Jump to content


Photo

Questions From A Beginner - Accordance 11 vs Logos 6 Original Language Study


  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#21 Timothy Jenney

Timothy Jenney

    Mithril

  • Accordance
  • 3,266 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sunny Winter Haven, FL
  • Interests:a great cup of coffee, sci-fi, jazz and the blues, kayaking, camping, fishing and the great outdoors
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 10 April 2015 - 01:38 PM

If Accordance got WIVU that would start to change things.

 

I am pleased to announce that we are currently finalizing the details of an agreement to do just that. :)


  • Daniel R, David Knoll, Brian K. Mitchell and 1 other like this

Blessings,
"Dr. J"

Timothy P. Jenney, Ph. D.
"Lighting the Lamp" Host and Producer
Academic Licensing Assistant

iMac: Late 2014 27" 5k display, 4.0 GHz quad core i7, 24 GB RAM, 500 GB SSD, AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB, macOS Sierra 10.13
MBP: Early 2011 17" MBP (8,3), 2.3 GHz quad core i7, 16 GB RAM, 480 SSD + 1 TB SSD, AMD Radeon HD 6750M, macOS Sierra 10.13
iPhone 7 plus: 128 GB, iOS 11.x


#22 Michael J. Bolesta

Michael J. Bolesta

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 981 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Addison TX
  • Interests:scripture study, preaching, teaching
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 10 April 2015 - 03:28 PM

WIVU?


Michael
Accordance on Macintosh, iPhone, and iPad

#23 Daniel R

Daniel R

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 10 April 2015 - 03:39 PM

*


Edited by Daniel R, 11 April 2015 - 08:02 AM.


#24 Timothy Jenney

Timothy Jenney

    Mithril

  • Accordance
  • 3,266 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sunny Winter Haven, FL
  • Interests:a great cup of coffee, sci-fi, jazz and the blues, kayaking, camping, fishing and the great outdoors
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 10 April 2015 - 03:58 PM

Daniel,

 

I totally agree.  That is why Accordance has long included the ability to make visual diagrams (for flow charts, sentence diagramming, and syntactical analysis) in Accordance. The bulk of our original users (scholars) did just that. When we finally started making syntax trees and diagrams available, we intended that people would use these sorts of databases to check their own work—not to do their thinking for them.

 

Alas, we are all under too much pressure these days. Some who need the information lack the skill to build them; others lack the time.

 

We are working on better ways to allow users to save and integrate their own work into Accordance, but we're not ready to release any details yet.


Edited by Timothy Jenney, 10 April 2015 - 04:07 PM.

  • Michael J. Bolesta likes this

Blessings,
"Dr. J"

Timothy P. Jenney, Ph. D.
"Lighting the Lamp" Host and Producer
Academic Licensing Assistant

iMac: Late 2014 27" 5k display, 4.0 GHz quad core i7, 24 GB RAM, 500 GB SSD, AMD Radeon R9 M295X 4096 MB, macOS Sierra 10.13
MBP: Early 2011 17" MBP (8,3), 2.3 GHz quad core i7, 16 GB RAM, 480 SSD + 1 TB SSD, AMD Radeon HD 6750M, macOS Sierra 10.13
iPhone 7 plus: 128 GB, iOS 11.x


#25 Daniel R

Daniel R

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 10 April 2015 - 04:01 PM

Hey I think we were thinking the same thing at the same time. JINX! You owe me a coke.


  • Timothy Jenney likes this

#26 Rick Bennett

Rick Bennett

    Mithril

  • Accordance
  • 2,695 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay, FL
  • Interests: gadgets, coffee, running and cycling, Rays baseball
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS

Posted 10 April 2015 - 04:11 PM

Daniel R. and Yaakov,

 

May I suggest inquiring further about our syntax resources before assuming they utilize an inferior linguistic methodology? I doubt seriously that the scholars behind them would agree with you. Your comments (especially to new or non-users) reflect a representation of our products that may not be operating on the best knowledge of them and those working on them.

 

Daniel, I would also encourage you to consider that you may not know who we employ or work with in regards to original language resources. This is not to say that Steve Runge et al. are not credentialed and working on important resources, just that you probably do not know exactly who we work with since we do not exactly publicize it.

 

Thanks for your feedback. :)


  • Julia Falling and Brian K. Mitchell like this

Rick Bennett
Director of Content Development


#27 Yaakov Jannis

Yaakov Jannis

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Accordance Version:10.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X

Posted 10 April 2015 - 05:09 PM

Dear Rick Bennett,

 

And may I ask that you read the comments above with more care. I've done my research on your database. I do believe that I even mentioned an above academic Encyclopedia article which details some of the issues in this area (and based on your comments it clearly shows you've not read it). As someone who is new to Accordance, I find your comments rather grotesque. Furthermore, you assume that the only place to learn about the Accordance Syntax database is here on this forums. You are wrong.



#28 Daniel R

Daniel R

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 10 April 2015 - 05:11 PM

*


Edited by Daniel R, 11 April 2015 - 08:01 AM.


#29 Yaakov Jannis

Yaakov Jannis

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Accordance Version:10.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X

Posted 10 April 2015 - 05:24 PM

I thought I was being nice.  ;)



#30 Rick Bennett

Rick Bennett

    Mithril

  • Accordance
  • 2,695 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tampa Bay, FL
  • Interests: gadgets, coffee, running and cycling, Rays baseball
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS

Posted 10 April 2015 - 06:40 PM

Dear Rick Bennett,

 

And may I ask that you read the comments above with more care. I've done my research on your database. I do believe that I even mentioned an above academic Encyclopedia article which details some of the issues in this area (and based on your comments it clearly shows you've not read it). As someone who is new to Accordance, I find your comments rather grotesque. Furthermore, you assume that the only place to learn about the Accordance Syntax database is here on this forums. You are wrong.

 

Yaakov,

 

Please accept my apology. I certainly did not mean to say anything "grotesque" (and honestly, I do not know what that even means in this context). Maybe I can clarify: if you want to know more about why our scholars chose the method (theory, etc) applied in our syntax databases, consider asking. They (Dr. Robert Holmstedt as one example) do monitor our user forums, and are usually happy to answer questions, especially for those interested in this area of research. They can also cite many academic sources (and ones which they've written) which support their decision. That is not to say that some (many?) disagree, just that there was a lot of academic inquiry that went into this before the work was even started. Suggesting that they did not make the right choice leaves the potential impression that they simply did so out of ignorance. That is not the case, and I wanted to make sure that anyone reading this does not get that impression.

 

We welcome any and all feedback (within reasonable guidelines); please do continue to join in the discussion.

 

Daniel,

 

Thanks so much for your support over the years! And, thanks for clarifying your comments. I still do not really find it helpful to compare who we may or may not have on our staff with our competitor in regards to the syntactical resources (one might actually view our business model more effective in some regards). And as I alluded to, I think some of the work they're doing is great; it just is not our focus right now.

 

All the best,

 

Rick


Rick Bennett
Director of Content Development


#31 Daniel R

Daniel R

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 10 April 2015 - 07:15 PM

*


Edited by Daniel R, 11 April 2015 - 08:01 AM.


#32 Yaakov Jannis

Yaakov Jannis

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 21 posts
  • Accordance Version:10.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X

Posted 10 April 2015 - 07:52 PM

Dear Rick Bennett,

 

Thanks for the apology. Regarding the use of "grotesque" I'd encourage you to look it up in OED.

 

kol tuv,

Yaakov 



#33 John Fidel

John Fidel

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 327 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 11 April 2015 - 08:24 AM

. By engaging the comparisons here, on blogs, at conventions, or wherever, Accordance opens itself to more comparisons by users who own multiple Bible software products.

 

This is an interesting comment given that the only reason the OP posted here was at Rick Mansfield's suggestion he do so when this was asked on the Logos Forum in order to provide the Accordance perspective. Rick did so in a very professional way and I approve of his suggestion to the OP. The OP is just starting to learn the original languages, not doing academic work on the DDS or other highly academic ventures. My point on the Logos Forum, which I will briefly make here is that both programs are excellent. The differences for a beginner are not significant, but that taking time learning to use each program is important as there is a learning curve. Also to spend time learning the languages, not learning multiple programs. The OP had already purchased a base package in Logos and was looking to add Accordance as well for his learning the original languages.

 

Customers who use both programs will have positives and negatives to comment about both programs. Those on the Logos site will tend to be more positive regarding Logos and those here more positive regarding Accordance. No one is truly objective, but those that use both programs have valid opinions based on their experience. Someone studying the DDS has valid complaints about Logos, but the complaints are specific to his experience and study and should not be applied across the entire Logos platform any more that a negative comment regarding Accordance should.

 

For many years I had a website and blog that discussed the different bible software programs. My introduction to Accordance was by doing a review of Accordance 5 or 6. I discontinued the site because comparisons became competitions with all sides defending or refuting comments made.

 

I understand competition being a CPA. I understand that users are really selecting platforms to build their libraries, not just a program. I understand the need to promote. I am just a bit weary of the need to do so with negative comments regarding the competition. Both these companies have employees that work really hard at providing great software and customer service. They have different business models and marketing strategies. But both are doing their best to provide a valuable product for the study of God's word. Users entering the biblical software market should investigate and evaluate what is best for them. Most of the comments on this thread offer great positives and customer experience. But the thread has become irrelevant for what the OP wanted to know.

 

Accordance has made significant efforts to be more than the scholar's favorite software. Once the discussion turns to highly specific scholarly endeavors, most new users tune out... like when I decide to explain tax issues using the internal revenue code sections.

 

Hope my post does not offend as that is not my intent. OK back to those tax returns...


  • Julia Falling and Brian K. Mitchell like this

#34 Julia Falling

Julia Falling

    Mithril

  • Super Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,561 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Tennessee
  • Interests:Numerous!
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 11 April 2015 - 09:06 AM

Thank you, John, for getting this thread back on track.  Thank you, also, for your irenic approach.

 

Thanks, too, for taking time out of what must be a very hectic schedule to post here.  Would that someone in DC would get serious about reforming the tax code.  It's multiple times longer than the Bible without providing and any eternal benefits to the reader.


Edited by Julie Falling, 11 April 2015 - 09:28 AM.

Julia Falling

13" MacBook Pro Mojave Acc 12
mid-2017 3.5 GHz Intel Core i7 (2 cores)
16 GB RAM;
512 GB SSD

iPad Pro iOS 12
128 GB
iAccord 2.7

iPhone XR iOS 12
128 GB
iAccord 2.7


Used for backup only:
Mac mini Mojave Acc 12
late-2012 2.3GHz Intel Core i7 (4 cores)
16 GB RAM; 1.12 TB Fusion Drive

#35 John Fidel

John Fidel

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 327 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 11 April 2015 - 09:26 AM

  Would that someone in DC would get serious about reforming the tax code.  It's multiple times longer than the Bible without providing and eternal benefits to the reader.

 

LOL. Now that is a true statement!!! Thanks for your kind comments and for your very helpful comments in this post.



#36 Robert Holmstedt

Robert Holmstedt

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 826 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 12 April 2015 - 07:30 AM

I think the last few comments reflect the best use of the forum. It certainly is not the place for Hebrew syntactic arguments, much less debates about linguistic theory. However, since there appears to have been some criticism of the syntax modules, I will offer a few brief comments for general users:

 

1. No database can be made that does not reflect some sort of theory. I work within generative grammar (minimalist programme of the principals and parameters theory), though I have already read and used (very early on in my career) the functional grammars of Simon Dik and M.A.K. Holliday. From the beginning of the release of the syntax project, the underlying principles have been made public so that users could better understand and use the database. 

 

2. The notion that Chomskyan linguistics is somehow old-fashioned (e.g., "from the 1950s") and thus obsolete is strange rhetoric when there are hundreds of linguistics departments in North America and Europe (not to mention China and elsewhere) that teach it and thousands of linguists who work directly in some aspect of Chomsky's minimalist programme. One needs only start browsing the linguistics journals to see that the statements made in this forum do not reflect the larger linguistics world. 

 

3. I take transparency very seriously. How my linguistic approach works out in Hebrew grammar is illustrated by my research. Accordance users can thus further investigate the basis upon which the syntax database is constructed and its implications in my papers, my Hebrew commentaries (Ruth, Esther [forthcoming], and Ecclesiastes [final draft being revised], and in my monograph on the relative clause [forthcoming]). I also post much of my research on a blog I share with John Cook. 

 

4. Finally, a comment on the nature of some of the posts in this thread. I respect (and like) Dean Forbes and Frank Anderson, who made the Anderson-Forbes database, and those who work on the WIVU project, as well as Jan Kroeze who wrote the Brill Encyclopedia article (for which I read a draft he sent me since we exchanged emails as he wrote it). All my interactions with these people suggest that, minimally, they respect me as a scholar and my work, even if they disagree with it. I have chosen what I consider to be the most compelling linguistic theory for my work and so also the syntax database. Even so, I do not see any justification for deriding the other databases or their teams. Such activity is both unscholarly (there is no way to support such statements) and uncharitable. Therefore, I suggest that those who disagree with our database simply choose not to buy it.

 

Indeed, if the mere thought of of a Hebrew database based on generative theory provokes allergic spasms and fits, I recommend staying far far away from it (and me, please).  Finally, for those whose strong syntactic opinions make available databases unsuitable for their own use, the answer is quite simple -- make your own. I promise I won't come along and force you to use mine.


  • Michael J. Bolesta, Julia Falling, Andrew Mercer and 7 others like this
Professor, Hebrew and Northwest Semitic Languages
Dept. of Near and Middle Eastern Civilizations
The University of Toronto
blog: ancienthebrewgrammar.wordpress.com
https://utoronto.aca...RobertHolmstedt

#37 Daniel R

Daniel R

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 12 April 2015 - 12:07 PM

Dr. Holmstedt, your database is an innovation in bringing the Minimalist Program to a wider audience.


Edited by Daniel R, 12 April 2015 - 12:09 PM.


#38 Fr. Rich

Fr. Rich

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 275 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Indiana
  • Interests:My grandchildren
    Bible study
    Adjusting to retirement
    Fly fishing
  • Accordance Version:11.x

Posted 12 April 2015 - 12:20 PM

WIVU?

Rank Abbr. Meaning   WIVU Werkgroep Informatica of the Vrije Universiteit (Dutch: Informatics Working Group of the Vrije University; Amsterdam; Netherlands) Search the Web

 


  • Michael J. Bolesta likes this

Rich Miller
Retired Priest
Christ the King Episcopal Church
Huntington, Indiana

 

Accordance 11.x running on Yosemite on MBP late 2014; iMac 25K retina display late 2014

Labor mediator and arbitrator


#39 David Knoll

David Knoll

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 251 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 12 April 2015 - 03:29 PM

I think the last few comments reflect the best use of the forum. It certainly is not the place for Hebrew syntactic arguments, much less debates about linguistic theory. However, since there appears to have been some criticism of the syntax modules, I will offer a few brief comments for general users:

 

1. No database can be made that does not reflect some sort of theory. I work within generative grammar (minimalist programme of the principals and parameters theory), though I have already read and used (very early on in my career) the functional grammars of Simon Dik and M.A.K. Holliday. From the beginning of the release of the syntax project, the underlying principles have been made public so that users could better understand and use the database. 

 

2. The notion that Chomskyan linguistics is somehow old-fashioned (e.g., "from the 1950s") and thus obsolete is strange rhetoric when there are hundreds of linguistics departments in North America and Europe (not to mention China and elsewhere) that teach it and thousands of linguists who work directly in some aspect of Chomsky's minimalist programme. One needs only start browsing the linguistics journals to see that the statements made in this forum do not reflect the larger linguistics world. 

 

3. I take transparency very seriously. How my linguistic approach works out in Hebrew grammar is illustrated by my research. Accordance users can thus further investigate the basis upon which the syntax database is constructed and its implications in my papers, my Hebrew commentaries (Ruth, Esther [forthcoming], and Ecclesiastes [final draft being revised], and in my monograph on the relative clause [forthcoming]). I also post much of my research on a blog I share with John Cook. 

 

4. Finally, a comment on the nature of some of the posts in this thread. I respect (and like) Dean Forbes and Frank Anderson, who made the Anderson-Forbes database, and those who work on the WIVU project, as well as Jan Kroeze who wrote the Brill Encyclopedia article (for which I read a draft he sent me since we exchanged emails as he wrote it). All my interactions with these people suggest that, minimally, they respect me as a scholar and my work, even if they disagree with it. I have chosen what I consider to be the most compelling linguistic theory for my work and so also the syntax database. Even so, I do not see any justification for deriding the other databases or their teams. Such activity is both unscholarly (there is no way to support such statements) and uncharitable. Therefore, I suggest that those who disagree with our database simply choose not to buy it.

 

Indeed, if the mere thought of of a Hebrew database based on generative theory provokes allergic spasms and fits, I recommend staying far far away from it (and me, please).  Finally, for those whose strong syntactic opinions make available databases unsuitable for their own use, the answer is quite simple -- make your own. I promise I won't come along and force you to use mine.

Professor Holmstedt,

I disagree with you and with the generative theory as implemented on Hebrew. Having said that, I don't think I need to subscribe to the generative theory in order to utilise your database and it was useful to me on various occasions. It is true I sometimes have to think how YOU would analyse a clause before I build a search construct, but that is a very small price to pay for an intuitive interface and a database that delivers results. We disagree about theory but I can utilise your database and it contributes to my research. Even when I had difficulties (mostly because of bugs), you were here in the forums always prepared to address every question or problem I encountered. For all that, I thank you wholeheartedly and not only will I continue to use your database which I hope will be complete soon, but I would also buy additional Hebrew syntactical databases you are working on (DSS? Ben Sira?), should Accordance have them on offer.

In short: Thank You! 


  • Ken Simpson, Brian K. Mitchell and Nursefriendly like this

#40 Michael Miles

Michael Miles

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 329 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, iOS

Posted 12 April 2015 - 04:49 PM

I started with Logos when you installed it using 3.5" "floppy" discs.  By the time Logos 5 was about to be released, I had amassed a pretty fair collection of resources pertaining to original language studies.  I was also using BibleWorks.  The extensive Logos library was such a bothersome mess with constant bugs, glitches, errors, and the like with seemingly little efforts being spent on fixing these issues on the part of Logos.  They seemed to be more interested in developing Logos for AS/400, Logos for ColecoVision, and Logos for the Commodore VIC-20 (my first computer) than fixing their current products.  When they needed a cash influx, then a new bug-riddled version was pushed out, compelling everyone to fork over handfuls of loot.  I ended up giving away my entire Logos Library.

 

Accordance on a Mac is like a dream come true.  I can do everything and more than I did in Logos and I never have to go to the E.R. after beating my fist on the desk in righteous indignation.

 

Your mileage may vary.  Just thinking about Logos makes me want to punch a wall.   :D

 

Have a nice day and choose wisely.  I need to go have some prayer time and simmer down.


Edited by Michael Miles, 12 April 2015 - 04:50 PM.

  • Julia Falling, Timothy Jenney, Frank and 2 others like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users