The Accordance Hebrew Texts Are Defective, missing vs 1

[Enoch]

The Accordance Hebrew Tanach OT texts are defective in that they lack the first verses, the superscriptions.  In English these verses are typically numbered as 0.  But in Hebrew they are the first verses.  These verses should not be omitted, for the integrity of the text.

[TYA]

Enoch, are you referring to what I show in this screenshot?

 

Depending on what array of texts I'm showing, the superscriptions (vs. 1) are left out, which I admit is not ideal; however, they aren't actually missing.  If you open the Hebrew texts by themselves, you will see that they are taka there.

Edited April 26, 2020 by TYA

[Fabian]

Then the Parallel works not perfect or I understand it not correct.

 

BTW often verses are hidden if you search in the search entry box for the verse. But not if you do it in the Go-To box right below. (Maybe you have to choose the book, and then scroll to the verse).

[Ken Simpson]

The Accordance Hebrew Tanach OT texts are defective in that they lack the first verses, the superscriptions.  In English these verses are typically numbered as 0.  But in Hebrew they are the first verses.  These verses should not be omitted, for the integrity of the text.

hi Enoch, the display of a parallel text is decided by the versification of the primary search text. So if there is no vs 0 in the primary search text (YWP in Fabian’s window - and in fact most texts based on the KJV numbering) then it won’t be displayed in the parallel text. The verses are still there. Just make the Hebrew the primary text (the search text) and open the other text in a parallel and all the verses will be there. 

[Enoch]

Thanks for the explanation, Gentlemen.  So I was wrong.  The superscriptions are there, but do not show up in Hebrew when you make Hebrew the parallel text.  i Is it possible with this system to search the English of superscriptions?  Or do you have to enter the Hebrew of it before you search?  Is this system a system which needs improvement?

[miketisdell]

Some English versions (like the ESV) have the title numbers as verse 0, with these versions you can use the English version as the primary version and the title shows in both Hebrew and English. 

Additionally, if the Hebrew version is the primary version, you can use the [text] option to search an English text.

[Fabian]

You have to distinguish between search and show.

 

Search: If there is no verse you can not search. So there will be no parallel, because ...

Show: Over the GoTo Box right below. The verses will show. Choose the book and then scroll or type one verse before the one you want. (the one right below the texts). 

 

Search again: You can always change the search text. Simply use the drop down left of the search entry box (the one above the texts)

[miketisdell]

You have to distinguish between search and show.

 

Search: If there is no verse you can not search. So there will be no parallel, because ...

Show: Over the GoTo Box right below. The verses will show. Choose the book and then scroll or type one verse before the one you want. (the one right below the texts). 

 

Search again: You can always change the search text. Simply use the drop down left of the search entry box (the one above the texts)

 

If you are using a version, like the ESV, that includes verse references for the titles then you can search the titles.

 

 

 

[Enoch]

Gentlemen, thanks for the interaction.  It seems then that there are a workarounds for this Accordance inconvenience.  Is it fair to call it a bug?  One can jump through hoops and bring up the superscriptions. But would it not be better to have the superscriptions always come up?  Why should not the superscriptions come up when one adds the Hebrew as a parallel text?  Is there some advantage to having them not come up?  Is there some advantage to not being able easily to search for words in the supersciptions in all translations?

[TYA]

 

 

Is it fair to call it a bug?

 

I'm not a programmer, but I can tell that this almost certainly wouldn't qualify as a "bug."  It is simply how the program is designed, whether we consider it ideal or not.

 

 

 

One can jump through hoops and bring up the superscriptions.

 

Just make sure the Hebrew text is the selected as the search version, as has been noted above.  Some English translations do have the superscriptions in v. 1 instead of in v. 0.  Have a look at this screenshot, for example.

 

 

 

Is there some advantage to having them not come up?

 

No, it's not an "advantage," of course.  It's just the design of the program.

 

 

 

...being able easily to search for words in the supersciptions in all translations?

 

Actually, this is fairly easy.  Use the Research Tab.  You can search in Hebrew, English, Greek, etc. and the search will run across all** your texts.  See attached screenshot.

 

** Accordance searches tagged texts and untagged texts differently; and sometimes vowelized texts and unvowelized texts differently.  So, one search technically won't find what you want across all the texts in your Library (assuming you have a library of considerable size).  You will have to search a variety of ways.

 

To help with the complexities, some of us create "crib sheets" to help us remember the different ways to search.  In this screenshot I attached, you will see that I had to put a space between the prefix and the actual word.  Let me know if you want, and I will be happy to share my crib sheet with you.

Edited May 3, 2020 by TYA