theblackbluejay Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Happy Holidays and a Merry Christmas to Everyone! I have a couple pf questions regarding the new Ugaritic module: 1) The description page describes the module as consisting of "full morphological tagging." How is this being done? What morphological database or theory of Ugaritic grammar (there are multiple: Pardee does not agree with Sivan, who does not everywhere agree with Huehnergard, etc.) informs the morphological tagging? 2) Will there be a podcast or a tutorial on using the Ugaritic database? If there is not one planned, I would be interested in working on one once the module is released. 3) Any sense of when the initial module will be released? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblackbluejay Posted December 19, 2015 Author Share Posted December 19, 2015 4) Are there any plans to include texts in cuneiform as well as transliteration? As Ugaritic is alphabetic cuneiform, searching should(?) not be nearly as difficult as Akkadian text, instead being like unpointed Hebrew or other Semitc language, with only a few more signs. Or am I incorrect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helen Brown Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 We plan to release this month, I hope it happens. the scholar working on it will have to explain his methods. No, there are no plans to release cuneiform! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblackbluejay Posted January 1, 2016 Author Share Posted January 1, 2016 Hi Helen, Thanks for the info. Is the scholar in question on the Accordance forums? I would love to speak with her/him. Happy New Year to you and the family! Sincerely, David Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helen Brown Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 Yes, PChris is certainly active here, and we released the first rev last night. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fabian Posted January 2, 2016 Share Posted January 2, 2016 PChris is now found under his full name http://www.accordancebible.com/forums/user/32934-peter-brylov-christensen/ Greetings Fabian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theblackbluejay Posted January 2, 2016 Author Share Posted January 2, 2016 Yes, PChris is certainly active here, and we released the first rev last night. Hi Helen, Thanks for the info! And I was happy to see the first version last night. I am using the module now! Shalom, David 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Brylov Christensen Posted January 3, 2016 Share Posted January 3, 2016 (edited) Hi David!I'm glad that you're happy with the module. As for your questions, I'll try to answer them as good as I'm able. 1. It is, strictly speaking, not possible to do "full" morphological tagging of the texts i.e. covering every aspect of the many interpretations amongst scholars: There are some grammatical conventions where most scholars have reached a consensus, but there's a whole lot of disagreement, too, in terms of epigraphy, phonology, morphology and, ultimately, semantics. As for the general grammatical understanding of the language, I tend to agree mostly with Dennis Pardee and Josef Tropper. And where they disagree I often wind up agreeing with Pardee. I believe that the best solution to this problem is a text critical apparatus, which I'm currently preparing. But for now there's only my specific (tagged) interpretation of the Ba'lu Myth. 2. As a matter of fact, I have made an introductory module intended for those users who know their Hebrew but haven't ventured into the respective fields of Ugaritology and comparative Semitic philology. The introduction will at the same time explain how to use the tagged text module in addition to its grammatical ties. It's almost finished. 4. I, for one, would love to see the texts in their original alphabetic cuneiform! Sadly, it would likely be nothing more but a novelty, seeing that the texts are almost always transliterated in scholarship. It is obviously overkill to transliterate an alphabet containing only 30 graphemes (with three of these being alephs), but scholars tend only to write the graphemes if they're discussing epigraphy. And in that case, you'd be better off looking at the pictures of the tablets themselves. These are easily accessed, by the way. The people behind the West Semitic Research Project (who provided the photographs for the Leningrad Codex Images module) have also photographed the tablets of the literary Ugaritic texts. Once you are a registered member, you may browse their database as much as you want. I've used it for years. Here's a link: http://www.inscriptifact.com With kind regards Peter Edited January 3, 2016 by Peter Brylov Christensen 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