Jump to content


Photo

Fuller References for the RV (1881), Request Module


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

#1 Enoch

Enoch

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 02:02 PM

Moulton, W. F.;  Moulton, James Hope; Greenup, A. W.; and Scrivener, Frederick Henry Ambrose; eds.:

The New Testament, in the revised version of 1881, with fuller references, Printed for the universities of Oxford and Cambridge, Oxford (1910).

 

https://archive.org/...u31924029309717

 

http://babel.hathitr...;view=1up;seq=4

 

Amazon $33.xx

http://www.amazon.co...s/dp/1112170391

 

My memory was wrong, for I had thought this work was done for the ASV.  Rather, it was done for the predecessor to the ASV, namely the English RV.  I don't know if Accordance has the RV, but if not, then that is also a requested module.

 

Many years ago, Wilbur Smith praised this work to an eschatology class in which I was enrolled.  I located it at the Moody Bible Institute Library across town, but I see that it is currently available in print (maybe old stock?).  At any rate, the work is public domain and available on line.

 

If you look at this work, I think you will be impressed at the incredible list of cross references, too many to be included in a regular edition of the RV.  


Edited by Enoch, 26 March 2014 - 02:09 PM.


#2 Helen Brown

Helen Brown

    Mithril

  • Admin
  • 8,506 posts
  • Twitter:accordancebible
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:heart in Israel
  • Accordance Version:11.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS

Posted 26 March 2014 - 02:16 PM

This is online only as a scanned file, not a text file from which we could create a module. And the interest in the Revised Version is minimal, but it is available here for $9.99, and included in the Bible Study Collection and higher.

 

We have many other modules of cross references, and are working to get more. I do not think that this should be one of them.


  • Michael J. Bolesta likes this
Helen Brown
OakTree Software

#3 Enoch

Enoch

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 03:01 PM

Well, you know much more than I about the nature of files online.  I wonder if anyone has a program that converts scanned files to text.  The two references I put do seem to be scanned as you say; but it maybe available on some other site as text.  Of course if one spends $33 on the printed text, it should be simple to scan it to text.  Thanks for telling me about your $9 RV; however, my main interest is in the great supply of cross references, rather than the RV as such.

 

It is no doubt more feasible for you and your staff to evaluate the comparative excellence of various cross reference collections  --better than I.  But if you think that you need to get more cross references, I would not overlook consideration of this Oxford-Cambridge work.


Edited by Enoch, 26 March 2014 - 03:08 PM.


#4 Enoch

Enoch

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 26 March 2014 - 03:37 PM

Well, I did another internet search and came up with this:

"Frederick F. Bruce, The Letters of Paul: An Expanded Paraphrase, Printed in Parallel with the Revised Version with Fuller References by Drs. Scrivener, Moulton & Greenup. Exeter, Devon: Paternoster Press, 1965."

 

I'll bet that Accordance is interested in adding this as a module.



#5 Helen Brown

Helen Brown

    Mithril

  • Admin
  • 8,506 posts
  • Twitter:accordancebible
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:heart in Israel
  • Accordance Version:11.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS

Posted 26 March 2014 - 09:03 PM

Unfortunately, I think this work will fall into the no-man's land. The older works that are public domain have often been etexted by volunteers (or for profit) because they are freely available. Works since about 1990 generally were produced electronically and so an etext of some sort exists, but of course the rights to publish and to use the etext must all be negotiated. The problem is with works that are still copyright but no etext has been created, those in no-man's land. It's a major expense and hassle to etext them. Yes, software can convert scanned text to real text, but not perfectly. It does best on real English sentences. The cross-references you want are small and are not real words, so there will be many errors, and each error makes the cross-reference useless to the program. So either we or the publisher would need to be convinced of the value of such a project.


Helen Brown
OakTree Software

#6 Enoch

Enoch

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 27 March 2014 - 10:34 AM

I note that the work is available on Amazon.  The blurb on it says:

 

"Originally published in 1910. This volume from the Cornell University Library's print collections was scanned on an APT BookScan and converted to JPG 2000 format by Kirtas Technologies. All titles scanned cover to cover and pages may include marks notations and other marginalia present in the original volume."

 

Using a book with cross-references takes a lot of time if one has to manually look up the cross-references, instead of clicking on them in Accordance & having the verse pop-up at once.

 

Since I looked at a page of this work and since both Wilbur Smith and F F Bruce recommended this work (Bruce by implication since he included it with his paraphrase on the Pauline corpus), I am thinking that it might be the best set of cross-references available for the NT.  But it would be impractical to use without an Accordance type system to bring up the verses quickly.


Edited by Enoch, 27 March 2014 - 02:09 PM.


#7 Enoch

Enoch

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 571 posts

Posted 30 March 2014 - 11:21 PM

Incidentally, on the difficulty of deciphering scanned text, I just did a little research on Captcha, where a string of letters / numbers is deliberately distorted for purposes of preventing spam on the internet.  For example, YouTube had a Captcha system if one posted too many posts in too narrow a time frame.  It turns out, from report, that it is really hard to keep hackers from writing programs that can hack through Captcha, convert the distorted characters to OCR results, & deposit the spam anyway.  But perhaps the hackers' programs are not readily available to legitimate businesses?






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users