different assimilated form, but I have no details to hand.

 

It's interesting that the lexeme is reported as εἶπον, and the root is reported as λέγω. That would be an issue with the way the Kraft/Taylor/Wheeler Septuagint Morphology Database has been assembled.

 

It's interesting that εἶδον is not treated that way (it's the 2nd aorist form of ὁράω). The database reports the lexeme of εἶδον as ὁράω. Go figure!

 

Anyway, that's not a solution, just an observation.


Regards
Ken
Lead Australian Accordance Demonstrator

Administrator, Accordance Exchange

Assistant Minister, Summer Hill Church


#5 Timothy Jenney

Timothy Jenney

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sunny Winter Haven, FL
  • Interests:a good cup of coffee, sci-fi, playing bass, listing to jazz and the blues, camping, fishing and the great outdoors
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 12 August 2013 - 09:29 AM

The most commonly used words in any language are often the most irregular.

 

Consider the English verb "to be." We have I "am," I "was," We "were," we "will be," they "are," he "has been," etc. If I remember correctly, the various tenses are so different because English merge two different verbs meaning "to be," eventually using them as different tenses for a single verb.

 

I had a course in historical Hebrew grammar, long ago, by Dr. Khramalkov at U Mich. If I remember correctly, Ken is correct that Heb. εἶπον was originally a different verb.


Blessings,
"Dr. J"

Timothy P. Jenney, Ph. D.
"Lighting the Lamp" Host and Producer

 

Mac: Early 2011 17" MBP (8,3), 2.3 GHz Quad core, 16 GB RAM, Mercury 6G 480 SSD + 1.5 TB HD, OSX 10.10, Yosemite

iPhone 6 plus 64 GB iOS 8.1


#6 Timothy Jenney

Timothy Jenney

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,639 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sunny Winter Haven, FL
  • Interests:a good cup of coffee, sci-fi, playing bass, listing to jazz and the blues, camping, fishing and the great outdoors
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 12 August 2013 - 04:47 PM

I should add that Dr. Khramalkov was using Greek to make a point about Hebrew. I've forgotten the Hebrew point (Hebrew was always my weakest language), but I do remember the Greek illustration!


Blessings,
"Dr. J"

Timothy P. Jenney, Ph. D.
"Lighting the Lamp" Host and Producer

 

Mac: Early 2011 17" MBP (8,3), 2.3 GHz Quad core, 16 GB RAM, Mercury 6G 480 SSD + 1.5 TB HD, OSX 10.10, Yosemite

iPhone 6 plus 64 GB iOS 8.1


#7 Tony Pyles

Tony Pyles

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 156 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Interests:Hebrew, Greek, Psalms, Septuagint, Linguistics, NT use of the OT, Reformed Dogmatics
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 13 August 2013 - 09:48 AM

The difference between the GNT and LXX1-2 tagging has come up in the forums before! This is certainly not the first time someone has tried to come up with a list of exclusively LXX vocab, been flustered by this issue, and looked to the forums. It is sad that it has not been rectified from one side or the other, though I seem to remember being told the tagging of LXX1-2 is not done by Accordance.

 

Perhaps it would be helpful to have a readme file that outlines the differences in tagging, both in terms of lemmas and any difference in grammatical tagging as well. Has anyone already done this for their own benefit and is willing to share it?

 

Tony



#8 Tony Pyles

Tony Pyles

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 156 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brisbane
  • Interests:Hebrew, Greek, Psalms, Septuagint, Linguistics, NT use of the OT, Reformed Dogmatics
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 13 August 2013 - 02:46 PM

The tagging in LXXS-T appears to be closer, but still not the same (e.g., Κυριος is identified as occurring in LXXS-T but not GNT-T in the above procedure).






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users