Jump to content


Photo

Danker's The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament


  • Please log in to reply
18 replies to this topic

#1 mgvh

mgvh

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland, USA
  • Interests:Archaeology, Photography, Biking
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows

Posted 21 June 2018 - 11:48 AM

Danker's The Concise Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (2009 version, not the 1983 Gingrich/Danker) is an excellent shorter and more affordable Greek-English lexicon. Since Danker is the editor, it reflects the excellence of the standard Bauer-Danker-Arndt-Gingrich (BDAG).

It is better than the glosses provided by the UBS/Newman dictionary. It is not as exhaustive as the 1993 The Complete Word Study Dictionary: New Testament (CWSD-NT) by Zodhiates that is included in Discoverer and higher collections, but it is more straightforward. While CWSD-NT is certainly helpful, there is considerable theological bias that skews some entries. (E.g., see the long entry under βῆμα which goes way beyond anything connected with that word!)


  • Brian W. Davidson, Michel Gilbert and Fabian like this

#2 Brian W. Davidson

Brian W. Davidson

    Silver

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

Posted 21 June 2018 - 11:51 AM

I was trying to find a post on this earlier today. Assumed someone had requested it in the past. I use the print dictionary just about every day when doing devotional reading. This is the most noteworthy lexicon that is in BibleWorks but not in Accordance yet.


Edited by Brian W. Davidson, 21 June 2018 - 11:52 AM.

  • Michel Gilbert and Fabian like this

#3 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,201 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 21 June 2018 - 12:08 PM

+100100

 

Yes, requested many times, e.g., at https://www.accordan...nker/?hl=danker

 

The best for rapid reading for most people.


  • Fabian likes this

#4 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,201 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 21 June 2018 - 01:30 PM

Here is the first word in Matthew:

 

 

Attached File  Danker.png   49KB   0 downloads



#5 mgvh

mgvh

    Gold

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 240 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Maryland, USA
  • Interests:Archaeology, Photography, Biking
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Windows

Posted 21 June 2018 - 01:51 PM

+100100

 

Yes, requested many times, e.g., at https://www.accordan...nker/?hl=danker

 

The best for rapid reading for most people.

I looked for a previous request but didn't find it. Thanks for noting it. I see now where it was in "Features" request. It's at home here now in "Modules" request.



#6 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,201 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 21 June 2018 - 01:58 PM

Hi Mark,

If I recall, Feature and Module Requests used to be one category and split into two. Also, for whatever reason, sometimes Members don’t post in the correct place, or at least where Acc intended them to. I’ve been guilty of this myself. Now I usually search from the main page to cover all the bases. Sometimes if I get too many hits, I search in individual Forums.

Thanks for reviving this request. I was hoping someone would. I think it is invaluable.

Regards,

Michel



#7 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,201 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 21 June 2018 - 02:30 PM

FWIW, I get the impression that some think Holladay’s and Danker’s concise versions are simply copies of the glosses in HALOT and BDAG, which of course, is simply not the case.



#8 Brian W. Davidson

Brian W. Davidson

    Silver

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

Posted 21 June 2018 - 02:57 PM

Danker emphasized that this is really a new work at the end of his career.

A quote from the preface:

 

"This lexicon is therefore neither a revision of any previous small-scale dictionary of New Testament Greek, nor an abridgment of BDAG, although I have certainly benefited from innumerable sources of information, ancient and modern, that make their mark in the pages of BDAG."



#9 דָנִיאֶל

דָנִיאֶל

    Ruby

  • Super Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,465 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, Windows, Android

Posted 21 June 2018 - 03:13 PM

Very helpful, those last couple of posts. I don't know this work but it sounds useful now I understand better what it is.

 

+1

thx

D


Sola lingua bona est lingua mortua
ἡ μόνη ἀγαθὴ γλῶσσα γλῶσσα νεκρὰ ἐστιν
lišanu ēdēnitu damqitu lišanu mītu

"Du stammst vom Herrn Adam und der Herrin Eva ab", sagte Aslan. "Und das ist zugleich Ehre genug, um das Häupt des ärmsten Bettlers zu erheben, und genug, um die Schultern des größten Kaisers auf Erden zu beugen. Sei zufrieden." Aslan, Die Chroniken von Narnia, Prinz Kaspian von Narnia. CS Lewis. Übersetzt von Wolfgang Holbein und Christian Rendel.

Accordance Syntax Search For Wallace's Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics : https://github.com/4...WallaceInSyntax

 

Accordance Crib Sheets: http://47rooks.com/l...ch-crib-sheets/

 

 

Accordance Configurations :

Mac : 2009 27" iMac
12GB RAM

Windows : MSI GE72 7RE Apache Pro laptop
Intel Core Duo Intel i7 Kabylake

Android : Samsung Note III 5.0, Samsung Tab S3 7.0 and Lenovo TAB4 8" 7.1


#10 Rick Bennett

Rick Bennett

    Mithril

  • Accordance
  • 2,703 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 21 June 2018 - 03:29 PM

I had a feeling this would come up soon (and it's not the first time).  ;)

 

Here are my thoughts on "concise" lexicons (or other abridged, shorter, etc. type resources): 

 

1. These two in particular (Danker and Holladay), and others like them are very widely used in schools because they are portable, get to the most commonly (if that's a good word) needed information more easily, and are less expensive. These are great features. I used the predecessor by Gingrich for 3 years in college, and became very acquainted with it, and agree it's superior to anything of its size. In seminary, Holladay was required, but I had HALOT in Accordance (and indeed almost every class the prof would ask me what HALOT said since no one else had it electronically, nor carried the 6 vols. to class).

 

2. Size is obviously not a constraint for electronic resources. Concise information about the passage you are working in is easily attainable with no additional effort via amplify with context. The price for these is relatively low considering the BDAG/HALOT bundle, academic discounts, and the frequently occurring 25% off pick a product sale. And, eventually, anyone who purchases one of these concise editions will purchase BDAG/HALOT. So, why invest in both? (I know some will disagree, and that's fine, too).

 

And from a development perspective, is it worthwhile to invest our resources in acquiring and developing them? It's tough to answer, and historically we have answered that "no." And, we have had relatively few requests in recent years as well.

 

That said, it's more probable that we can get Danker, and if others make the call to acquire it, I will not say no to develop it. 

 

I hope that helps…thanks for the feedback.


  • mgvh likes this
Rick Bennett
Director of Content Development

#11 Brian W. Davidson

Brian W. Davidson

    Silver

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

Posted 21 June 2018 - 03:49 PM

Thanks for considering Danker.

 

I have never had an interest in Holladay because it is weird in that it is really a concise version of something in between the second and third editions of KB. Besides the Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew is far better.



#12 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,201 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 21 June 2018 - 05:40 PM

Besides the Concise Dictionary of Classical Hebrew is far better.

 

I knew this would come up too. :)

 

Anderson wrote some scathing criticisms of the DCH, see http://www.biblicals...3_50_clines.pdf , which have not been answered. I’ve checked every CDCH definition over the past few years and compared them to HALOT and Holladay, and Anderson’s criticisms hold true for the entire set. I'm not going to go into it, but I don't think Anderson's concerns about DCH's methodological inconsistencies can be answered. We just have to use it with caution.

 

Of course, DCH has the benefit of covering all classical Hebrew texts. And it has other benefits. But it is not far better, nor is it particularly suited for the average reader, e.g., which homonym should they choose, and why? Nor is Holladay simply an abridgement of HALOT. I know because I've read Holladay and HALOT (and CDCH and BDB) cover to cover, in the context of reading the HB over the last two decades, and I've seen that Holladay was too modest about his own contributions to the work (many others have said this as well). Nor does the common argument of an old gloss approach (honestly, whatever that means, as if Hebraists from former generations used interlinears and just replaced them with the newest glosses from the latest lexicons) versus a new lingusitic approach hold water for a lexicon whose sole purpose was to give glosses, a context, and a for further reference if needed, which was HALOT itself. So,in context, I think you would have to prove DCH is far better than HALOT to prove CDCH is far better than Holladay. I think Anderson showed that that can't be done.

 

Having said all this, I would prefer Danker’s concise lexicon for the NT, and Brill’s Konzise und aktualisierte Ausgabe des Hebräischen und Aramäischen Lexikons zum Alten Testament. But if Acc can't get KAHAL, then i would vote for Holladay in its place. Or, if I just had students in mind, vote for Holladay in the first place.

 

I'm not as well versed in NT lexicons, but from what I've seen, Danker seems to have made improvements over BDAG in the same way Holladay did over HALOT.

 

Regards,

 

Michel

 

 


  • Mark Allison and Donald Cobb like this

#13 Brian W. Davidson

Brian W. Davidson

    Silver

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

Posted 21 June 2018 - 07:35 PM

I do prefer HALOT to DCH, but I've always really enjoyed CDCH as a reading lexicon, like Danker for NT.

 

Haven't used Holladay cover to cover or in comparison so I'll bow out on the comparison to CDCH and concede with a "Touché, kind sir."



#14 Brian W. Davidson

Brian W. Davidson

    Silver

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

Posted 22 June 2018 - 02:04 PM

Michel, wanted to say, "Thank you SO much!" [dripping with sarcasm].

 

I just had to go to the local bookstore and buy another copy of Holladay (sold mine years ago) to give it another go.


  • Timothy Jenney and Michel Gilbert like this

#15 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,201 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 22 June 2018 - 04:23 PM

Hi Brian,

 

Just today I checked אב and מופת. HALOT has 9 entries, Holladay has 6 for אב, and I like "originator, founder" in Holladay vs "progenitor" in HALOT (for #2). I especially dislike "parent" in CDCH. Also, for מופת , I like Holladay's "omen" vs HALOT's and CDCH's "portent." I would guess that there are hundreds of places where I prefer Holladay's glosses over HALOT's. I think they are better glosses based on my studies, and, no doubt, based on where I've lived, e.g., I'm more used to the phrase "founding fathers" vs "progenitors of the nation," and "omen," as in, "Oh man, something bad is going to happen," vs "I just saw a portent."

 

I could say a lot more, but I won't, except that I admit that once in a while I prefer a CDCH gloss.

 

Now I have my own user lexicon, not just gleaned from the main lexicons, but also including my own work. I'm going to check it against KAHAL next, probably starting in January.

 

Regards,

 

Michel


  • Brian W. Davidson and Fabian like this

#16 Fabian

Fabian

    Mithril

  • Super Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,769 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 23 June 2018 - 02:12 AM

Hi Brian,

 

Just today I checked אב and מופת. HALOT has 9 entries, Holladay has 6 for אב, and I like "originator, founder" in Holladay vs "progenitor" in HALOT (for #2). I especially dislike "parent" in CDCH. Also, for מופת , I like Holladay's "omen" vs HALOT's and CDCH's "portent." I would guess that there are hundreds of places where I prefer Holladay's glosses over HALOT's. I think they are better glosses based on my studies, and, no doubt, based on where I've lived, e.g., I'm more used to the phrase "founding fathers" vs "progenitors of the nation," and "omen," as in, "Oh man, something bad is going to happen," vs "I just saw a portent."

 

I could say a lot more, but I won't, except that I admit that once in a while I prefer a CDCH gloss.

 

Now I have my own user lexicon, not just gleaned from the main lexicons, but also including my own work. I'm going to check it against KAHAL next, probably starting in January.

 

Regards,

 

Michel

 

I'm interesting in your opinion of the new Gesenius.

 

Greetings

 

Fabian


Greetings

Fabian

ATTENTION: My bug reports are all with the GERMAN INTERFACE and with the EUROPEAN NOTATION! It can be the English interface has no bug, which I describe.

#17 markusvonkaenel

markusvonkaenel

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 156 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ersigen and jerusalem
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 23 June 2018 - 03:34 AM

I'm afraid because KAHAL and also Gesenius are German, they will never made it to Accordance.



#18 Michel Gilbert

Michel Gilbert

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,201 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS, Android

Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:11 AM

Hi Markus,

 

They both came out in 2013, and I planned to go through KAHAL first. Life got in the way (including Robert's syntax database in Acc), and I haven't even bought my own copy of it yet, never mind the new Gesenius.

 

Regarding German titles, at least in this case, if Acc coud license KAHAL under reasonable terms, they know that some/many? would buy it.

 

Regards,

 

Michel


  • markusvonkaenel and Fabian like this

#19 markusvonkaenel

markusvonkaenel

    Silver

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 156 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:ersigen and jerusalem
  • Accordance Version:12.x
  • Platforms:Mac OS X, iOS

Posted 23 June 2018 - 11:41 AM

Hi Michel

 

would be a difficult decision for me, as I own Gesenius.  I use mostly Kleins Etymologial Dictionary from Carta Jerusalem. Also on paper. For accordance I mainly use CDCH.

 

Therefore I can not promise any purchase. I'm at the moment done with Hebrew dictionaries. But looking forward of your commentary about KAHAL here on the form.

 

Otherwise its a strategical decision, if they are planning to "conquer" the German market. Then they need certainly such high quality books in German.

 

BTW: I'm looking in Kittel or BDAG for Greek, this will be my next purchase. 


Edited by markusvonkaenel, 23 June 2018 - 12:16 PM.

  • Fabian likes this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users