KYLE: Data BUG in Bible sense lexicon

Yes, Kyle, I am as tired of finding these problems as you are at fixing them. What is wrong with this picture?

How does one equate a Bible Sense entry that is specifically immediate daughter to a Louw-Nida entry that is specifically NOT immediate? BTW this is also reflected in Lk 13:16 which is where I was when I ran into this little problem that makes my example of the search trash.

Find more posts tagged with

Desktop App

Comments

Kyle G. Anderson

Definitely a bug. We have a case to address it. I'm not sure what strategy we'll take yet. We have a couple of options.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

What is wrong with this picture?

Nothing is wrong with it.

How does one equate a Bible Sense entry that is specifically immediate daughter

But it's not specifically daughter; in fact, it's the opposite.

The sense for immediate daughter is https://ref.ly/logos4/Senses?KeyId=ws.daughter.n.01

This sense is "descendant, represented using the word 'daughter'." BSL consistently uses "sense <=> literal". Compare https://ref.ly/logos4/Senses?KeyId=ws.son+disciple.n.01 or https://ref.ly/logos4/Senses?KeyId=ws.son+man.n.01 or https://ref.ly/logos4/Senses?KeyId=ws.woman.n.02. (Maybe a slight tweak to the wording of the definition of the sense would make it less confusing for you?)

MJ. Smith

What is wrong with this picture?

Nothing is wrong with it.

Huh? I focused on the word immediate not daughter.

On the Bible sense lexicon side it says "a female descendent, understood as a first generation (i.e. immediate) daughter.

On the Louw-Nida side it says "a nonimmediate female descendant"

If you wish to claim descendant ⇔ daughter means descendant understood as daughter, that is applying a sense not existing in English to the word daughter. It means descendant ⇔ female descendant not of the daughter generation". I could understand descendant ⇔ granddaughter as a reasonable abbreviation of the situation.

I am still missing whatever you think I am missing.

NB.Mick

What is wrong with this picture?

Nothing is wrong with it.

Huh? I focused on the word immediate not daughter.

On the Bible sense lexicon side it says "a female descendent, understood as a first generation (i.e. immediate) daughter.

On the Louw-Nida side it says "a nonimmediate female descendant"

I think the BSL definition actually is wrong and means the sense of non-immediate daughter: the two references from Luke are first-century jewish women called a daughter of Aaron and a daughter of Abraham. Otherwise the LN reference would need to go to 10.46 instead of 10.31.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

Huh? I focused on the word immediate not daughter.

On the Bible sense lexicon side it says "a female descendent, understood as a first generation (i.e. immediate) daughter.

You're reading it backwards.

BSL uses "sense <=> literal".

The literal word used in the text is "(immediate) daughter". The sense you're supposed to understand is "descendant".

This concords with the LN definition.

Maybe the phrase "understood as" in the BSL definition is throwing you off?

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

Regardless, it's clear that the BSL definition as written is confusing, so we should update it.

MJ. Smith

The literal word used in the text is "(immediate) daughter".

In my translations yes, in the Greek no which is why I find it confusing. I thought the BSL was based on the original languages.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1325687#Comment_1325687

Agree!