Getting to the root in logos resources

The BH PN Jeroboam (1 Kings 11:26, etc.):

The mss transliteration.(with adjustments for diacritics) is yA-rob-(Am while the lemma transliteration is yA-rAb-(Am. [Although the latter seems contrary to Masoretic biblical Hebrew syllable structure which prefers a short vowel in a closed, unaccented syllable; and the Logos pronunciation for the lemma in the Exegetical Guide renders the proposed root form as if it were identical to the mss vocalization, short o, in keeping with Greek renderings.]

And this is replicated in numerous places in Logos as well as in multiple Lexham resources.

Was Logos adapted to reflect Lexham resources or vice-versa?
Is the representation of the lemma with a long A vowel intended to represent a preference for any one of the possible roots (yrb, ryb, rbb, rbh)? Actually, I would have been expecting an I-class theme vowel for some of these or an O-class imperfect theme for others; not sure which one would have an A-class unless possibly as perfect of yrb [and then a short a, rather than long vowel, having the accent]? Thoughts?
What is the recommended process for a basic Logos user when seeing such a differentiation? Pronounce the purported lemma as written in transliteration, or go with that given by the pronunciation guide/speaker? Or should one assume that the logos pronunciation reader merely gives the pronunciation of the mss vocalization at all times although linked to the proposed lemma in the exegetical guide? [This seems unlikely since the very next word-form he pronounces bEn, the root, versus ben-, the mss form.] Or attribute an error or specific dialect to the pronunciation reader? Or insist the root derives particularly from only one of several possible roots and/or based on a particular historical linguistics reconstruction, and how would they know which if scholars can't agree? Or something else?

Any responses welcomed.

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

Christian Alexander

Don this is a good request. I am not familiar enough to answer but I would like to see the comments on this. Blessings.

Don Parker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1278013#Comment_1278013

Good Christian you are aptly named.

You also are worthy of the nickname Barnabas (“son of encouragement”).

MJ. Smith

Was Logos adapted to reflect Lexham resources or vice-versa?

Lexham is the publishing arm of Logos.

As for the transliteration questions, have you read the documentation within the Text Converter tool or the Help document?

[quote]

The supported transliteration schemes for Hebrew include:

• Scientific (default) — a Verbum scheme that aims to preserve virtually all phonetic and orthographic information in a Hebrew word. It should be possible to read a transliterated string in this format and have a very good guess about the exact spelling of the Hebrew word that generated it.
• SBL Academic — one transliteration format used by the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL), suitable for academic or technical publications where fine distinctions of Hebrew consonants and vowels is necessary.
• SBL Academic with Spirantization — same as the previous style, but preserving the distinction in pronunciation between hard and soft Begadkefat letters.
• SBL General — another transliteration format defined by the SBL style guide, suitable for general audiences.
• SBL General with Glottal Stops — same as the previous style, but with a leftward half-ring to represent Hebrew ‘ayin (ע) and a rightward half-ring to represent Hebrew ’alef (א), which are omitted in the official SBL General style.
• Simplified — a Verbum scheme for general or popular-level audiences that has no diacritic marks. This is close to the transliteration scheme employed by Strong’s lexicons.

Verbum Help (Bellingham, WA: Faithlife, 2022).

You will see that Logos provides rather limited information.

Don Parker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1278069#Comment_1278069

TY, MJ:

Do you happen to know which came first (chicken or egg) or if simultaneously, Lexham Publ. or Logos software (and specifically the parsings in Logos, were they there from the start? and since Logos has regular updates are those pushed out similarly to Lexham - online resources at least, and then in later print Lexham editions I assume?)

The info on transliteration schemes may be of use to some forum readers, although it has zero to do with my question about the lemma transliteration of the specific word/PN Jeroboam (and specifically how it differs from the pronunciation reading and whether the transliteration reflects a particular root as embedded in the verbal portion of the PN).

You are always kind with a response and I always appreciate your input.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1278098#Comment_1278098

Do you happen to know which came first (chicken or egg) or if simultaneously, Lexham Publ. or Logos software (and specifically the parsings in Logos, were they there from the start?

This varies. In some cases, the Lexham publication is the source of the Logos data e.g. All the Meals in the Bible, or the analytic lexicons. In other cases, the parsing came first. IIRC Logos parsing began as a variant of Robinson's parsing for the Greek. But Logos was also involved in a number of the early parsing projects - Andersen-Forbes, Perseus, the basis of the Cascadia syntactic tagging . . . I didn't have L1, L2 I don't recall in sufficient detail, L3 was at least very similar to the current parsing.

Don Parker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1278112#Comment_1278112

Interesting. TY again.

Don Parker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1278069#Comment_1278069

Since you kindly informed me of the symbiotic relation between Lexham and Logos, what would be the best way to suggest a correction, or at least a consideration, for an update in the LBD?
My 2016 ed. of LBD (maybe a newer ed. now?? I didn't find such via Google and Amazon books and link at Logos also pointed me to 2016 ed.) offers yerushalami as the transliterated reading for the Hebrew of the GN/city.
This transliteration now seems to have been substantially shown as a misreading of a Kethiv-Qere (as famously the tetragrammaton being vocalized [majority of instances] as the Hebrew word for "Lord" was mutated into a Frankenstein monster-word as Jehovah).

As well as the yod being in the majority of DSS citations (52 to 34 and in Isaiah 34 to 16, according to online counts) there are a few instances in the Hebrew Bible showing a next-to-last consonant yod in full spelling for the GN; in which case the dot/chireq simply represents a vowel in a closed final syllable yim - a form easily recognized as related to the common grammatically-masculine plural ending, as well as part of the lesser-used dual ending - rather than representing a final vowel following the consonant mem and creating a final open syllable; thus the transliteration should be shown as close to Modern Hebrew, yerushala'yim, (mutatis mutandis for whatever transliteration scheme one chooses. Here I have tried to mimic that used in LBD, albeit with the addition of an accent for a short vowel in an open syllable).

A 2018 archaeological discovery seems to literally inscribe in stone what is represented by the meticulous Masoretic traditional vocalization and how the city name should be read (Qere) even when not fully written (Kethiv) with a consonant yod: https://www.biblicalarchaeology.org/daily/biblical-artifacts/inscriptions/first-person-jerusalem-column/