A Lexicon of Biblical Aramaic: Clarified by Ancient Documents

[drsdanderson]

It is hard to find a good supplement to HALOT for Biblical Aramaic. This one was translated and revised by Fitzmyer, who is a noted Aramaic scholar.

 

Vogt, Ernst. A Lexicon of Biblical Aramaic: Clarified by Ancient Documents. Translated and revised by J. A. Fitzmyer. Subsidia Biblica 42. Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2011.

 

[Brian W. Davidson]

This lexicon is fantastic!

[MattChristianOT]

I would like to see this added: +1 vote on my end

[Timothy Jenney]

Thanks for the recommendation! 

 

However, we are currently having difficulty licensing resources from publishers, particularly European publishers, at reasonable rates. Historically, our formula has been reasonable royalties + efficient internal development + modest markup (profit) = reasonable sale price. Note that we do not control all the variables. When we anticipate that a resource will not have a broad appeal (sell lots of copies), the calculus gets even tighter.

 

Nevertheless, we are currently pursuing licenses on several different Aramaic lexicons (as well as other secondary languages for biblical research). We'd appreciate your prayers in these endeavors.

[ukfraser]

I hope we would all endorse the model you outline, i struggle with publishers like oup where you have a few resources licensed from them so why are they being a pain and not letting you have more? Does exchange rate have any impact? Or is it something else with european publishers? I appreciate you may not be able to say. Ive contacted oup in the past, perhaps all us europeans need to petition specific publishers as a group.

[Timothy Jenney]

Print publishers are struggling as a group, as people are buying fewer and fewer printed books. They typically don't make anywhere near much on digital sales, like Kindle, as Amazon takes such a huge cut (70% in many cases). The problem is industry-wide, but particularly acute in Europe, where publishers typically face even smaller markets and higher costs. The specialty printers (like those for ANE languages) are often family-run small businesses with relatively few books. I think many of them feel that every digital sale is one less printed book they can sell.

 

Yes, please let these publishers (and authors!) know you'd like to see their books offered in Accordance.

Edited July 26, 2018 by Timothy Jenney

[MattChristianOT]

By day I am a salesman (just to pay the bills) but by evening and weekends I am a scholar so I very much understand this model. I appreciate the transparency and will be praying for these matters. I think Accordance is the best tool out there and will continue to support you!

[ukfraser]

Print publishers are struggling as a group, as people are buying fewer and fewer printed books. .

Because of the advantages of edevices.

 

People like peachpit and apress have been selling ebooks as pdfs for years. With dtp the preparation cost is the same but ebook, no printing, distribution or remainder costs so better for the environment.

 

By not selling via accordance they are missing out on easy royalties as you do all the marketing and clever markup. They are really doing their authors a disservice by restricting possible sales.

 

;o(

 

Print has a place but so does etext.

Edited July 26, 2018 by ukfraser

[Timothy Jenney]

The trouble is that many of these publishing companies still have printing presses, typesetters, and other workers—and they want to continue using them! They represent an large investment and they want to continue to get a return on it. They also have their distribution networks set up (mainly direct to university libraries, in the case of academic European publishing houses, as there are very few independent scholars in Europe [unlike the US]).

 

Moving entirely to digital represents a real risk. Customers want a single app on which they can read all their books. No one wants to buy a separate app for every single publisher, so the publisher must publish to a standard (and an app) over which they have no control (like Kindle or Nook). I, for instance, use Kindle for all my fiction reading and Accordance for all my scholarly work. If a book isn't published on one of them, I simply don't buy it. (OK, maybe I very, very, rarely buy something in print.).

 

Many of these app owners rigidly control pricing and royalties, so a publisher can't charge whatever they want. Kindle, for example, gives publishers 70% of retail on the Kindle platform if the book is priced between $.99 and $9.99. If the book is priced at more than $9.99, the publisher only received 30%—out of which they must then pay the author 8-10%. Most of them can't survive on 20%, as they must pay for proofing, layout, and advertising. The bottom line is that everyone is looking for a better solution.

[drsdanderson]

For lexicons and dictionaries, publishers are going to have to accept the move to digital. Platforms like Accordance and Google Translate are doing for languages what calculators did for math. If I only have a lexicon in print, I won't use it very much, if at all. It is far more efficient to look up words in an Accordance lexicon than by flipping through a print lexicon, and I can only use the print lexicon if I have it with me.

[Enoch]

Because of the advantages of edevices.

 

People like peachpit and apress have been selling ebooks as pdfs for years. With dtp the preparation cost is the same but ebook, no printing, distribution or remainder costs so better for the environment.

 

By not selling via accordance they are missing out on easy royalties as you do all the marketing and clever markup. They are really doing their authors a disservice by restricting possible sales.

 

;o(

 

Print has a place but so does etext.

Are human eyeballs & bodies part of the environment? What are the health results of reading a book vs. staring at a computer monitor being bathed with radiation? How about the eyeball retina?

[Enoch]

It is hard to find a good supplement to HALOT for Biblical Aramaic. This one was translated and revised by Fitzmyer, who is a noted Aramaic scholar.

 

Vogt, Ernst. A Lexicon of Biblical Aramaic: Clarified by Ancient Documents. Translated and revised by J. A. Fitzmyer. Subsidia Biblica 42. Rome: Gregorian & Biblical Press, 2011.

I searched AccordanceBible.com to see if there were a (good) Aramaic Lexicon available, after getting frustrated on the translation of Daniel 2:41, clay of clay?  חסף טינא

miry clay, baked clay, brittle clay? Two words for clay; I assume each has some different nuance. I like the idea of translating brittle clay because it fits the material sequence: gold, silver, bronze, iron, hard ceramic brittle clay; the sequence going from more dense to less dense, more valuable to less valuable, softer to harder (so hard it is brittle). But just because I LIKE it some way, doesn't mean that is what the Aramaic means. BTW, is it not marvelous how a ton of commentaries may come out with a load of words on a passage while ignoring the significant problem one really would like to solve?

[Enoch]

Thanks for the recommendation! 

 

However, we are currently having difficulty licensing resources from publishers, particularly European publishers, at reasonable rates. Historically, our formula has been reasonable royalties + efficient internal development + modest markup (profit) = reasonable sale price. Note that we do not control all the variables. When we anticipate that a resource will not have a broad appeal (sell lots of copies), the calculus gets even tighter.

 

Nevertheless, we are currently pursuing licenses on several different Aramaic lexicons (as well as other secondary languages for biblical research). We'd appreciate your prayers in these endeavors.

Calculus, differential or integral. I just bought Vogt on Amazon for $40. Even if you paid the royalty owner the whole $40 retail price, you could mark it up for being computerized. Somebody said that Kindle wants 70 percent. But do authors get 30 percent of a book's price when it is sold?  But I am sure that Accordance knows its problems better than I on publishing books.

[MattChristianOT]

Calculus, differential or integral. I just bought Vogt on Amazon for $40. Even if you paid the royalty owner the whole $40 retail price, you could mark it up for being computerized. Somebody said that Kindle wants 70 percent. But do authors get 30 percent of a book's price when it is sold?  But I am sure that Accordance knows its problems better than I on publishing books.

They still have to purchase the rights (which are not cheap) and sell at a price point to recover the loss. If a publisher sells the electronic rights to a book for say $500.00. Accordance has to evaluate what to charge that is feasible (the book retails $50.00 per hard copy) to the degree they know they can offer and turn a profit (well past the $500.00 mark which means they have to make close to quadruple or more to pay for the time, effort, and people that made it possible). Its a gamble too because they do not know how many will buy what.

[TYA]

What are the health results of reading a book vs. staring at a computer monitor being bathed with radiation? How about the eyeball retina?

 

I'm not expert on this, and would love other input if others disagree, but I took this question to heart years ago because my day time work was all computer, and then my night time scholarly pursuits were all computer. ~ 12-15 hours / day of computer.

 

What I remember reading online was that computer monitors don't emit any (really) harmful radiation.  It's not UV, or anything like what comes from the sun.  I remember reading that it is recommended that you look away from the monitor, at least briefly, every so often.

 

In regards to strain, that is actually one reason I *do* prefer computer monitors over books.  I have no control over the font size of a book, and good lighting is usually an issue.  Both of these issues are negated with my computer screen.  I can control both the font and the light output.

 

Again, someone with more expertise, feel free to refute.  But I remember looking this up out of concern, and being quite relieved that I wasn't being zapped with harmful radiation.  Just need to remember to give the eyes a break.

Edited January 10, 2019 by TYA

[Enoch]

They still have to purchase the rights (which are not cheap) and sell at a price point to recover the loss. If a publisher sells the electronic rights to a book for say $500.00. Accordance has to evaluate what to charge that is feasible (the book retails $50.00 per hard copy) to the degree they know they can offer and turn a profit (well past the $500.00 mark which means they have to make close to quadruple or more to pay for the time, effort, and people that made it possible). Its a gamble too because they do not know how many will buy what.

They don't know how many will buy what:  Has Logos found the answer to that problem by its community pricing system where people bid on a book, but it doesn't go out until there are enough subscribers?  I have made some bids on Logos on Loeb classics sets of some author, like Aristotle; then had to wait years to actually get the set. But when I got it, it was incredibly cheap. Those who didn't bid in the community pricing system, can still buy the book, but at a higher price.

Edited February 23, 2019 by Enoch

[MattChristianOT]

They don't know how many will buy what:  Has Logos found the answer to that problem by its community pricing system where people bid on a book, but it doesn't go out until there are enough subscribers?  I have made some bids on Logos on Loeb classics sets of some author, like Aristotle; then had to wait years to actually get the set. But when I got it, it was incredibly cheap. Those who didn't bid in the community pricing system, can still buy the book, but at a higher price.

A subscription model would be interesting, but really only works on limited systems and would always require internet and a lot of maintenance on Accordance's part which are huge details that I don't think are very helpful in the long run. I think Accordance has done a great job balancing cost/usage. The expansion of needed texts is slower but, the format of Accordance is not really on book reading (like LOGOS) but on textual work. JMHO

[arnehalbakken]

I'm not expert on this, and would love other input if others disagree, but I took this question to heart years ago because my day time work was all computer, and then my night time scholarly pursuits were all computer. ~ 12-15 hours / day of computer.

 

What I remember reading online was that computer monitors don't emit any (really) harmful radiation.  It's not UV, or anything like what comes from the sun.  I remember reading that it is recommended that you look away from the monitor, at least briefly, every so often.

 

In regards to strain, that is actually one reason I *do* prefer computer monitors over books.  I have no control over the font size of a book, and good lighting is usually an issue.  Both of these issues are negated with my computer screen.  I can control both the font and the light output.

 

Again, someone with more expertise, feel free to refute.  But I remember looking this up out of concern, and being quite relieved that I wasn't being zapped with harmful radiation.  Just need to remember to give the eyes a break.

 

Like Tim Jenney, I had gone to purchasing most books in digital format with Accordance being my preference by far. However, I am moving more to read books again because of the risks to the health from screens.

 

Here are some issues:

1) The flicker effect from computer screens, etc. has a deleterious effect on the mitochondria. The flicker effect will lead to melanopsin dysfunction.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/flicker-effect-light-jack-kruse

 

2) The blue light from computer screens, tablets, smart phones, etc. will also lead to melanopsin dysfunction.

Retinol is loosely bound to melanopsin. When that bond is broken, the free retinol will do major damage to photoreceptors in the body creating a cascade of health effects.

 

 

 

 

 

The artificial blue light from the screen will also lower ocular dopamine and ocular DHA.

 

Blue blocking glasses do help when working with Accordance.

 

Iris Software also has a product that will cut the blue light from the screen thus making Accordance safer.

https://iristech.co/

 

3) Non-native electromagnetic fields (nnEMF) emitted from a computer also has health effects.

http://www.emfwarriors.com/library/

 

When I measured my Macbook Pro, I found there were extremely high magnetic fields (plus RF as well).

To help mitigate, I use a wired keyboard and mouse to give distance from the screen and don't charge the laptop while I'm using it. It is also good to have some ambient sunlight while using the laptop.

 

The printed price of this Aramaic lexicon is quite reasonable and I did buy it. But it doesn't have the capacities of use like with Accordance.

[Leonardo]

I like having a book to hold in my hands or on my desk, so I am for print, and I need to add a library, as over the years I have purchased a great many books.  

 

However, I cannot cart the books all over the place, and I love Accordance on the Mac.

 

Do please seek to bring the Vogt Fitzmyer lexicon to accordance.  

 

I don't know how long its been since Hilary O'Shea was at OUP, but the senior editor of classics and theology got to hear from me, encouraging OUP,  as one simple independent student for the LSJM lexicon to be available to Accordance on the Mac, thats with supplements too.