Jump to content

BDAG * & ** at End of Entries


Enoch

Recommended Posts

I am not sure if this is a bug swatter or not, since the last hard copy (paper) edition I bought of BDAG was not BDAG (no Danker), but Bauer (Ardnt-Gingrich) 3rd edition. But in that edition at the end of entries often there was found either * or **. * meant that all the references to the word in the literature covered by Bauer was listed. ** meant that all the references to the word in the NT were listed. Thus, if one got an entry with ** at the end, one had a concordance for that word in the NT (all the references had been listed by Bauer).

 

I note that the Accordance version of BDAG lacks these asterisks. I am not sure if they were dropped by later editions of Bauer or not, though I cannot imagine why they would have been.

 

Thus I ask if it is a bug in the Accordance BDAG that it lacks the asterisks???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have three electronic copies of BDAG (Accordance, Logos & Bibleworks). None of them contain the asterisks of which you speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not see them in the print (hardcover) version of BDAG as you describe them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, Dr. Danker explains the omission himself in an article in, Biblical Greek Language and Lexicography: Essays in Honor of Frederick W. Danker. This book is an excellent read for anyone interested in Greek lexicography. Highly recommended.

 

If you're only interested in the explanation to your inquiry, you can find it on page 14, here:

 

http://books.google.com/books?id=xi0_3tIIKZcC&pg=PA14&dq=biblical+greek+language+a+double+asterisk+at+the+end+of&hl=en&sa=X&ei=aWKhT9S5E-iPiALC-di-Ag&ved=0CEMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22a%20double%20asterisk%22&f=false

 

Hope that helps.

 

Darryl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Darryl,

thanks for the link.

When I went there, however, I found nothing on my subject. It did discuss the use of asterisks in some other (non-Bauer, non-BDAG) concordance apparently.

Do you have time to tell me in a couple of sentences (with my thanker) on what was Danker's hanker in making a spanker of the asterisk?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enoch,

 

 

Here is a brief summary:

 

First (English) edition: BAG = Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich

Second (English) edition: BAGD = Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, Danker

Third (English) edition: BDAG = Bauer, Danker, Arndt, Gingrich

 

The portion in the link basically informs us that Danker, upon revising the second edition (BAGD), decided to omit the asterisks for the third edition (BDAG) because "many of the inherited asterisks were invalid."

 

Briefer summary:

 

BAGD (your print copy) = contains (some invalid) asterisks

BDAG (Acc copy [+print copy]) = omitted asterisks

 

Further Clarification:

 

I think the confusion is coming from the reference of "asterisks in BAAR."

 

BAAR (Bauer, Aland, Aland, Reichmann) is the abbreviation to the German edition upon which our English version is based. So the asterisks in BAAR were transferred into BAGD, but later omitted in BDAG.

 

Hope that makes sense.

 

Darryl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Ach, Wot der Dumboozle!

 

I didn't know about Reichmann (said with uvular r of course & a good German ch).

And thanks for really valuable info.

I didn't realize that Bauer's Lexicon had erroneous asterisks in it.

It just proves, "I dare not trust the sweetest frame."

 

But the asterisks (if accurate) would be very helpful info.

Now if only Reichmann could make it right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...