Data BUG (LHB-CA): Silluq/Meteg indistinction

Page 1 of 1 (5 items)
This post has 4 Replies | 0 Followers

Posts 1970
Forum MVP
Reuben Helmuth | Forum Activity | Posted: Wed, Jan 16 2019 4:27 AM

18,769 data errors are due to tagging every Silluq in the Hebrew Bible as Meteg, which is simply preposterous (Meteg isn't even really a Cantillation mark). Here's a search that finds all these. I mentioned this before and Eli said it could be "easily changed". This is also covered in the Resolving Ambiguities section of Richters site.

Posts 1275
LogosEmployee
Rick Brannan (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Feb 20 2019 9:30 AM

Hi Reuben.

As with the Meayla/Tipcha ambiguity, I want to follow up here since Hebrew Cantillations are a bit out of my depth, and I want to make sure I'm addressing the ambiguity appropriately.

You mention "Silluq", but my understanding is that Silluq is part of Sof Pasuq.

In this case, if both a Meteg and a Sof Pasuq occur in the same *text segment* (not visual word), the Meteg needs to be removed. Is that correct?

Rick Brannan
Data Wrangler, Faithlife
My books in print

Posts 1970
Forum MVP
Reuben Helmuth | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Feb 20 2019 12:48 PM

Rick Brannan (Faithlife):
In this case, if both a Meteg and a Sof Pasuq occur in the same *text segment* (not visual word), the Meteg needs to be removed. Is that correct?

Correct.

Posts 1275
LogosEmployee
Rick Brannan (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Apr 16 2019 9:59 AM

Hi Reuben.

I have a version of the data internally that only returns 114 hits for text segements that include both Meteg and Sof Pasuq. Examples include the final text segments in Gen 4:22 and Gen 6:19 and 20.

I'm assuming this is a much better version of the data and rather than work on the remaining 114 (assuming they're incorrect?) I will instead work on verifying some of the other large scale issues you reported.

Thanks again!

Rick Brannan
Data Wrangler, Faithlife
My books in print

Posts 1970
Forum MVP
Reuben Helmuth | Forum Activity | Replied: Wed, Sep 11 2019 12:32 AM

Rick, sorry for the very delayed response! 

Rick Brannan (Faithlife):
I'm assuming this is a much better version of the data and rather than work on the remaining 114 (assuming they're incorrect?)

I'm seeing 141 hits, but per a quick scan, they do all appear to be correct (containing both meteg & silluq). I think this report can be closed out as resolved. THANKS!

Page 1 of 1 (5 items) | RSS