Is not L8 able to recognise references to specific versions?

Francis

In my reading today, a commentary references Dan. 2:29, 45 Theod. The reference is highlighted although hovering on it reveals that "Theod" is not recognised by L8 as part of the reference (or at least does not appear to do so). 

Right-clicking on reference appears to indicate that it is recognised as a LXX-R reference:

The help file defines the LXX-R type as "Bible (LXX-R) — Septuagint with Logos Morphology (bible+lxx data type)". I have corresponding resources:

I have also tried adding these resources to the prioritisation list and specifying the LXX-R type for them. 

Still, clicking or hovering on the reference leads me to my preferred English Bible instead. 

I have described this instance at length but this is something I encounter regularly. I have not noticed if some resources are actually tagged so as to properly lead to specific variants or whether this is just something L8 does not do at this point.

Whatever the case, this is important for academic work at least. 

Dave Hooton

Francis said:

The reference is highlighted although hovering on it reveals that "Theod" is not recognised by L8 as part of the reference (or at least does not appear to do so). 

That is a citation for Theodotion; not a part of the reference.

Francis said:

I have also tried adding these resources to the prioritisation list and specifying the LXX-R type for them.

...

Still, clicking or hovering on the reference leads me to my preferred English Bible instead.  

That won't make any difference to prioritization unless you place it above the ESV.

An LXX-R designation states that the reference is within that type, and it has to be translated to find the equivalent passage in another type e.g. LXX-R Ps 4:9 = Ps 4:8 in ESV, etc. So the translation will occur and the passage will be found in your favourite bible. The Daniel 2 reference is the same in both types.

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1056494#Comment_1056494

Dave Hooton said:

That is a citation for Theodotion; not a part of the reference.

I don't agree with this statement: Dan 4:28-29 Theod. is a specific variant. It does not equal the unspecified Dan 4:28-29. The same applies to LXX references or other specific texts or variants a reference points to. In other words, L8 should not just be concerned with finding the same "address" as it were as in your example (Ps 4:9 LXX = Ps 4:8) but to point to the appropriate source. The wording of Ps 4:9 LXX is NOT the same as that of Ps 4:8. When a reference points to the former, it is inaccurate to be taken to the latter. 

Here is an example: Beale's commentary on Rev 5:1 refers to the wording of Dan 12:4 Theod: 

“καὶ σύ, Δανιηλ, ἔμφραξον τοὺς λόγους καὶ σφράγισον τὸ βιβλίον ἕως καιροῦ συντελείας, ἕως διδαχθῶσιν πολλοὶ καὶ πληθυνθῇ ἡ γνῶσις.” 

Compare with the non-Theod. text:

“καὶ σύ, Δανιηλ, κάλυψον τὰ προστάγματα καὶ σφράγισαι τὸ βιβλίον ἕως καιροῦ συντελείας, ἕως ἂν ἀπομανῶσιν οἱ πολλοὶ καὶ πλησθῇ ἡ γῆ ἀδικίας” 

Daniel 12:4 Theod. is NOT the same reference as an unspecified Daniel 12:4 and certainly not that of English Bibles based on the Masoretic text!

MJ. Smith

Francis said:

a commentary references Dan. 2:29, 45 Theod. The reference is highlighted although hovering on it reveals that "Theod" is not recognised by L8 as part of the reference

What you are saying is that Theod. does not have a corresponding verse map? or are you saying that Theod. is not recognized as a specific version - something that I am annoyed is true throughout Logos?

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1056540#Comment_1056540

Francis said:

Dave Hooton said:

That is a citation for Theodotion; not a part of the reference.

I don't agree with this statement: Dan 4:28-29 Theod. is a specific variant.

I meant that it was the variant (a Greek translation) authored by Theodotion (my wording was poor).

Francis said:

It does not equal the unspecified Dan 4:28-29. The same applies to LXX references or other specific texts or variants a reference points to. In other words, L8 should not just be concerned with finding the same "address" as it were as in your example (Ps 4:9 LXX = Ps 4:8) but to point to the appropriate source.

The bible datatypes like LXX, BHS, ESV-A, primarily address the versification schemes used by different bibles, and they often (not always) point to a unique source. If there was a resource for the Theodotion reference, then Faithlife could provide a resource link like Dan 2:29, 45 (which will open the Logos LXX). The first underlying link address is  https://ref.ly/logosres/logoslxx?ref=BibleLXX.Da2.29; which includes the Bible LXX/LXX-R datatype. But it isn't much use if you don't have the Logos LXX resource. The citation Theodotion (the author's) allows the reader to be aware of the source for the comparison.

The "unspecified" Dan. 2:28–29, 45 uses the generic Bible datatype, but the LXX-R/LXX (Rahlfs) could have been a better choice:-

"In making general references to the Septuagint, I refer to the eclectic Greek text of the Rahlfs edition and sometimes a text dependent only on Codex B (= The Septuagint Version of the Old Testament and Apocrypha with an English Translation [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1972], published by special arrangement with Samuel Bagster and Sons, London). Where these two editions differ in chapter or verse numbering, I always place the Rahlfs reference first, with the Bagster edition reference following in parentheses or brackets. For example, especially in Daniel 4 and parts of Exodus (especially chs. 35–40) and Job (especially chs. 40–41) versification is different in the different editions (e.g., between the Rahlfs eclectic edition and the Bagster edition). Such a stylistic convention will enable those not knowing Greek to be able to follow the Septuagint in a readily available English edition even in those places where it differs in versification from the standard Greek edition of Rahlfs. In addition, in Daniel I use “LXX” to refer to the Old Greek version and “Theod.” to refer to Theodotion, which is in accordance with Rahlfs’s system."

Beale, G. K. (1999). The Book of Revelation: A commentary on the Greek text (p. xxi). Grand Rapids, MI; Carlisle, Cumbria: W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press.

So Faithlife reflect the author's intention (similar to most others) by allowing the reader to use their preferred bible, whilst also indicating the source via the LXX-R datatype. So you can prefer the Logos LXX resource, or use it as a temporary Target via Send hyperlinks here.

Francis said:

The wording of Ps 4:9 LXX is NOT the same as that of Ps 4:8. When a reference points to the former, it is inaccurate to be taken to the latter. 

It may have indicated my source, but Ps 4.9 BHS would not have (applies to at least 4 different Hebrew bibles).