TDOT & DCH comparisons

Page 1 of 2 (22 items) 1 2 Next >
This post has 21 Replies | 4 Followers

Posts 1134
Juanita | Forum Activity | Posted: Tue, Jul 14 2015 1:47 PM

It would be great to hear from those who know these resources to comment on reasons why someone would want both sets.  Any issues with redundancy?  Since TDOT is much longer, does it already contain what the DCH might offer?  Thanks for your opinions!

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 2:09 PM

DCH is a lexicon it contains short glosses for each entry, no etymology and a list of occurrences in the corpora covered. 

TDOT is a dictionary or encyclopedia. Each entry is covered by a very long article discussing all semantic and theological aspects. Some entries span over dozens of pages.

Posts 1134
Juanita | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 2:44 PM

David Knoll:

DCH is a lexicon it contains short glosses for each entry, no etymology and a list of occurrences in the corpora covered. 

TDOT is a dictionary or encyclopedia. Each entry is covered by a very long article discussing all semantic and theological aspects. Some entries span over dozens of pages.

 Thanks for explaining the difference.  I am close to cancelling my order for the DCH and sticking with the TDOT.  But, I am still undecided.

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 3:23 PM

From my experience, your instinct is correct. Follow it!

Posts 1134
Juanita | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 4:14 PM

They both seem to be really good buys, given the Logos price vs. hard copy.

Posts 8898
Forum MVP
Bruce Dunning | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 4:27 PM

Juanita:

They both seem to be really good buys, given the Logos price vs. hard copy.

Yes, and they both serve different purposes.

Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God

Posts 1134
Juanita | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 4:34 PM

Bruce,

The "different purposes" is what I stumble over.  How can the TDOT not already cover what the DCH has?  My scenario, apart from advice here, is to get the DCH and compare some of it with the Google Books preview of the TDOT word for word.

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 4:48 PM

As a sole lexicon DCH is practically useless. I only use it after HALOT and BDB to see if the Dead Sea Scrolls offer something interesting which I have overlooked when I searched them for the lexeme. The decisions there are often odd. I don't recommend it to anyone who is not an expert and can read it with a grain of salt. TDOT has very good discussions sometimes (but must also be read critically). 

Posts 8898
Forum MVP
Bruce Dunning | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 4:52 PM

Certainly there is overlap but here are the descriptions on the Logos website

DCH

The Dictionary of Classical Hebrew is a completely new and innovative dictionary. Unlike previous dictionaries, which have been dictionaries of biblical Hebrew, it is the first dictionary of the classical Hebrew language to cover not only the biblical texts but also Ben Sira, the Dead Sea Scrolls, and the Hebrew inscriptions.

This dictionary covers the period from the earliest times to 200 CE. It lists and analyses every occurrence of each Hebrew word that occurs in texts of that period, with an English translation of every Hebrew word and phrase cited.

TDOT

The Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (TDOT) is one of the most extensive and important works on the Old Testament ever produced. A requirement for sound scholarship on the Hebrew Bible, it remains as fundamental to Old Testament studies as its New Testament counterpart Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (TDNT) does to New Testament studies.

Beginning with 'ābh ('āb), “father,” and continuing all the way through the Hebrew alphabet, TDOT provides extensive research and analysis of every Hebrew and Aramaic word group in the Old Testament. Leading scholars from a variety of Christian traditions and all across the globe contributed articles on individual words that explain the word’s semantic range, present its morphology, and identify its meaning in the Old Testament. Contributors employ philology as well as form-critical and traditio-historical methods to provide explanation for religious statements found in the original Hebrew.

To avoid artificially restricting the focus of the articles, TDOT considers larger groups of words that are related linguistically or semantically. Lexical work includes detailed surveys of a word’s occurrences, not only in biblical material but also in other ancient Near Eastern writings. Sumerian, Akkadian, Egyptian, Ethiopic, Ugaritic, and Northwest Semitic sources receive detailed attention, as do Qumran’s texts and the Septuagint.

Both have value for sure.

Using adventure and community to challenge young people to continually say "yes" to God

Posts 1134
Juanita | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 4:55 PM

Bruce,

I read those and yes, they are pertinent.  I seem to need more of a hands-on, word for word experience to really know.

Posts 1134
Juanita | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 4:58 PM

David Knoll:

As a sole lexicon DCH is practically useless. I only use it after HALOT and BDB to see if the Dead Sea Scrolls offer something interesting which I have overlooked when I searched them for the lexeme. The decisions there are often odd. I don't recommend it to anyone who is not an expert and can read it with a grain of salt. TDOT has very good discussions sometimes (but must also be read critically). 

Yes, having HALOT and BDB, I feel like I am in good shape to add the TDOT, and not the DCH.  I opted for the DCH way before TDOT in Logos was offered.

Posts 8967
RIP
Matthew C Jones | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, Jul 14 2015 5:30 PM

I have my order in for TDOT even though DCH is included in Collectors Edition. I don't see a need to have both but I really want TDOT.

Logos 7 Collectors Edition

Posts 310
Jeremiah | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, May 8 2017 2:58 PM

These posts are all a couple years old by now.

I was wondering can any of you chime in with your experience?

I read my Old Testament only in Hebrew so I rely heavily on my lexicons.

Currently use hard copies of HALOT, BDB, Klein, Jastrow. 

Often the issue for me is for a certain word HALOT and BDB will have radically different definitions. Also, if I'm trying to chase down a hapax legom. I'm left in the dark. I'll dig a bit looking in Targum or LXX but I often feel I have to "settle" with just going with whichever dictionary had a definition that matched the LXX. 

I've been considering DCH on logos for some time but whenever I look over the pages it seems to me that much of the great work that went into creating DCH is already handled by logos (looking of usages for lemma use). If I were to have a print edition (for when my eyes hurt from the computer), I'm thinking DCH would be great due to all the usage listings.TDOT seems generally available now in print for $750.

Here's what's unclear to me; DCH surely will cover even the hapax legom; does TDOT? It looks like TDOT will group words from same lema in a detailed article about that lemma. Am I correct in my understanding?

in short my observation from reading descriptions of these products is:

1. DCH has *more entries*, i.e an entry for every single word in Tanakh as well as additional materials.

2. TDOT does *NOT* have an entry for every word but the entries they have are actually more like an essay about that word.

Are my assumptions correct? If they are then for my concerns about getting at very rare word definitions is DCH better for me?

Thanks

Dead languages are my mid-life crisis

Posts 10119
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, May 8 2017 4:47 PM

Mr Knoll's comments above remain appropo. The two are not in the same ballpark. One is a rollup; the other serious depth. Depends on you.

Am I understanding you read the hebrew, but don't understand the hebrew (ergo lexicons). Or understand almost all the hebrew, but need a few extra pointers?

The first instance, DCH is good. I like it because I can get a quick scan on usage. I spend time on late 2nd Temple, so quite handy.

The second instance, DCH is nice but not needed per se. Even Logos' interlinears can do most of that. TDOT is far more useful, for the depth.

Hapax don't improve with opinions. One more, just means one more.

Finally, if indeed you're into hebrew, english lexicons are handicapped by english. It's not hebrew. You loose the feel.


Posts 9079
Forum MVP
Mark Smith | Forum Activity | Replied: Mon, May 8 2017 5:42 PM

Jeremiah Myers:

in short my observation from reading descriptions of these products is:

1. DCH has *more entries*, i.e an entry for every single word in Tanakh as well as additional materials.

2. TDOT does *NOT* have an entry for every word but the entries they have are actually more like an essay about that word.

Are my assumptions correct? If they are then for my concerns about getting at very rare word definitions is DCH better for me?

Yes. Beside the 'more entries' in DCH, the entries are often fuller (because of the more extensive literature surveyed).

The DCH has a table of word frequencies that sheds light on the question of whether it will yield definitions for rare words better than HALOT does. You'd need to see it to make your own decision.

You can purchase the DCH and use it for 30 days and return it for a full refund if you find it isn't that helpful.

Pastor, North Park Baptist Church

Bridgeport, CT USA

Posts 310
Jeremiah | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 9 2017 2:14 PM

Yes, I understand almost all of the Hebrew in various sections. It's my goal this year to nail down the rest of it.

For example, Torah, historical works, psalms, Ecclesiastes, Ester, some prophets; I just read and don't need to think in English.

Proverbs, Isaiah, Daniel (of course the Aramaic) other later prophets,Job, I am weaker on my vocabulary and sludge through sometimes very slowly.

Currently I use BDB in logos and HALOT in another program. Those are fine for words which are generally known.

When I get to a rare word with dubious meaning I branch out into LXX or a Targum with Jastrow hoping to get the meaning more nailed down.

I wasn't sure what you meant by saying the lexicons are handicapped by English. I do have an all Hebrew lexicon I use sometimes but it's not in Logos; it's a hard copy. Are you suggesting there are some Hebrew-Hebrew lexicons in Logos that I'm not aware of?

thanks,

Jeremiah

Dead languages are my mid-life crisis

Posts 310
Jeremiah | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 9 2017 2:16 PM

Thanks for your reply.

The issue with the purchase and try for 30 days, is I'm considering a sizeable upgrade soon.

Either a large cross grade to include TDOT, or a different package which has already DCH as part of it.

This is why I was hoping to be more decided before just jumping in; dealing with refunds, etc later as I'll be getting several items.

Dead languages are my mid-life crisis

Posts 10119
Denise | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 9 2017 2:33 PM

The way you describe sounds exciting!  The way life should be.

My mention of english didn't imply a hebrew (effective) dictionary in Logos. But english is a very dictatorial language that quickly looses nuances of other languages. I also use the targums a lot just to see what flavor they go with. I assume you also have access to the syriac, which provides clues regarding expressions.


Posts 310
Jeremiah | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 9 2017 2:49 PM

Your comment timing is funny. I just started Thackston's "Introduction to Syriac" grammar a couple days ago.

Can trudge through Estrangela now. What stinks though is a lot of my reading I do on my tablet since it's easier on my eyes than my lame laptop; but the Syriac in Logos mobile defaults to Serto (which I don't know of anyone using) so even the BDB definitions including Syriac are all messed up. So I may hold off in getting my peshitta in logos until I know I can display it in Estrangela script on my tablet.

Dead languages are my mid-life crisis

Posts 599
Steve Maling | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 9 2017 2:56 PM

DCH is synchronic while HALOT and BDB are diachronic.

I value DCH very highly indeed because of its detailed attention to syntactic contexts.

TDOT is a different animal altogether, exploring theological usage rather than focusing on words in their syntactic contexts.

Page 1 of 2 (22 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS