LXX vs MT-LXX? Search results

[Julia Falling]

Hey – I've only done a little with the MT-LXX, but did a search today that really confused me.  If I search the Rahlf's LXX for ἱλάσκομαι I get 11 hits.  If I search the MT-LXX for Greek, ἱλάσκομαι, I get 0 hits.  

 

What I want to find out is which Hebrew words are translated by ἱλάσκομαι, ἱλαστήριον, or ἱλασμός.

 

Do I actually  need to search for all the inflected forms?    

 

I did a search in the LXX for all the words (got 43 hits), ran the Analysis, then copied all the inflected forms into the MT-LXX search box within parentheses and separated by commas.  I got 47 hits.

 

Do I actually need to search for all the inflected forms?

 

 This is not an emergency.

 

It would sure be nice to have a Webinar that dealt with the MT-LXX!  Every time I attempt to use it, I end up confused.

 

This is what happens when a powerful tool is handed over to an amateur …

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Hy Julia,

 

  What you need is to do a search in the LXX in one tab for ἱλάσκομαι.

  Then open the MT-LXX Parallel in another tab and do [MERGE <LXX tab name>]

 

Thx

D

[Julia Falling]

Thanks, Daniel.  Should have remembered that.  I need to do one of these searches weekly whether I want to or not.  Then maybe I might remember.

[Joel Brown]

Julie, the reason is straightforward, and should help you with MT-LXX searches in the future.  Being a tool, the words are all only inflected, so lexical searched by themselves won't find anything.  However, by [MERGE]ing in results from a text, Accordance is able to blend the inflected forms and locations and give pretty accurate results.

[mgvh]

Though he isn't exactly addressing your question, David Lang had two very helpful posts working with the MT-LXX Parallel HERE (and link at bottom to part 2).

 

I also just posted on my blog how I would go about answering your original question, Julia, using Accordance, BibleWorks, and Logos.

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Hey Mark,

 

  A couple of things from your post.

 

  1. The root issue in Deut might be worth raising for Acc to reconsider. I don't know how L and BW tag them but there may be an argument to consider separating the roots in the Greek. It's not a morph tag issue - the form is correctly tagged I believe. But they (L and BW) differ in the opinion about the verbal root from Acc. I was reading now in Muraoka's lexicon on the Septuagint. There could be enough daylight there. I'm not sure how I would handle it myself but it might be fore asking Acc to check their current view of this one. That said there could be no real case at all. How stems (in Acc verbal roots are really stems if I recall an older answer on this topic correctly) are determined is not a process I'm familiar with. (Add that to the list of stuff to learn I guess. )

 

  2. The comparison of function in your post is interesting. The main thing I cannot see how to do in Acc is how to get a concise summary list of the ways the Hebrew is rendered in Greek, the way you can in Logos and BW. Of course, all the caveats associated with word to word association apply but nonetheless auto production of Greek <-> Hebrew associations in this tool would have its value.

 

  Anyone know how ? If this is not possible in Acc it would be a nice enhancement.

 

  In case anyone is interested this is the workspace I use for hacking out queries on the the MT-LXX. It is set up with Hebrew on the left, and Greek on the right - ok, I now see how that seems backwards now, but I did this a long time ago before I had even the skerrick (which really should be skeric I feel ) of Hebrew I have now.

 

  Here it is doing Julia's query where only the middle and the right zones are of use:

 

 

  And here it is showing a specific translation of the word ἱλάσκομαι.

 

 

  The workspace is attached. It has a couple of other tabs for crossing things or looking up verses or such as you go.

 

Thx

D

MTLXX.accord.zip

Edited March 24, 2018 by דָנִיאֶל

[mgvh]

Thanks, Daniel. You know Accordance better than I do!

As for Deut 21.8, yes, the morphological tagging is correct, but I think it's tied to the wrong lemma. (It is correctly connected to the root which is ἵλεως.)

The verb ἐξιλάσκομαι does occur 105x in the LXX, so the Deut 21.8 instance should be included w/ those rather than to ιλασκομαι. I'll send a correction to Accordance. (BibleWorks must be using the same system as Accordance since it does the same, but Logos has corrected it.)

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Ooops - yes it's not the root - it's the lemma.

 

Thx

D

[Helen Brown]

If correction is needed, please send to Corrections. If it's tagging, we need to send it to the source of the tagging so it takes longer than fixing simple typos in tools.

[Joel Brown]

Mark (and Daniel and others),

 

Don't forget that using the Analysis tab you can easily see how MT words were translated into LXX words or vice versa.  Just run your search, open the analysis, and drag in the MT-LXX Lex or MT-LXX Inflect options [Note: Both of these require owning the MT-LXX Parallel tool, which I believe the two of you have].

 

See:

 

You can also show it graphically in the Pie or Bar chart:

 

And of course, all information can be copied and pasted.  And yes, this can be done for any Greek or Hebrew search, including by root.

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Thanx Joel. That's what I couldn't find. I now recall having seen them before. Many thanx, D.

[Michel Gilbert]

Both of these require owning the MT-LXX Parallel tool . . .

 

And yes, this can be done for any Greek or Hebrew search, including by root.

 

 

Good to know, information like this helps me plan new purchases. Thanks.

[mgvh]

Mark (and Daniel and others),

 

Don't forget that using the Analysis tab you can easily see how MT words were translated into LXX words or vice versa.  Just run your search, open the analysis, and drag in the MT-LXX Lex or MT-LXX Inflect options [Note: Both of these require owning the MT-LXX Parallel tool, which I believe the two of you have].

 

See:

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.10.29 AM.png

 

You can also show it graphically in the Pie or Bar chart:

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.13.33 AM.png

 

And of course, all information can be copied and pasted.  And yes, this can be done for any Greek or Hebrew search, including by root.

Thank you, Joel! This is exactly what I was trying to accomplish, but I wasn't aware of that MTLXX Lex option for customizing the results. I had to go back and seriously update my blog posthttps://bibleandtech.blogspot.com/2018/03/finding-hebrew-words-translated-by.html, and now Accordance rises to the top! Thanks again.

[Benjamin Gladd]

Mark (and Daniel and others),

 

Don't forget that using the Analysis tab you can easily see how MT words were translated into LXX words or vice versa.  Just run your search, open the analysis, and drag in the MT-LXX Lex or MT-LXX Inflect options [Note: Both of these require owning the MT-LXX Parallel tool, which I believe the two of you have].

 

See:

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.10.29 AM.png

 

You can also show it graphically in the Pie or Bar chart:

Screen Shot 2018-03-26 at 11.13.33 AM.png

 

And of course, all information can be copied and pasted.  And yes, this can be done for any Greek or Hebrew search, including by root.

Thanks, Joel!

 

I'm trying to reproduce your results, but I don't know what you mean by "drag in the MT-LXX Lex." Could you please show how? Thanks! 

[Joel Brown]

1) After running your search, first open the Analysis analytics tab (I believe you know how to do this).

2) From that tab, use the gear in the top right to choose Customize Display.

3) Drag from the palette on the left, the item saying 'MT-LXX Lex' into column 1 on the right, just below the existing LEX item in column 1.  This tells the analysis to first break down the word by its lexical form, then list each MT-LXX Lexical form.

4) Hit OK to display the changes.

 

Does this help?

[Michel Gilbert]

Wunderbar!

[Benjamin Gladd]

Brilliant! I didn't know about step #3. Thanks so much.

 

This is such a critical feature!

1) After running your search, first open the Analysis analytics tab (I believe you know how to do this).

2) From that tab, use the gear in the top right to choose Customize Display.

3) Drag from the palette on the left, the item saying 'MT-LXX Lex' into column 1 on the right, just below the existing LEX item in column 1.  This tells the analysis to first break down the word by its lexical form, then list each MT-LXX Lexical form.

4) Hit OK to display the changes.

 

Does this help?

[Benjamin Gladd]

One issue: It works when I search MT-LXX but crashes when I try LXX-MT. Any suggestions? 

[Joel Brown]

What LXX search results are you attempting it with?

[Benjamin Gladd]

Accordance crashes with LXX word I search. 

 

What LXX search results are you attempting it with?

[Silas Marrs]

Benjamin, when it crashed, did you get a crash report?  That would be a great help to me in figuring out how to fix it, since I've so far been unable to reproduce the crash.

[Benjamin Gladd]

Sure thing: 

 

Accordance Crash Log

5/28/19, 2:21:23 PM

Program Version: 12.3.4 (12.3.4)

OS Version: 10.14.5

 

Message: Access violation

Address:   $000000010409360F

 

Backtrace:

0   acord                               0x000000010409360f acord + 4380175

1   acord                               0x000000010409445e acord + 4383838

2   acord                               0x00000001040939e4 acord + 4381156

3   acord                               0x00000001040a693e acord + 4458814

4   acord                               0x00000001040a65e9 acord + 4457961

5   acord                               0x00000001040a8cb4 acord + 4467892

6   acord                               0x00000001040a8fbc acord + 4468668

7   acord                               0x00000001040a9fba acord + 4472762

8   acord                               0x00000001040bb7f0 acord + 4544496

9   acord                               0x00000001040bb278 acord + 4543096

10  acord                               0x0000000104110a4e acord + 4893262

11  acord                               0x00000001040fe060 acord + 4816992

12  acord                               0x00000001042a52eb acord + 6550251

13  acord                               0x0000000103e4a4fd acord + 1983741

14  acord                               0x00000001042a4afd acord + 6548221

15  acord                               0x0000000103e480a5 acord + 1974437

16  acord                               0x0000000103d84b11 acord + 1174289

 

Binaries:

0x0000000003c66000 /Applications/Accordance.app/Contents/MacOS/acord

0x0000000104a01000 /Applications/Accordance.app/Contents/Frameworks/ZipArchive.framework/Versions/A/ZipArchive

0x0000000104a4e000 /Applications/Accordance.app/Contents/Frameworks/Sparkle.framework/Versions/A/Sparkle

0x0000000104ad3000 /Applications/Accordance.app/Contents/Frameworks/ObjectiveDropboxOfficial.framework/Versions/A/ObjectiveDropboxOfficial

Benjamin, when it crashed, did you get a crash report?  That would be a great help to me in figuring out how to fix it, since I've so far been unable to reproduce the crash.

[vfhirschi]

1) After running your search, first open the Analysis analytics tab (I believe you know how to do this).

2) From that tab, use the gear in the top right to choose Customize Display.

3) Drag from the palette on the left, the item saying 'MT-LXX Lex' into column 1 on the right, just below the existing LEX item in column 1.  This tells the analysis to first break down the word by its lexical form, then list each MT-LXX Lexical form.

4) Hit OK to display the changes.

 

Does this help?

This is so useful! amazing...

thank you so much for this.

[Silas Marrs]

Thanks again Benjamin, but I'm still having trouble with this one.  Does this happen every time you use "MTLXX Word" in the Analysis Display dialog, or only with some searches?

[Benjamin Gladd]

Thanks so much for looking into the issue.

 

It happens 100% of the time when I search the LXX and then try and use the MTLXX Word. See attached. 

 

 

Thanks again Benjamin, but I'm still having trouble with this one.  Does this happen every time you use "MTLXX Word" in the Analysis Display dialog, or only with some searches?