"Lexham Hebrew Bible" has no introductory material. (last updated 1/29/2015)

The "Lexham Hebrew Bible" has no introductory material.

Is this analyzed text the same as another analyzed text that has introductory material or is it an independent/original work that lost its introduction?

Note: this forum's spell checker does not know the word "Lexham," maybe it could be added to the dictionary. I am sure it would make Lexham look better.

Find more posts tagged with

Lexham Press

Comments

Bruce Dunning

I'm not sure about the introduction text but agree with you that there is none in it.

I'm not sure how the spellchecker works but it is kind of humorous that Lexham is highlighted as a spelling error.

Sean Boisen

It's an original analysis from Faithlife/Logos Bible Software: we use the Lexham name for such projects (it's probably your browser's spell-checker that doesn't recognize the name: you should be able to add it to your personal dictionary on the right-click menu). We don't have an introduction, but we're working on documentation for this resource.

Rick Brannan (Logos)

Regarding the terms used in the morphology, The Lexham Glossary of Morpho-Syntactic Database Terminology should cover all of the terms used.

Daniel Gray

Leave it to me to get 2 subjects going in one post:

On the introduction issue: thanks for the info, I had gotten to the point where it would have been helpful to know if the resource may have considered “4Q37 Deut j” in its analysis. Even AFAT has a meager half page preface but that was enough to give it’s sources (does not include Q text) and explain what they mean by “critical” and that there is “no emendation” (as in Ps 58:2אָדָֽם silence/”Oh gods”). That was helpful in that it explained the difference between AFAT’s reading and the commentators.

Then again, it is probably not fair to compare LHB to AFAT as LHB does not make the claims AFAT does of being critical and analyzed but only “including morphological analysis” in the info description. Now that I have thought about it, I have a better idea how to use LHB until the resource mature further and the introduction information is added.

On the spell checking: I think you are correct that it is the browser spell checker used in the online form. Even though I have no spell check add-on installed in my browser, I can right click to get a menu to “add to dictionary as you suggested.” I always thought it was a sever script. Thanks.

Thanks to all who responded.

just_me

I searched for a forum this morning because of similar question, and found this thread.

The material introducing Lexham Discourse Hebrew Bible does not clarify whether or how it relates to the Lexam Hebrew Interlinear., and does not identify its source text(s). The LDHB shows only one editor. One can't help but wonder if this product is solely the result of one person's labor, or if there has been scholarly interaction in establishing this document. One also notes that the LHI had multiple contributors for the first edition, but there was only one contributor for the second edition which has undergone "a substantial revision of the entire text." Again no mention is made of interaction with others in the scholastic community for review (one supposes the committee may have had that right on the first edition) for the second edition.
It seems a user would benefit from a little more scholarly insight to the derivation of these two products.

It would also be very beneficial to know if Lexham is going it alone on these two products or if there is scholarly interaction, and if so, with whom.

Rick Brannan (Logos)

The material introducing Lexham Discourse Hebrew Bible does not clarify whether or how it relates to the Lexam Hebrew Interlinear

The glosses in LDHB are from LHI (Lexham Hebrew Interlinear)

and does not identify its source text(s).

It uses the Lexham Hebrew Bible, which is based on a transcription of L, the same basic source used by most editions of the Hebrew Bible today. Its surface text is essentially the same as Andersen Forbes, and Westminster, and BHS, and … well, about anything else that is 'essentially' a transcription of L. Nothing new or novel.

The LDHB shows only one editor. One can't help but wonder if this product is solely the result of one person's labor, or if there has been scholarly interaction in establishing this document.

Actually, there are two names, Joshua R. Westbury and Steven E. Runge. The analysis is based on cross-linguistic principles pioneered and used by Bible translators. There is a separate "Lexham Hebrew Discourse Bible: Introduction" resource that provides information on the analysis.

One also notes that the LHI had multiple contributors for the first edition, but there was only one contributor for the second edition which has undergone "a substantial revision of the entire text."

The second edition was essentially a pass by the general editor across the whole of the other contributors submissions, checking to see how consistently each contributor handled common terminology.

Again no mention is made of interaction with others in the scholastic community for review (one supposes the committee may have had that right on the first edition) for the second edition. It seems a user would benefit from a little more scholarly insight to the derivation of these two products

Many of the cross-linguistic prinicples applied to the LDHB are discussed in the introduction. Their application to the Greek New Testament is discussed in Steve Runge's Discourse Grammar of the Greek New Testament, which has been reviewed by the scholarly community and is used as a coursebook in several institutions for advanced Greek grammar studies. The analysis in the Hebrew Bible was part of Joshua Westbury's PhD in Hebrew Linguistics at Stellenbosch University, and have been presented on and discussed within the scholarly community as well.

It would also be very beneficial to know if Lexham is going it alone on these two products or if there is scholarly interaction, and if so, with whom.

We are not going it alone. If you search the annual meeting book for each years' SBL national meeting, you'll see papers by Steve Runge or Josh Westbury, or both. We talk about these ideas a lot and are not working in a vacuum.

Hope this helps.

Edit: We also do plan on a short (page or two) preface to the Lexham Hebrew Bible to help with the "where did it come from" sort of questions.

just_me

Thanks. I had noticed the gloss sequence for Ps 1:1 was slightly different (Interlinear seems to treat Psalm 1:1 (LHI) אַ֥שְֽׁרֵי־הָאִ֗ישׁ as a single unit while LDHB treats it as two. Rather than attempt a more comprehensive comparison, I thought it worth asking how these relate.

My understanding of texts is in its infancy - I had thought that BHS included some corrections to L, and that BHQ, of which some parts seem available at this time, provides some additional textual corrections. I will read the intro with interest.

I appreciate the insight as to how you are interfacing with others in these products. Thank you.