TIP of the day: Why read the forums ... or why I wasn't wasting my time while dilly-dallying ... and

MJ. Smith

One of the folks in our users group inadvertently added an incorrectly spelled word to his dictionary.  Is there some way to correct this? 

I don't think anything has changed; incorrect words have always been indicated with a dashed line.

There is a way to remove words from your custom dictionary using the command box at the top of the window. The following is from the help file (there should be more information in the help file on using the command box as well):

Remove a Spell-Check Word

remove word from language

Removes a word you have previously added to your custom user spell-checking dictionary in a given language.

• remove mishmosh from en removes the word “mishmosh” from the English dictionary.

Logos ships with these dictionaries by default:

• en English
• es Spanish

==========================================================================

Okay so that one may have had a hint in the title that it make have information I didn't know. But this bug report was a useful surprise.

If I enter "open esv" in the command box I can drag the resource to any panel I choose

If I enter "open esv to john 1" I can no longer drag it

Yes, the bug was confirmed but I hadn't tried dragging from the command box since I dragged Facilitate Serendipitious Discovery to the shortcut bar ... a feature staring me in the face that I never thought of using.

============================================================================

Sometimes, it is as small as a link to a page with documentation that I have forgotten about:

This weekend I found that typing into any text box on my Firefox browser resulted in Greek characters. 

Do you have any Greek keyboards installed (e.g., https://www.logos.com/support/logos5/windows/keyboards)? If so, perhaps the Greek one has been activated for Firefox, and switching back to English should fix it. (I can't think of any way in which having Logos running would affect text entry in another application.)

============================================================================

Sometimes it is the detail provided by Faithlife employees that helps me understand what goes on under the hood. This helps me understand what I can and cannot do with Logos.

No matter which (RI) English that one uses, the translation section will always display [variant reading] for the Lexham English Septuagint (LES).

When using the LES, EVERY other version, including the LXX's, simply display [variant reading].

Only when using the LXX, do all the versions display properly.

It's by design, but the consequences of the design may not be obvious at first glance.

The way this section works is it takes your selection in the surface text and maps it to original language words using either the words that you selected (if you're in an original language text already) or through the mediation of a reverse interlinear. It then opens all your reverse interlinear Bibles that contain that verse reference and checks them for the same words. If the words can't be found, then "[variant reading]" is shown.

(It really doesn't map back to words, but unique word instance identifiers called "word numbers." We add these identifiers to select original language texts, and the reverse interlinears use them to stand in for the surface words, which may have various variations in form or spelling in any given version/edition of an original language text, but still be the same "word".)

The reason you always see "[variant reading]" for the LES is that all the other translations translate from the Hebrew (at least ostensibly), but the LES translates from the Greek as its "original". So if you select something in ESV, then it maps back to Hebrew words, which can be found in every other translation except LES, which reads a different "variant." (We chose "variant reading" is the English equivalent of "varia lectio" which is often what is used in commentaries and apparatuses, abbreviated "v.l." to indicate that the fore-text in question doesn't match what you're looking at because it reads a different fore-text here.)

Now, if you then select something in LES, it maps back to Greek LXX words, which can only be found in LEX (and possibly Greek versions of the LXX, about which below). I don't know why your middle screen shot doesn't show anything for LXX Swete and Logos LXX; which verse you're in may make the difference. Or it may be a bug.

If then you select something in a word-numbered Greek LXX, like LXX Swete, we have two sets of word numbers, because LXX Swete and Logos LXX are themselves reverse interlinears back to the Hebrew! So when you start from this text, it's possible to match up the Greek LXX "original" for LES, and also the Hebrew behind the other translations. (This is a happy but coincidental outcome that had you asked me without presenting a screen shot I might not have correctly predicted.)

We could, but don't, open the LXX reverse interlinear to convert the Hebrew word numbers gathered by selecting text in ESV into LXX word numbers to get the translation from LES. That is, ESV -> Hebrew -> LXX -> LES. And vice versa. But we only do one reverse interlinear hop as it is, not two.

And I also learned a small tidbit of information that will help me glean more information from what Logos presents to me:

... I also consider it a bug that my prioritized bible (ESV) doesn't stay in the first (top) position....

... The translation options are sorted by frequency, so the most common translation is listed first. 

============================================================================

I suggest that you keep a note file containing tidbits of information and hints that you run into in the forums, videos, blogs et. al. Because one cannot copy images into the notes I would suggest that you include a link back to the original source. For many people, titling the now with "how do I ....." is the best approach for titling them. I organize mine by how I navigate to feature e.g. Tool ==> Lookup ==> Information ==> Translation. I'm sure others have invented other useful schemes

Chris

Thank you for this post MJ (and all of your other posts)!  In particular, I have found the questions and issues that you bring up lead to threads where I learn a significant amount about how the tools that I am most interested in using in Logos are working.  So, thank you!

Chris