cmcintos Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Any word on TDOT coming to Accordance? Logos sent me a pre-pub email, maybe it's finally coming? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaakov Jannis Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 This would be a good resource. I would prefer some attention be paid to the lack of Aramaic and Syriac resources in Accordance. No Sokoloff, Jastrow, Payne-Smith, Lane's Arabic lexicon, Nöldeke's grammar. I've not used Accordance long, but I am growing to like it. It still must be supplemented with the Bar Illan Responsa Database for complete textual searches. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Cardona Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 (edited) +1 I hope that one day Accordance is able to get it. And I hope it will not be as costly as the entire set in print. The Aramaic volume (vol. 16) is still not in print though. Edited June 12, 2015 by Emanuel Cardona Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Jenney Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 I'd like to remind everyone that TDNT and TDOT both suffer from some serious methodological errors. I use these volumes (when I use them) only to mine data. I ignore the conclusions. I think the Dictionary of Classical Hebrew is a far better choice for scholars and the NIDOTTE much better for pastors. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michel Gilbert Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 I use these volumes to mine data . . . TDOT is a gold mine, and you can make nice things out of gold! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michel Gilbert Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 TDNT and TDOT both suffer from some serious methodological errors. Hey Dr. J., You astonish me. Not because I agree or disagree, but because you didn't mention DCH also has methodological errors. For the sake of those who aren't scholars and might go out and buy DCH based on your recommendation, would you elaborate a bit? Regards, Michel 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michel Gilbert Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 I don't see the edit button, so I'll add it here: For some of the problems with DCH see Anderson's review at http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/abr/43_50_clines.pdf DCH has it place, with its own issues. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yaakov Jannis Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Yes, I too am curious to learn of what makes DCH far better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Jenney Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 [Chuckle] OK, OK, I admit it. Every resource we use has errors. There, I said it. I guess I am still reacting to a very old debate where TDNT and TDOT were to be the holy grails of biblical studies. Now, don't get me wrong, they are fine sources. They just did not live up to the hype (or their publication schedules). I have also seen too many of my own [Christian college and seminary] students use these sources uncritically. Personally, I like DCH better because it covers a wider array of texts. It is also already available in Accordance. Sure, I'd buy TDOT (if and when it became available in Accordance) so I could compare the two, but I am quite satisfied with DCH. When posting, I try to keep in mind that the majority of people who come to this forum asking for advice are not specialists in biblical studies (or its languages). Scholars already know the strengths and weaknesses of the major resources in the field. That's why i usually recommend something like NIDOTTE. It is more immediately useful to such a person. BTW, Yaakov, I did take note of your earlier concerns about more secondary resources for Aramaic and Syriac, particularly grammars and lexicons. I am compiling a list and working toward acquiring these sorts of things, but it is an uphill battle and I don't have any progress to report at this time. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niko Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 BTW, Yaakov, I did take note of your earlier concerns about more secondary resources for Aramaic and Syriac, particularly grammars and lexicons. I am compiling a list and working toward acquiring these sorts of things, but it is an uphill battle and I don't have any progress to report at this time. Thank you! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Brylov Christensen Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 (edited) This would be a good resource. I would prefer some attention be paid to the lack of Aramaic and Syriac resources in Accordance. No Sokoloff, Jastrow, Payne-Smith, Lane's Arabic lexicon, Nöldeke's grammar. I've not used Accordance long, but I am growing to like it. It still must be supplemented with the Bar Illan Responsa Database for complete textual searches. +1 for all the resources mentioned - Come to think of it, "Classical Syriac - a Basic Grammar with a Chrestomathy" and "a Qumran Aramaic Grammar" both by Takamitsu Muraoka, "a Grammar of Biblical Aramaic" by Franz Rosenthal and the exceptional "Altaramäische Grammatik" by Stanislav Segert would be great to have, too! With kind regards Peter Christensen Edited June 12, 2015 by Pchris 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Jenney Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 You guys are killing me. Do you have any idea what it takes to secure and develop these kinds of works? How about a nice, English Bible dictionary or commentary instead? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Brylov Christensen Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Sorry about that, Dr. J. - got carried away for a sec, there! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Niko Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Eisenbrauns just released Dictionary of Qumran Aramaic by Cook. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Brylov Christensen Posted June 12, 2015 Share Posted June 12, 2015 Looks interesting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atom Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 TDOT +1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblackbluejay Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 I'd like to remind everyone that TDNT and TDOT both suffer from some serious methodological errors. I use these volumes (when I use them) only to mine data. I ignore the conclusions. I think the Dictionary of Classical Hebrew is a far better choice for scholars and the NIDOTTE much better for pastors. Would you, Dr. J – and anyone else who is interested – please comment on the methodological errors/deficiencies of the TDOT? I have read this in a couple of places, but have never seen a statement as to the nature of the alleged errors. Do the issues concern etymological theory? Or something else? And how are the theory and method used in the TDOT to be contrasted with those of DCH? HALOT? NIDOTTE? TLOT? Many thanks! David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timothy Jenney Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Hi, David! My principle is "context is king" when it comes to a word's meaning. By that I mean the literary context as well as the socio-historical-religious-ect. contexts of the original author and audience. It is not a word's etymological root, nor its meaning in cognate languages, or even the various ways it has been used by all the writers we have preserved throughout endless centuries. Such studies, which form the bulk of works like TDNT and TWOT, can inform us of a word's historic range, but they do little to help us ascertain the precise meaning in a particular passage. All too often, I have seen such resources misused, as students treat such articles as a smorgasbord of meanings from which they can pick and choose. The data contained in such sources is invaluable though, the reason I still recommend their use. If one is working in Deuteronomic literature, for instance, it helps to read the section of the lexicon that treats the word's use by that/those author(s). A Semitic specialist may be able to better answer your question about the varying bias in these various sources and how they; I know I cannot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 I'd like to remind everyone that TDNT and TDOT both suffer from some serious methodological errors. I use these volumes (when I use them) only to mine data. I ignore the conclusions. I think the Dictionary of Classical Hebrew is a far better choice for scholars and the NIDOTTE much better for pastors. You should put together a list of recommended resources giving explanations just like this. It would be invaluable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Buck Posted November 17, 2015 Share Posted November 17, 2015 Eisenbrauns just released Dictionary of Qumran Aramaic by Cook. I'll bump this thread to point out that we've just released Cook's Dictionary today for Accordance. Fully tagged to our Qumran texts! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Mansfield Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Sneak peek: coming soon to the Accordance Library-- 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblackbluejay Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Aweome!! Woo hoo! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emanuel Cardona Posted January 28, 2016 Share Posted January 28, 2016 Big thumbs up for all the hard work Accordance! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblackbluejay Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Hi Rick, Thanks again for this very good news! Any idea on an ::approximate:: release date? Toda, David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. Mansfield Posted February 8, 2016 Share Posted February 8, 2016 Any idea on an ::approximate:: release date? David, it would be extremely approximate. I'm not a developer, so I'm not working directly on it. I have to kidnap dogs and cats that belong to the developers to get screenshots like the one I posted above. However, from the looks of things, it's coming along quite well. Keep in mind that it's a larger project than many we produce. If I had to guess--and you can't hold me to it--I'd say the TDOT might be available before the beginning of Spring. 2 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