Does anybody know if MP has done or is thinking about doing seminars tailored for academia?
I'm pretty sure he has not. I don't know whether he's thinking about it, but given that his own background is pastoral rather than academic, I'm guessing it's not high on his agenda. He knows well how to use Logos for sermon prep and standard personal Bible study. I'm sure he knows Logos well enough to train academic types, but he might not know well enough what uses they might want to make of such software in order to gear the sessions to their liking. However perhaps in consultation with some folks from academia he'd be able to develop a good seminar for them. It would be a good thing, but he might not have room in his schedule to add that as it would take away from the number of times he could offer his basic Camp Logos and now Camp Logos 2, and the I-Beam Sermon Prep seminar.
In my experience talking with some of the Biblical Studies faculty members at my seminary, they don't think Logos can do for them what they need (this was back in the L3 days, though) so a seminar geared towards academic use of Logos would be a good thing. There is still a reputation among certain academics that Accordance is better suited to their original language needs than Logos is. Perhaps L4 has finally pushed through that barrier (particularly with features like Analysis View) and can truly offer them unparalleled power to do their work. having a Mac version truly the equal of the Windows version very close to shipping is another plus, as many academics use Macs (most of the Biblical Studies faculty at Regent College do; they might have even chosen to switch to Mac because of Accordance...eeek!).
There is still a reputation among certain academics that Accordance is better suited to their original language needs than Logos is.
It seems to me that Logos is closing in on but not all the way there on tools for academics - the LXX still has a number of pieces in pre-pub or contracted, the Vulgate support is still minimal. The broader canons are not quite up to parity with the canon of 20% of world Christians. If I were coaching Logos on how to become the academics' program of choice I would:
It looks to me as if Logos is moving in this direction. I always appreciate it when academics take the time to give Logos good feedback on what is needed to meet their needs. The ones that come to mind are the recent maps issues and earlier notes issues.
There is still a reputation among certain academics that Accordance is better suited to their original language needs than Logos is. It seems to me that Logos is closing in on but not all the way there on tools for academics - the LXX still has a number of pieces in pre-pub or contracted, the Vulgate support is still minimal. The broader canons are not quite up to parity with the canon of 20% of world Christians. If I were coaching Logos on how to become the academics' program of choice I would: expand to include other early translations most notably: Armenian, Georgian, Old Church Slavonic, Gothic, Anglo-Saxon ... expand to include early lectionary texts - the one major source of early Scripture manuscripts that has not been mined to death include more standard text analysis tools - tools that probably have little use as long as only common manuscripts are available include more specific teaching features (some of which are coming) - check usability issues for class presentations, vocabulary cards & drills, grammar drills, class handouts It looks to me as if Logos is moving in this direction. I always appreciate it when academics take the time to give Logos good feedback on what is needed to meet their needs. The ones that come to mind are the recent maps issues and earlier notes issues.
It was the original language tools that I recall one of our NT profs saying were not strong enough in Logos. I can't remember specifically what feature(s) Accordance had that he said were indispensible to him for his work with the Greek text. But that was the issue. It had nothing to do with other translations, lectionaries, teaching features.
What standard text analysis tools are you thinking of? I don't know the competition at all, so I don't even know what's possible that Logos isn't able to do yet, nor am I very knowledgeable about the Biblical languages at all (took just one year of Biblical Hebrew and have forgotten most of it).
What standard text analysis tools are you thinking of?
Generally when working with fragments or manuscripts one has tools for word counts, density statistics (how often words, particular grammatical forms, syntactic forms etc. occur), searching tools for similarity, ability to build a manuscript with variants, key word prominence suggestions, building of concordances, text comparison with other manuscripts ... there are a plethora of online sites that provide some of the tools, or academic shareware form them. In short they provide the basic data necessary for dating manuscripts, proposing authorship, developing a "standard" manuscript, documenting linguistic changes.
I have no knowledge of what your professors' interests and specialties were. However, the presence of Syriac, Aramaic, Ugartic, Akkadian, Coptic points to the importance of early translations. A number of Biblical scholars are predicting the rise of lectionaries as a primary concern because they are the one unmined source of early Biblical passages - think of them as another source of fragmentary manuscripts. In other words, think of lectionaries a text sources not as lectionaries in this context. As for teaching features, I was taking my clues from the professors and students who have posted on the forums - I am certain that expectations for computer support in teaching is a rapidly moving target ... one that behooves Logos to be on the front side of. However, the college I attended in the mid-sixties was already using computers to drill Greek and Latin students - the prof was a former IBM researcher. I can safely assume expectations have increased.
Admittedly, my experience in this text analysis/manuscript studies is old - primarily in an ongoing workshop in which one had to be able to read the text in two languages (Sanskrit, Tibetan and/or Chinese) and was expected to cover a third language (Japanese, Mongolian, Uighur, Khotanese, Sogdian, for some reason we never had Korean show up ...). I am so jealous of the tools the current students have.
So I'll stand by my analysis. However, I suspect you bring up a very important point. What the academics want will vary dramatically by their subjects of interest, where they teach and the level of students they teach.
I wasn't critiquing your analysis, just mentioning that I think the prof I spoke with had something else in mind. His big area of interest is the NT use of the OT. So maybe he'd be wanting to look for percentage similarity of verses in Septuagint with the NT manuscripts?? I dunno. I should ask him again sometime to remind me what it was he said he needed that Accordance does which Logos doesn't. Just a quick look at the former's website (which I'd never explored before) shows up some things that might be contenders:
I wasn't critiquing your analysis,
My apologies for being overly touchy and misunderstanding you. I've had a hard week.
Just a quick look at the former's website (which I'd never explored before) shows up some things that might be contenders:
Yes, I think that's the sort of thing that is needed to bring the prof's on board. I'll admit to lusting after their infer search although I understand why Logos has not implemented a similar feature.
Guys, I have never heard the word Accordance come up in a conversation with any academic at the undergrad or seminary level. It is always the classic Bible Works vs. Logos argument - which has literally been beaten like a dead horse in Richmond post war!
That being said, I imagine with a quite great certainty, that knowing how academics think, they are still mostly on L3 and when comparing things to BW or Accordance, they are thinking in terms of L3. In other words, most academics are still stuck on L3 because they hate change, in general. ALSO, along with that statement goes the next. I would also say, and this is flat out conjecture, that those academics who are critical of L3 when compared to BW or Accordance, didn't have tools such as the SESB installed with it's rich searching capabilities. Even if they had the BDAG installed in L3, did they use the custom search functions or the standard search functions?
OK, I admit, I am being very casual and not scientific about this and reasoning these things out, but I can't help but wonder.
Here is recommended OT resource list from Denver Seminary. Check out what they have to say about "computer concordances":
http://www.denverseminary.edu/article/annotated-old-testament-bibliography-2010/#concordances
It makes one wonder if they've ever used any software other than the one mentioned.
In my experience talking with some of the Biblical Studies faculty members at my seminary, they don't think Logos can do for them what they need (this was back in the L3 days, though) so a seminar geared towards academic use of Logos would be a good thing.
Accordance still has some advantages in terms of search accuracy and intuitive/simple linguistic searches.
I hope Logos will work on that.
Very interesting Todd! Thanks for that information. BTW, what is Denver? Evangelical? That is what their statements looks like and I know evangelical is a broad brush, but dude is up there in a collar like a Catholic or Lutheran. I was just curious if they are associated with any traditional protestants or what? The question boils down to this: What's the guy in the collar doing there? LOL No harm meant, I am just curious.
Wilson:
Denver Seminary is where I did my MDiv and now am working on my DMin. I didn't watch the video clip of the guy in the collar so can't really comment there. Denver Seminary has its roots in the Conservative Baptist tradition, though I don't know offhand whether they are affiliated formally.
Dr. Hess, who helps to keep the annotated OT bibliographies up-to-date is a huge Accordance fan. Maybe he wears a collar - not really sure [:)] But I do know from one short lecture from Dr. Hess that he's a big Accordance guy.
Those annotated bibliographies are terrific BTW. I have used them quite a bit to evaluate logos purchases. Very helpful indeed.
blessings,
Randy
Historically Baptist, but generally broader than that. Wikipedia can summarize better than I can: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denver_Seminary
Craig Blomburg is a prof there.
Randy: it's right up on the front page. It's the "Light in Darkness" video with Rev. Pedro. I haven't watched it in it's entirety, I am having serious bandwidth issues today.
Thanks
Oh wow!
If you go to http://www.denverseminary.edu/denver-seminary-stories-of-transformation/ and read the summary (not available on the main page) you see he wears the collar to be recognized as a "man of faith." That is absolute smart! "When in Rome..."
It seems to me that Logos is closing in on but not all the way there on tools for academics
caveat:I am not a scholar so I feel out of place offering my opinion on the academic value of Logos, but (you knew I'd offer it anyway! [;)] )
It is obvious to a rank amateur like myself that Bob Pritchett is serious about making Logos the software of choice for the academic community. In the last few years we have seen a bevy of scholars join the Logos staff. I would start to list the members of that bevy but I am sure I would miss one or two. The several I am aware of are in the language studies area and are actively working on projects ( [H] a couple are top-secret.) Presently Logos has competition from two other companies in this area. I like the fact Bob is willing to work with the other software in a complimentary fashion. This enhances the value of both and the user is the big winner.
Setting aside the whole area of linguistics/translations/manuscripts, I think Logos has already surpassed the other companies in academic scope and capabilities. No, they have not "arrived" at perfection, but they are fast on the way. The resource offerings in both historical and systematic theology are quite diverse and growing monthly. The reference works Logos publishes are the finest you can get. There are only a few (unfortunate) exceptions that have been locked in exclusive agreements with other companies. When those agreements have expired, I expert to see those titles become available in Logos too.
One last observation: Half of the Logos sale force is dedicated specifically to the Academic community That tells you something about their resolve. Logos WANTS to be the first choice for academics and scholars. It is all about Bible study, isn't it?
expand to include other early translations most notably: Armenian, Georgian, Old Church Slavonic, Gothic, Anglo-Saxon ...
Are there any extant copies of a Gothic translation? If so, are there presently any available sources for Gothic or Anglo-Saxon?
You don't need to link to them but please email me if you know of any.
Anglo-Saxon http://wordhord.org/nasb/
Gothic http://www.wulfila.be/gothic/browse/
These links have been given before so I'll make them available to everyone
I know that a presentation was arranged last year by SBL at which Logos 4 was demonstrated and greatly impressed my own NT supervisor who is a committed Accordance man. I used L3 exclusively for my academic work, though once Logos 4 Mac is at parity with the Windows version, I'll shift to that, as I already use it exclusively for my sermon preparation.
As for resources Logos has a way to go to catch Accordance for historical-critical resources, though it is already ahead in linguistic resources for NT. Once the many PrePubs, including those on LXX, OT Lexham are complete, Logos academic resources will be formidable indeed.
On the Denver Seminary site that you cite, this is done by the Old Testament department--whose members use mostly Macs. In the New Testament department we use and highly recommend Logos 4 and BibleWorks 8. In my view they complement each other very nicely, though there is some obvious overlap. I wouldn't like to part with either Logos or BibleWorks.
William W. Klein, Prof of New Testament, Denver Seminary.
Dr. Klein,
Do you mind if I e-mail you with a question regarding this topic?
You can e-mail me at wilsonhines AT gmail.com and I can just respond back. I realize you're a busy person and the school year has freshly started, therefore I will have utmost respect of your time.
Thanks,
Wilson Hines
...I used L3 exclusively for my academic work, though once Logos 4 Mac is at parity with the Windows version, I'll shift to that, as I already use it exclusively for my sermon preparation. As for resources Logos has a way to go to catch Accordance for historical-critical resources, though it is already ahead in linguistic resources for NT. Once the many PrePubs, including those on LXX, OT Lexham are complete, Logos academic resources will be formidable indeed.
...I used L3 exclusively for my academic work, though once Logos 4 Mac is at parity with the Windows version, I'll shift to that, as I already use it exclusively for my sermon preparation.
As for parity's sake: I believe I might be in the perfect position to take full throttle advantage of such parity timing. I have two years until I start taking seminary classes from Dallas Theological Seminary at the Satellite campus. Three years and we move to Dallas. I think the parity will be fully developed by the time I start taking satellite classes.
Resources: Can you describe some of the resources particularly whereas Accordance has an advantage with historical-critical resources? It occurred to me a few days ago, from the research perspective (Ph.D. work), French and German are languages whereas there are tons and tons of research material regarding biblical research. Every Ph.D. program which I have looked into requires, as a part of the entrance examination process, French and German literacy testing.
Once I realized this, I started looking around CBD, Eisenbrauns and a plethora of other sources for scholarly material that would be used in biblical research. I was ASTOUNDED at the amount of material out there that is just in French. I was not astounded at how much is in German, but I am impressed by the amount. I am probably showing my naïveté here, but this is my intended track - Finish my B.A. in History, Th.M. at DTS, and then move to a Ph.D. program somewhere out there, eventually to teach at the academic level. Doing this research has changed my outlook on courses that I need to prepare for all of this post-grad work. I am now in French 111 and I intend on taking four semesters of Fr and minoring in German. Most people don't go into their Th.M. with such language work, from what I have understood.
HERE's the point: There are tons of resource material out there not only in German and French, but have almost zero shot of being translated into English. Also, occasionally, there are items STILL published to this day which are scholarly research resources in German and French - just a few months ago, a French book on the Septuagint was published. I wonder what Logos is going to do about getting resources that have a limited, but scholarly, appeal into the engine.
There are tons of resource material out there not only in German and French, but have almost zero shot of being translated into English. Also, occasionally, there are items STILL published to this day which are scholarly research resources in German and French
There is starting to be a push from some users for German sources - German showing up in reading lists and suggested resources. So you'll find some support among Logos users.
There are tons of resource material out there not only in German and French, but have almost zero shot of being translated into English. Also, occasionally, there are items STILL published to this day which are scholarly research resources in German and French There is starting to be a push from some users for German sources - German showing up in reading lists and suggested resources. So you'll find some support among Logos users.
It would be great to see the next SESB collection to include things like a English-German Dictionary, particularly one focused on a theological slant. But to cover basics it would be great to get the Collins English-German Dictionary in Logos. The Spanish one is there so why not add German and French ones for that matter.
It would be an absolute great start, Andrew.
What worries me is things like the Gottingen, which of course is in Koine. If they had such a hard time getting prepubs for something like the Gottengen (not to mention the support material, how hard will it be to get a pre-pub with enough to proceed to publication on something like Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrasch ??
