Apparatus section improved

The apparatus sections are very helpful in Logos, but they can be made much better I think by breaking down, organizing and reporting the information therein, instead of just providing links to the apparatuses.

What I mean can be illustrated somewhat by analogy to the Ancient Literature section. The AL section does not simply provide links to resources, it has them categorized and the arrangement can even be modified to facilitate a different approach:

It would be great if the apparatus section also consolidated different type of information from the different apparatuses instead of just listing them.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Kenneth Neighoff

I copied this information from a Logos post somewhere. But it should be incorporated by a link on the headings.

I found these brief definitions very helpful. I found this is what you are referring to.

Logos- Ancient Literature section category meanings-

citation – Introduced by a citation formula such as "it is written." Does it have a citation formula? It doesn’t matter whether or not the wording exactly matches.
quotation – Intention to quote a phrase of this canonical passage. Is the wording intended to reproduce verbatim this specific scripture for at least three words?
allusion – Intention to paraphrase the words of this canonical passage. Is the wording a paraphrase of at least a clause of this specific scripture? Does the relationship appear to be intentional?
echo – Reader who has read both would be reminded of a similar scriptural passage. Does the verbal parallel evoke or recall this scripture (and possibly others) in a reader's mind, without apparent authorial intention to reproduce the exact words?
topical – Similarity of subject matter. Is there a general referent in common with this scripture, without using the same word? Is its meaning similar? This is like Lexical, but for ideas rather than words.
historical – Reference to the same specific event or situation, whether historical or fiction. Is there a specific referent in common with this scripture, whether or not the event is fictitious or in real history?
lexical – The same or cognate word is used. Is there a word in common that is useful for lexical studies, but without evoking (even unintentionally) this particular scripture?
phrase – Similarity of subject matter AND the same or cognate words are used. Is there a combination of words in common with this scripture, without being the same specific referent (which would be Echo or Historical)? This is like Lexical, but for phrases rather than words. Examples: verb & subject, verb & object, noun in genitive relation with noun.

Category. Use

Citation ⇒ Canonical studies
Quotation ⇒ Textual Criticism
Allusion ⇒ Historical Interpretation
Historical ⇒ History
Echo ⇒ Theology
Phrase ⇒ Theology
Topical ⇒ Theology
Lexical ⇒ Word studies

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/694546#Comment_694546

I think you may have misunderstood me Kenneth. I only meant to use the Ancient Literature categorization as an example of how information is organized in a helpful way as opposed to just providing links as it is currently the case in the Apparatus section. Of course, the information in an Apparatus section would have to be organized differently with textual critical categories instead.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/694561#Comment_694561

Francis ... what exactly are you seeking (e.g. what categories, etc)?

I can think of some real basics (e.g. mss, AF, litergical,etc). Even approximate century along with a sort. I suppose if Logos wanted to charge quite a bit more, the family, etc?

Rick Brannan (Logos)

Hi Francis

The function of the apparatus section (within the larger Textual Variants guide section) at present is to aggregate apparatuses that have an entry for the verse(s) being researched.

What type of information are you looking to have categorized? Different apparatuses for different corpora do things differently. The NA apparatus has some indication of entry type (add, omit, substitution, transposition); but other apparatuses (especially those outside the NT) do not go to this length, they operate more like footnotes with an implied substitution or addition.

Do you have an example or two or something more about what different types of information you're looking to see categorized?

Rick Brannan (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/694680#Comment_694680

I can think of some real basics (e.g. mss, AF, litergical,etc). Even approximate century along with a sort. I suppose if Logos wanted to charge quite a bit more, the family, etc?

On the NT side of things, the information from Online Manuscripts begins to get here. (FWIW, some sort of better way to look at the whole of the available manuscript data instead of hitting the 'more' button forever to get to lectionaries is on my list of things to bug Eli about [again].)

Rick Brannan (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/694705#Comment_694705

On the NT side of things, the information from Online Manuscripts begins to get here.

See the below, for example, which is data returned for John 4.2 (only the first 5 hits, but there are scads and scads in the underlying data we're actually serving). The data is implicitly broken into Papyri, Majuscule, Minuscule, and Lectionary categories. The data also includes the century/date, manuscript coverage (either from specific reference or the 'eapr' style annotation of the NA/UBS apparatuses), and other stuff. I'd like suck that data in to a search-grid-style control for a given passage and then do really fun things with it (right, Eli?).

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/694713#Comment_694713

The variants tool is very good, precisely because it breaks down information by category.

I am not totally sure, to be honest, how apparatus information could be categorized in a report since as you say, they are not all organized the same. But it would be good to remove the Chinese out of the Greek, so to speak. It is a pain to keep track of various sigla and Latin "explanations". Perhaps there is no practical way of making this any easier? On the other hand, perhaps there will be some brilliant ideas tossed around here on the forum that can result in a way forward.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/695099#Comment_695099

A couple winters back I had the bright idea of adding tools to my Bible software to assist my extensive user base (me), who had been frustrated with the tediousness of 'tracking back' the text (versus just 'reading it').

One was, in a passage for a word/phrase, showing the varients in a drop-down menu. The other was a tool to unscramble the apparati (apparatus's).

I actually tested both out to see how much work would be needed by our large programming staff (me). The first one (varient dropdown) was extremely painful (though easy for Logos to do with its expanding interlinears where words can be matched up across sources).

The second (apparatus unscrambling) was quite workable and very useful, since the underlying structure can be improved (e.g. how the mss's inter-relate). I waited to see how Logos would implement CNTTS. So now that's my new target-ish (hopefully with L6 improving the CNTTS delivery; currently molassas similar to WIVU).

GregW

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/695099#Comment_695099

I am not totally sure, to be honest, how apparatus information could be categorized in a report since as you say, they are not all organized the same.

I'm delighted to see this thread. Since CNTTS, for example, is really a database, it should be possible to present a number of report views so that you could view given variants by combinations of century, text family, manuscript type, etc. The task of looking at a variant within Logos almost invariably involves me having to get out a pen and write a variant chart, probably the only remaining part of my exegetical workflow that still requires that. It would be great if someone at FL could come up with ways of visualising or tabulating some of this data.

The Psalms Explorer is IMHO a great example of doing this well, but when I look at CNTTS or the SBL apparatus I am left with a lot of work still to do to turn the data into useful information that I can do something with. Assuming that Logos/FL has structured the underlying data for the apparatus files in a similar way (which might be a false assumption) then it shouldn't need to be completely reworked for every apparatus.

I'm really pleased that Rick appears to be on the case with this sort of thing, and look forward to what comes of it.