20 replies to this topic

[AbramKJ]

I'm wondering if someone who owns or has used the UBS4 and NA27 modules in Accordance can say what they include with regard to cross references, front/back matter, and other marginalia? I haven't been able to tell from the product pages, but a short breeze through the forums has led me to believe that perhaps not all that is in the print editions is in the modules.

The product pages seem to suggest it's just text+apparatus. Is that right? And if that's true, have users of those modules still found them helpful to have in electronic form?

[Michael J. Bolesta]

NA27 comes with NA27 Apparatus. The latter includes the Introduction down to Appendix I; it lacks Eusebius and Appendices II through V. It would be nice to have the cross references as a module (feature request developers!).

UBS4 comes with UBS4 Apparatus and UBS4 Crossrefs. The apparatus includes the introduction; it lacks the indices at the end.

The utility of both is that of Accordance. The search engine is (as you have found), incredibly powerful and fast. The ability to quickly "look something up" in a tool almost instantaneously is marvelous. The portability of the resources with a laptop or iOS device is mind boggling.

If the apparatuses are useful to your work, I would be surprised if you were disappointed.

[AbramKJ]

Thanks, Michael--that's really helpful. I second your thought that cross references would be nice--that's one of the best things about the NA27 in print, in my view.

One thing about the BHS/BHQ modules that is really nice is the ability (as you've noted) to search the apparatuses. That seems like it would be a good use of the NA27 and UBS4, too. I'm definitely considering--just holding off a bit now, because it's hard to say how close we are to NA28 release, and I may just decide to wait it out for that....

(Any Accordance staff or insiders reading this post know an ETA for NA28? I saw a tantalizing Twitter photo of it during SBL...)

[J. T.]

Whether NA28 is imminent or not I cannot say, but I would suggest that the differences of NA28 alone are enough to merit reason, at least for the critical scholar, to have both the NA27, UBS4, and NA28. Textual critical reasoning is at its foundation an interpretation of precedence.

[Matthew Burgess]

Michael's observations are excellent, particularly regarding portability (which seems obvious, but is occasionally overlooked). In addition to its raw power, Accordance reduces the number of large volumes that I need to carry around in order to do scholarly work wherever I happen to be. In my opinion, another vital element of the apparatuses is the addition of hypertexting, both for the sigla and the designations of the manuscripts. The systems of notation in the apparatuses of the major editions of the Hebrew Bible, Septuagint, and New Testament (the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia; the Rahlfs-Hanhart edition of the Septuaginta; and the United Bible Societies and Nestle-Aland editions of the Greek New Testament) differ from one another in a number of ways, some major, some minor. For example, the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia uses a number of Latin abbreviations, most of which do not appear in either of the editions of the Greek New Testament; the Nestle-Aland edition's sigla for the different types of textual variations is much more complex than those used in any of the other editions; the large amount of manuscript evidence for the New Testament has led to a situation in which dozens of manuscript symbols must be understood in order to use the relevant apparatuses effectively; etc. In print editions these differences could easily become overwhelming, but with Accordance, most questions can be resolved by hovering the cursor over the symbol in question and reading the information in the instant details box. Dont't remember which symbol refers to which ancient version of the Hebrew Bible? Don't remember the contents and date of a rarely cited minuscule manuscript? Look in the instant details box.

Also, if you use textual criticism in your teaching or peer-reviewed research, owning the apparatuses makes it much easier to prepare papers or handouts that incorporate their information.

I own the apparatuses for BHS, LXX, UBS, and NA27, and I use them every day. If you're planning to do any serious work with the text of the Bible in the original languages, then they should be among the first modules that you buy.

[AbramKJ]

Thanks, both of you, for your replies.

Matthew: agreed about the hypertexting. With the BHS, moving the cursor over the abbreviations in the apparatus (as you know) just shows you the full Latin word that the abbreviation stands for. There are a couple workarounds to this. BHQ is set up well in this regard. With as much as Accordance did with the BHQ module (it's extremely well done), I wish they could have included more cross-references, marginalia, front/back matter in NA27 and UBS4. That is why I haven't yet purchased them, since I would still need to refer to the print edition to get everything the print edition has. In some ways, the apparatus is the most important thing, though, and I do like the thought of not having to look up which century which manuscript dates from, assuming NA27 helps in that regard?

To James's point, I just found this interesting suggestion from "Dr. J" about going for the CNTTS apparatus, for example, over NA27. I have used the CNTTS apparatus in BibleWorks, and it is pretty thorough....

[WillT]

I would add that being able to hypertext from sigla in NA27 and UBS4 when using Accordance on my iPhone is one of my favourite parts of the Accordance iOS experience.

[Rick Bennett]

Michael is correct.

We were never provided an e-text for the cross references in NA27, but did create our own GNT-T Notes which includes NT OT cross references.

The cross references were provided for UBS4. Their inclusion in a separate searchable module for the most part makes the indices obsolete since you can search by passage (an e-text was not provided for them anyway).

For NA28 we hope to have everything included in the print edition of use in Accordance. Development is underway, but given its technical nature (and our penchant for research-grade quality), it will take a couple months to complete. When it is complete, it will be (in my biased opinion!) the best digital edition available, developed with academic use in mind.

Edited by Rick Bennett, 10 December 2012 - 09:47 AM.

[AbramKJ]

Sounds great, Rick.

[Matthew Burgess]

It's true that the hypertexting of the Latin phrases in BHS is not as helpful for those who don't know Latin. However, as Abram has pointed out in his blog posts, the BHS Latin Key, which is included with many (if not all) Accordance packages, is a good workaround. So, I wouldn't consider this feature a dealbreaker in terms of purchasing the module. Although I don't own the BHQ module, based on what I've seen I would agree that it's a significant step forward. However, I don't expect it to supersede BHS until it is complete, and that may be a few years away.

Also, I would disagree with Dr. J that an apparatus such as CNTTS would be a better initial purchase than NA27. In my estimation, most of the prospective buyers of these modules are highly educated and highly interested laypeople, graduate students, and scholars. For this group, NA27 (and NA28, once it makes its way into Greek language and exegesis courses) will remain the standard for the foreseeable future... the editions used in most courses and cited in most commentaries, monographs, and articles. While CNTTS is impressive in its collation of a large body of manuscripts and its presentation of orthographic and other variants that are often omitted from other apparatuses, its lack of patristic and versional evidence is a serious shortcoming if one intends to use it alone, and its massive amount of data could easily overwhelm introductory students, making it less than ideal for the newcomer to textual criticism. I think that it's best used in concert with other apparatuses, not apart from them. (I do own CNTTS, and this is how I use it.)

I would agree with James that the impending release of NA28 does not necessarily eliminate the value of NA27. Many won't immediately adopt the new edition; students and scholars will continue to buy and use NA27 for a few more years, and in any case, it will be fruitful to compare the two to see what changes have been made.

[Matthew Burgess]

And, in response to one of Abram's questions that I forgot to address: the date and contents of all of the manuscripts cited in NA27 are included in the hypertexting of the manuscript symbols. Although the dating of some manuscripts remains disputed, this tagging is certainly helpful in providing basic information about each manuscript.

[AbramKJ]

Great--thank you, Matthew.

[Robb Brunansky]

Are there any updates on when NA28 will be released? Are we talking weeks or months or (horrors!) longer?

[Rick Bennett]

Are there any updates on when NA28 will be released? Are we talking weeks or months or (horrors!) longer?

 

Hopefully weeks, and it will be fully tagged (i.e. every possible symbol, abbreviation, and manuscript to its description in the Introduction or Appendix). The text with sigla and morph has been done and waiting.

[Robb Brunansky]

That's good news. Looking forward to it!

[Julie Falling]

I, too, am looking forward to it.

[Julie Falling]

One advantage you young guys have missed in the electronic versions of the NA27 (and NA28), etc., is the ability to resize the text!  I wrote text criticism papers for Greek class and had to get out a magnifying glass to read the apparatus.  That really is a pain.  The eye strain was considerable.

 

Regarding the CNTTS - I was examining the changes made from NA27 —> NA28.  Most variants are considered so insignificant that they are not even mentioned in the UBS4 or NA27apparatus.  However, they're all there in the CNTTS, and that's why I purchased it in the first place.  I had found a variant in the TR in Acts 3:20 that was not discussed in the other apparatus (προκεκηρυγμενον-TR vs προκεχειρισμενον-NA27).  My Greek teacher at the time was convinced I had a defective etext of the TR.  Having confidence in Accordance, I was convinced I did not.  I got the CNTTS for Christmas that year and sent him a screen shot.  Of the mss that have been examined so far in New Orleans, the TR is the only one that has that reading.  As the work continues, and we get the yearly updates to the CNTTS, we should have an increasingly complete picture.  But as Matthew said above, the CNTTS doesn't mention the lectionaries, the Fathers, any versions other than the Latin, and the sheer volume of information can be overwhelming.  I will continue to use all the apparatus.  

 

(I'm hoping that when we get a new senior pastor and the transition chaos settles down that I will have some serious blocks of time to devote to tackling Hebrew and continuing my study of Greek.)

[Matthew Burgess]

Although this variant isn't listed in the NA27 apparatus, it's included in the Tischendorf apparatus.  Despite its age and its difficulties (such as its extensive use of Latin), the Tischendorf apparatus remains a very valuable tool.  Its catalogue of variants is larger than that of NA27, and the patristic citations often include the title and reference number of the source of the citation, instead of the name of the father alone.      

Edited by Matthew Burgess, 04 April 2013 - 01:29 PM.

[Julie Falling]

Thanks, Matthew.  Is it usable to someone whose Latin study is distant?  I took three years in high school — that's all that was offered — but that has been more than 40 years ago.  I'm very, very rusty, to say the least.  (How did I get so old so quickly?)  If knowledge of Latin is not essential, that looks like a module I need to acquire!

[Matthew Burgess]

Yes, I think so.  Between your previous Latin, the hypertexted portions of the module, and Google Translate, I think you'll do fine.  :-)  Given your interest in textual criticism, in my opinion this is an essential purchase!