The highlighted word appears to be missing its pointing, and I can't work out why. Have I done something wrong? Is it just me? Thanks!
Very strange.
The word is unpointed אהלה in BHS SESB 2.0 (resource id LLS:1.0.204 2016-11-29T19:16:17Z BHSSESB.logos4).
However, אָהֳלֹ֑ה shows up correctly in BHS/WIVU (resource id LLS:WIVUMORPH 2017-04-07T18:00:20Z WIVUMORPH.logos4).
X-ref:
Thanks, glad it's not just me. How do you draw this to the attention of someone who can fix it?
I also have Bibleworks 10 along with Logos 7. The same word in there also lacks the pointing in that version of BHS in their text too, so my guess is that it must be an error / omission in the underlying digital source for BHS.
Replicated resource LLS:1.0.204 (updated on 2017-10-26T20:42:40Z ~5 days ago) lacking vowel pointing so used Right Click to Report Typo with Comment about Vowel Pointing missing
X-ref: Pericope unaccountably missing in former version of Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament, 28th Edition. My "wish" for Logos 8: zero tolerance policy for errors in primary texts.
Thankful for 5 Sep 2017 update of NA28 that included Acts 15:36-41 (fix released ~4 days after forum discussion)
Keep Smiling [:)]
Great catch. Quality control is not what it used to be.
I've passed this thread along to the appropriate person.
Thanks Bradley. How long does it take this sort of correction to make its way through the system and out to end-users?
This might take a while since the error could stem from the German Bible Society's digital original.
The issue is with the German Bible Society's digital source files for BHS. The same word is unvocalized on their online version of BHS. [edited to add link]
I can see that it's there in the original dataset, but how hard is it to pull a copy of BHS off the shelf and add the correct pointing to the word!?
Licensing terms prohibit it.
I don't think the absence of the points here is a mistake. It seems to me (from the marginal note) that though the ketiv (originally written) really had a final he, it should be read (qere) as if this he was a waw, so we came to this ḥolem-waw vocalization. Some editors think that in this kind of situation it's a good idea to keep the original text without the dubious / ad hoc nekudot/teamim.
FWIW, here's the print version:
