Jump to content


Photo

Isaiah Göttingen Septuagint--some Latin not being found in App1


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 Abram K-J

Abram K-J

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Boston, MA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 02 November 2013 - 07:13 PM

I'm using the Göttingen Septuagint module for Isaiah, and really appreciating the multiple search fields available in the two apparatuses.

 

In the first apparatus, the "Latin content" search field seems to be missing "scripsi" ("I have written," used for conjectural emendation in the apparatus)--it returns nothing. When I change the search field to "Content," it returns 19 hits.

 

Going even broader, and accounting for multiple conjugations of that Latin verb, I try searching "scr*" in "Content," returning 30 hits, but then again with the "Latin content" search layer (which I'd expect to find it), no hits are returned.

 

I could use "Report Correction" here (Helen, just let me know if you would like me to), but this isn't a typo per se.

 

The drop-down list of Latin words looks pretty thorough, so I'm guessing this one got missed in tagging? Or maybe there's something about how the search entry fields are expected to function that I'm not aware of?

 

I also don't know much Latin, but I think the above is still not-to-be-expected behavior.

 

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


#2 James Tucker

James Tucker

    Platinum

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

Posted 02 November 2013 - 07:45 PM

Abram:

 

There are two data types in Latin in the Göttingen volumes. On the one hand, there is a preference for the editor to write notations in Latin, standing in the long line of Latin usage for scholarly work in general and apparatuses in particular. On the other hand, there are Latin readings, in which case it is evidence to a manuscript reading. The "Latin Content" field is designed to capture this latter data, not the former. On the basis that a reading is more germane to the nature of the tool.

 

I concur the field name isn't apropos to the data in which constitutes the field. I wasn't the one to initially designate the fields. I recently suggested that the Fields be redone to facilitate research queries. With a tool of this complexity, there is a medium one has to find, so as to prevent the population of fields.


Edited by James Tucker, 02 November 2013 - 07:46 PM.


#3 Abram K-J

Abram K-J

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,484 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greater Boston, MA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 02 November 2013 - 07:57 PM

James, that's a helpful explanation--thank you.


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





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users