davidmedina Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 I have noticed that if I use the ESVS many words are not tagged and won'r show up in the Instant Display or be useable for Lookup. For example, I am studying the book of Luke using the ESVS. I got to Luke 3:17 "His winnowing fork is in his hand, to clear his threshing floor and to gather the wheat into his barn, but the chaff he will burn with unquenchable fire.” I wanted to find more about winnowing fork". I click on the word "winnowing" and there is no information on the Instant display. And because there is no tag I cannot search by strong number. These is no lemma, no information at all like if that word did not exist. I found many words like that. Further test reveals that winnowing is tagged in the NASB95. Same happens with the phrase "Good news to the people" in verse 18 in the ESVS is not tagged at all but in the NASB which was translated as the gospel it is tagged. But it gets worst. When I try to look up the word winnowing in the dictionary by right clicking and going to Lookup>Dictionary Accordance tells me that "There are no words to use in the selected text". But there is as if I do the same thing using the NASB95S it opens up… because it is tagged in the NASB95. It seems like I cannot choose the ESVS as my study Bible as there are many words that are not tagged. If Accordance is about choosing my own path for study then why is the ESVS not tagged as well as the NASB95? Also, as I did a "search all" for the word winnowing using just dictionary, when it opens up to the result page non has active links to the reference Bible verses. It forces you to have to open up the actual tool in order to see the active links to the reference. Not very efficient. What if I just want to quickly hover over the Bible reference and see what is about in the Instant Display? What if I just want to open directly to that Bible reference without having to open the tool? I would like to hear if there is any reason behind this or if it is a bug or a mistake, but I am finding too many words in the ESVS that are not tagged although is a tagged book but that they are tagged in the NSAB95. My biggest concern is that I know cannot trust the tagging on Accordance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinClay Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Presumably it is like this because winnowing fork and good news are each just one word in the Greek, so fork and news have been tagged but winnowing and good are not. If you try to search on winnowing you are searching on a word that is not not the Greek. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Fidel Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Hi David, The word "fork" is the tagged word in the ESVS and the NIV. What you are looking for is referred to by Accordance as "phrase tagging." Currently the only tagged text that has this feature is the Mounce NT. It provides highlighting of the phrases ore multiple words used in English to translate a Greek word represented by the Strong's or GK tagging system. I hope this helps explain what you are experiencing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Fidel Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Actually, the NASB is probably the least tagged text when it comes to conjunctions and prepositions. I do not think they are tagged at all in the NASB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmedina Posted October 30, 2013 Author Share Posted October 30, 2013 Presumably it is like this because winnowing fork and good news are each just one word in the Greek, so fork and news have been tagged but winnowing and good are not. If you try to search on winnowing you are searching on a word that is not not the Greek. I appreciate your explanation but I am sorry Fidel and Martin, but that does not explain why the word winnowing is NOT tagged in the ESVS yet the exact same word is tagged in the NASB95 Actually, the NASB is probably the least tagged text when it comes to conjunctions and prepositions. I do not think they are tagged at all in the NASB. I am sorry, but the word winnowing is tagged in the NASB and the word is NOT tagged in the ESVS. The exact same word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmedina Posted October 30, 2013 Author Share Posted October 30, 2013 There may be something I am missing or maybe unaware of that justify this happening, that not every word in the Bibles that are tagged are actually tagged. That is why I am asking. I like to know why things work the way they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Fidel Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 I apologize if I was not clear. The underlying Greek word is translated winnowing fork. There is one Greek word and two English words in translation. The people tagging the texts chose to tag the word fork in the ESVS and winnowing in the NASB. It is the same underlying greek word. Since The NASB or the ESVS do not tag multiple english words translating a single underlying Greek word, they have to choose which word to tag. Personally, fork is probably the better choice if you have to pick one word. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Bennett Posted October 30, 2013 Share Posted October 30, 2013 Both answers are basically right. When tagging these translations we had to make a decision on which single word to tag because up until recently it wasn't possible to tag a phrase. The goal was to tag the most meaningful word in the phrase. The NAS95S was not tagged by us, we license the text and tagging from another source so we do not control how it is tagged. You will notice that often times phrases are tagged with multiple key numbers for the main word. See for example "tax collectors" in Mk 2.15. They tag "tax" and "collectors" with G5057. In the ESVS only "collectors" is tagged. It is only one word in Greek. If you search for G5057 in the NAS95S you will therefore get an inaccurate number of hits because of the way they tagged it. It is for this reason that we did not tag the rest of our texts like this. And, I just realized this is the case for your "winnowing fork" example in Matt 3.11. There are other instances where multiple key numbers are tagged on a single word or phrase. One example that stands out in the ESVS is "with child" ἐν γαστρὶ ἔχουσα in Matt 1.18 (Lk 2.5). We tagged all three key numbers on the English word "child" (in retrospect "with" should probably be tagged with G1722, but that's arbitrary). As we often say, our key number texts are a guide to the underlying original languages, but they are not precise. The ones doing the tagging did not translate the texts, nor are there any translator's notes provided in them. Judgment calls have to be made all the time. Regardless, they are very useful if you take a bit of time to get to know how they function, and as you've done, ask questions when you run into something. One major tip, is to use the Interlinear. This will line up the tagging in a way that will clearly show you which word is tagged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmedina Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 Thanks for the explanation. But the creates a problem for those of us that have no knowledge of Greek and study the Bible in English and depends of the strong number. It assumes that whomever is using Accordance will know that winning fork are two English word for one Greek word. I personally did not know that. I depend on the software to help me find what the words means. If I was using printed tools I would have gone to my strong concordance to find the meaning. Can you imagine if could not find the word or some sort of explanation or a tag for it? Confusion. That is the same thing I experienced. I thing every word need to be tagged. Now I may look at the inter linear if something like that happens again. But again, I didn't knew or think on that, and Accordance assumes that it's user will know or should know to do that. And that has been my biggest stumbling block learning to use Accordance and choosing it over Logos. It assumes a lot from me. I am just saying this to share what a novice, non-scholar type stumbles with hopping that the feedback help refine Accordance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Bennett Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 I appreciate the feedback, really. We're always looking to improve things, and history shows that often comes from user feedback. In this case we're not assuming knowledge of Greek or Hebrew. This is just the nature of Key Number tagging, which is shared by many apps and texts. As mentioned I would especially recommend using the Interlinear feature; it's designed for just this type of scenario and for comparing multiple texts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmedina Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) Thanks Rick, I will sure do that. I know each software has its own style and reason of doing things the way they do. I wasn't implying that accordance did assume things intentionally. But in my experience as a photographer and graphic designer sometimes when I try to explain things to others because they have become second nature to me I implicitly assume certain level of awareness or knowledge from the hearer and communication breaks down. My point was that maybe Accordance is so used to work with certain type of users that certain things become implicitly assumed. Sometimes I read topic discussions in the forum and I have no clue as to what they are talking about. As far as I am concerned they are speaking in tongues. For example, someone that is familiar with Greek may have assumed that the reason the word as not tagged was because of what you have explained. But someone like me, that is not aware of those things would have never thought of that but that there was something missing or wrong. Not to tag every word assumes that those using the software know or should know or will learn once they face the issue Accordance reason for not tagging the word. The assumption may not be intentional but it is certainly implicit in the action. Logos seems to tags every word so I have never faced this issue before. Edited October 31, 2013 by davidmedina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Bennett Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 That's certainly a valid point, and one that we often try to take into consideration. I guess on this particular issue I was just trying to say 'most' apps (all except Logos?) function like we do with respect to key number (aka Strong's) texts. This is also why I thought our interlinear might be more at home for you, knowing that Logos is big on them. Thanks again for the feedback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmedina Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 I can't say if Logos tags everything but so far I have never encountered something that wasn't tagged on a Bible. But I'll take your advice and use the Interlinear for cases like that. Once you know what's going on and what to do it's not a big deal anymore. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Francis Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) The only thing I remember close to an interlinear in MY Accordance Library is the NIV Concordance....(EDIT: I see this is likely a moot point as it does;t appear to be one the Zondervan products reintroduced). Luke 3:17 NIV Word Lexical Form Inflected Form G/K Number Relationship His o¢ß ou∞ G4005 Equal Word * oJ to\ G3836 Not in English winnowing English Helper Word +01 fork ptu/on ptu/on G4768 Equal Word is Not in Greek in e˙n e˙n G1877 Equal Word his aujto/ß aujtouv G0899 Equal Word * oJ thvØ G3836 Not in English hand cei÷r ceiri« G5931 Equal Word to Aid in Translation +01 clear diakaqai÷rw diakaqa◊rai G1350 Equal Word his aujto/ß aujtouv G0899 Equal Word * oJ th\n G3836 Not in English threshing a‚lwn a‚lwna G0272 Equal Word floor English Helper Word -01 and kai÷ kai« G2779 Equal Word to Aid in Translation +01 gather suna¿gw sunagagei√n G5251 Equal Word the oJ to\n G3836 Equal Word wheat si√toß si√ton G4992 Equal Word into ei˙ß ei˙ß G1650 Equal Word his aujto/ß aujtouv, G0899 Equal Word * oJ th\n G3836 Not in English barn, aÓpoqh/kh aÓpoqh/khn G0630 Equal Word but de÷ de« G1254 Equal Word he Aid in Translation +02 will Aid in Translation +01 burn katakai÷w katakau/sei G2876 Equal Word up English Helper Word -01 the oJ to\ G3836 Equal Word chaff a‡curon a‡curon G0949 Equal Word with Aid in Translation +01+02 unquenchable a‡sbestoß aÓsbe÷stwˆ. G0812 Equal Word fire.” puvr puri« G4786 Equal Word Goodrick, Edward W., John R. Kohlenberger, and James A. Swanson. The Zondervan NIV Exhaustive Concordance. Accordance electronic edition, version 1.1. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999. Edited October 31, 2013 by Dan Francis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helen Brown Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 David: Why not try using the MOUNCE-NT translation. He does tag each English word as part of a phrase, thus showing clearly which word it translates. The main word is highlighted more strongly as you pass the cursor over it. Of course, in any translation, you can see the meaning of each tagged word in Instant Details, in Parsing, and with a triple-click. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmedina Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) Thanks Helen, but my point was precisely that because the word was not tagged, there was no instant display or triple clicking. There was some information that was assumed that either I knew or should have known, that Accordance made a choice of only tagging one of the two words but not both. And my point for consideration was that for beginners like me that causes a little confusion. A person that has knowledge of Greek and know that sometimes more than an english word is used to translate on Greek word may have guessed or known why the word was not tagged in Accordance. For Accordance and Scholar types it maybe easy to assume or conclude that that is what's going on but not necessarily for beginners Bible Students. Once I learned the reason that Accordance did not tagged the word it takes away the confusion. The interlinear method works but it assumes that I already know that I need to do this and add extra steps to something that could simply be dealt with in the Instant Display window. When I read that a Bible is tagged one obvious assumption is that every word is tagged. Now, a Bible Scholar may know better but not a beginner or common person. My request goes as to what to do in order to help those like me that could get confused and to make Accordance more efficient for our study. But I do thank you all. I will do what Rick suggested whenever I encounter a word that isn't tagged. Edited October 31, 2013 by davidmedina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joel Brown Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 This often falls into the area of assumptions and prior experience. Consider that every word is tagged, so there is lots of duplicity throughout. My assumption in that case would be that every single english word matches to a greek word (which is wrong), and the greek words themselves are repeated multiple times, such as πτύον πτύον. These assumptions would be the natural direction I would go. I'm of course not saying that your assumptions are wrong or my assumptions are right - but that we are all bringing our own backgrounds to the table, and certain solutions that would help your assumptions would perhaps create more problems. As mentioned before, the MOUNCE-NT translation is making good effort to rectifying the situation. Since it uses phrase tagging, it is immediately clear both that 'winnowing fork' is the same greek word, but that the word doesn't occur twice. Now we just have to hope and wait for more translations to use the principles the MOUNCE-NT is using. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmedina Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 Exactly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julia Falling Posted October 31, 2013 Share Posted October 31, 2013 (edited) David – I just looked up Lk 3:17 with the NAS95S as the search text & GNT28-T & KJVS open at the same time. The same Gk word was highlighted in the Gk text when hovering over 'winnowing' and 'fork,' and the same key number came up for both words, just as it should [G4425 ptuon = πτυον]. What I observed was highlighting across all three texts, English and Greek for all the main words, and where two English words were required to render the Greek effectively, 'winnowing fork' and 'threshing floor,' the same key number came up for both words. Where the NAS95S does not have the article, pronouns, or prepositions tagged, the KJVS has everything tagged if there is a corresponding word in the original language, at least for this verse. Word studies on the article, pronouns, and prepositions would be extremely unenlightening. I checked the ESVS at the same verse, and only one word of each phrase is tagged — 'fork' and 'floor.' While I agree that it would be best if every word were tagged, you might want to just keep a couple of tagged texts open at once. The Mounce-NT is a great resource, as suggested, and I think you would find it very helpful. Time to ask for Accordance gift certificates for Christmas! P.S. The NASB (1977) is not tagged at all. The NAS95S is tagged pretty well (though 'burn up' is just one Gk word and only 'burn' is tagged). The ESVS & NKJVS seem to tag just one word, while the KJVS tags everything, at least at Lk 3:17. Remember that all the tagged texts of the English Bible end in 'S' for 'Strong's' even if they are keyed to different dictionaries. The NAS95S is keyed to the NAS Greek Dictionary and the NAS Hebrew Dictionary. The KJVS is keyed to Strong's dictionaries, and everything else, with the exception of NIV11-GK, is keyed to a Key Dictionary, either Hebrew or Greek. The NAS Dictionary has added some letters after some of the numbers where the KJV/Strong's failed to distinguish between two similar or related words (see NAS Greek 19a & 19b; 31a & b; 32a & 32b). This can be very, very confusing if you don't know any Greek. I experience a similar frustration when I'm looking at Hebrew. I only know a few facts but don't know the language. Dan — The NIV and tagged NIV will not be re-released. They have been replaced with the NIV11 & tagged NIV11. No more NIV84 - it was the publisher's decision (Biblica). Zondervan is the commercial license holder in the US. See Wikipedia. Edited October 31, 2013 by Julie Falling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidmedina Posted October 31, 2013 Author Share Posted October 31, 2013 Thanks Julie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daniel Francis Posted November 1, 2013 Share Posted November 1, 2013 (edited) Dan — The NIV and tagged NIV will not be re-released. They have been replaced with the NIV11 & tagged NIV11. No more NIV84 - it was the publisher's decision (Biblica). Zondervan is the commercial license holder in the US. See Wikipedia. I thought since it is technically labeled a concordance there might be an exception... -Dan Edited November 1, 2013 by Dan Francis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.c3123c857d1029f98e39c9394adc358d.png)
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now