Corresponding Annotations Question

Reference the screenshot below. I made one annotation in the NABRE. When I open the ESV or RSVCE I am seeing multiple instances of the single annotation. They all say the same thing with the added "Corresponding annotation from NABRE." Why would this be?

Verbum 8.8 SR-1. 8.8.0.0046

MacOS Catalina 10.15

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

JT (alabama24)

Is the original note tied to TWO verses?

Deacon Steve

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072874#Comment_1072874

Tied to Romans 5:6-10. Five verses. I made this annotation 6 years ago and had not looked at it side-by-side with another translation. I think at the time I underlined the text and attached a note to it. I'm not so familiar with how notes are functioning today.

Kevin A

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072877#Comment_1072877

If you open the inline reverse interlinear you can see that the note icons seem to follow wherever there is an English word with no corresponding Greek/Hebrew (Bold Dot). Why this happens I have no idea.#

Edit - I was looking at an OT verse, having now viewed Romans 5 it does not totally apply to your highlight verses, although seemingly there is something to it still.

Deacon Steve

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072882#Comment_1072882

I just noticed that the original underline in the NABRE is continuous from v6 through v10. But, in the other translations there are breaks - and it seems the note indicator is repeated when the underline starts back up again after the break.

Hmmm ... [*-)]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072885#Comment_1072885

Picking up on Kevin's clue I would guess:

if the original note is by reference, the entire 6-10 will be underlined regardless of content
if the original note is by selection, the underlining will require they be linked via the RI and you may get broken underlining such as you see.

Is your original note by selection?

Deacon Steve

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072893#Comment_1072893

I don't know the answer to "by reference" or "by selection." Is there a way I can see which it is? Also, what is RI?

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072910#Comment_1072910

Also, what is RI?

RI = "Reverse Interlinear." That is the dataset which lets Logos know what is "underneath" (i.e. the greek) the surface (i.e. the English) text.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072911#Comment_1072911

By selection (1) is currently not selected. If it were, the note would be attached to this specific text and the anchor would show the text.

By reference (2) is currently selected. The note is attached to the reference and will appear on all milestones of this reference e.g. all Bibles. The anchor will show the reference.

By selection can create additional post-it icons in the corresponding text when the underlying original language differs (translations have a mismatch in words translated/not translated).

Deacon Steve

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072916#Comment_1072916

OK - I understand the difference now. Given that notes were a little more simplified when I made this particular one, I'm thinking that is was by selection. That would explain the behavior that you and Kevin are describing. I've been out of school for a couple of years and haven't really used the upgraded notes, so I have some reading and learning to do. [:)]

I understand now what is happening underneath, but it still seems odd that the program logic would duplicate the same "post it" note in secondary translations on the surface when there is only one in the primary translation. There must be some program logic that is trying to handle the scenario, and I recognize the difficulty in coming up with an elegant way to resolve the issue.

It looks odd the way it is - especially when I just open one of the secondary translations (i.e. ESV) by itself.

Not that I can do anything about it - just thinking out loud; Do you happen know if the same Greek source is used underneath on all the ones in my example? (NABRE, ESV, RSVCE)

Thanks everyone for responding to my question. I have work to do on my part to learn how to better use the notes functionality.

[:)]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1072944#Comment_1072944

I'm thinking that is was by selection

The reference/selection distinction has been around since at least L4. You can look at the anchor of the note and tell which it is.

Do you happen know if the same Greek source is used underneath on all the ones in my example? (NABRE, ESV, RSVCE)

. . . most NT reverse interlinears are now linked to the SBLGNT. (For example, the second and third instances of "the God" in Acts 3:13 in ESV and NRSV are unaligned, because SBLGNT doesn't include those words, even though some Greek texts do.)

Translations in the TR tradition are also aligned to a common base text (Scrivener's according to Resource Information).

But that does not mean the three translations used the same text - consider variants and words left untranslated. It only means there is a common mapping to the Greek that the system can use.