I am wondering what this provides
Having the definite article will provide more complete information for those less knowledgeable in Hebrew, so that they can learn.
My philosophy here, D., is that more information is better (as long as it doesn't cause clutter, and in this case I don't believe it does). I know that Dr. J. previously said something along the lines of "The tagging is meant for those already more knowledgeable in Hebrew" (paraphrasing here), but I would like to gently disagree.
I think the tagging is (or would be) a great place for newbies to learn some of the basics of Hebrew, and if Accordance would go for it, even the accenting of the Hebrew Bible. (The other Bible software in the screenshot has an option to turn on/off the accenting in the morphology, which is a nice feature).
One of my first posts ever was "Include tenses in the BHS tagging" in which I argued that, since "perfect" (tense) appears consistently in the tagging wherever applicable, "imperfect" (tense) should also appear consistently, but it doesn't. You'll notice that whenever there is a waw consecutive, for example, the word "imperfect" is simply left out of the tagging.
(I understand the Hebrew itself, converted forms, etc. but was just a bit dissatisfied with the lack of consistency in the tagging, which is what I argued in that thread).
I'm a stickler for consistency. I believe it is always helpful, and ideal. Why not let the tagging be a better tool for those who are newer to Hebrew? That's what is at the heart of my request to include things like the tenses (consistently), definite article, and accents in the tagging. The other software set a high standard for me, I suppose, and I don't believe Accordance should come behind.
I personally would like to know that I could recommend Accordance to others who are newer at Hebrew, and know that they are getting the greatest benefit out of the morphological tagging to aid them in their learning. Hope this makes sense.
Edited by TYA, 30 May 2019 - 11:56 AM.