Multiple redundancy in name of Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon Morphology (CAL) Aramaic Morphology

At the very least, the word "Morphology" is incorrectly repeated in the name of this morphology. It could/should be simplified to Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon (CAL) Aramaic Morphology. But even the second instance of "Aramaic" is sort of redundant since it's pretty obvious it's an Aramaic morphology, as opposed to Greek or Hebrew or Syriac. So it could be simplified all the way down to Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon (CAL) Morphology.

Perhaps this is so deeply encoded into resources and databases that it would be impossible to fix? It's not a big deal to me, just looks kind of clunky.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

(‾◡◝)

Your comment will be forwarded to the Department of Redundancy Department.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/127058#Comment_127058

Your comment will be forwarded to the Department of Redundancy Department.

[:)]

James W Bennett

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/127178#Comment_127178

Actually the second Aramaic might be incorrect rather than just redundant.

The Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon project is an attempt to build a complete Aramaic (and all its various dialects such as Imperial Aramaic, Rabbinical Aramaic, Palestinian Aramaic, Syriac, etc) lexicon and original text database. When looking up a word/lemma/root in the online database you will get back information about how that lexeme was used in the various dialects.

For example:

ʾmr
vb. a/a
to say

G
  1
to say
Com.
--(a)
to make a legal declaration
OfA, OfA, OfA, OfA^Sam, OfA^West.
(a.1)
+ܕܝܼܢܵܐ : to litigate
Syr.
--(b)
to pronounce
Syr.
(b.1)
to name
.

  2
to command
OfA, OfA, BA, Syr.

  3
to think
Syr.
--(a)
to agree
Syr.

  4
idiomatic and special usages:
.
--(a)
לאמר : as
follows, quote (see also s.v. lm adv.)
OfA, OfA.
--(b)
ܐܡܪ ܐܢܐ : what I mean to say
is ...
Syr.
--(c)
ܒ ܂܂܂ ܐܡܝܪܐ : idem
Syr.

Gt
1
to be said
Syr, JBA.
--(a)
to be called
Syr.

2
to be ordered, commanded
Syr.

LS2: 26. DJPA: 63a. DJBA: 140b. J. Payne-Smith:
20.

Having worked with the internal format of this morphology I don't believe that you can really separate it into Aramaic and Syriac morphologies except through the inherent association of a language or dialect with the work being tagged. For example, all the Targums use CAL but some are Palestinian Aramaic and some are Jewish Literary Aramaic. So the proper name is probably the Comprehensive Aramaic Lexicon(CAL) Morphology.

The current form of the Peshitta NT that we have is tagged with SEDRA3, but it would be nice to also have it tagged with CAL to simplify searching across these resources. I know that CAL already has the Peshitta NT tagged in this format. It would also be nice if the Leiden Peshitta is tagged in the CAL format to aid in searching across the Targums and the Leiden Peshitta. Getting it tagged in SEDRA3 format would also be nice, but if Leiden has their own tagging format that should be brought in also.

Ultimately it would be wonderful to have the complete CAL database (lexicon and works) in Logos format. They have already imported the Targums so they have experience with the database format for the works. I know that to some extent CAL is willing to work with people and organizations. And it would be very nice if I could spend alot more time in Logos and less on the CAL website

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/127216#Comment_127216

Ultimately it would be wonderful to have the complete CAL database (lexicon and works) in Logos format.

At least a link as for Perseus? I'd also like an Open Text link to get their diagram format.