Accents affecting search for tartaros in LXX

This search for ταρτάρος in the LXX yields only one result:

If I search for τάρταρος instead, I get Job 41:24 and Prov 30:16, but not Job 40:20.
AFAICT, it's the same word, just accented differently.

How do I search so I get all 3 results, i.e. so the accents don't interfere with the results? Do I have to know ahead of time that a word can be accented multiple ways, and explicitly search for them each?

Thanks

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

I suspect this is a bug as A Greek-English Lexicon of the Septuagint shows:-

τάρταρος,-ου N2M/F 0-0-0-3-0=3
Jb 40,20; 41,24; Prv 30,16
place of imprisonment Prv 30,16; deep place Jb 40,20; lowest place of the deep Jb 41,24

Dave Hooton

How do I search so I get all 3 results, i.e. so the accents don't interfere with the results? Do I have to know ahead of time that a word can be accented multiple ways, and explicitly search for them each?

Unfortunately, accents do matter in the general case ie. use lemma:χάρις and not lemma:χαρισ. This can be tested by entering lemma:χαρισ in Morph Search and noting that the only suggestion with a gloss is χάρις.

NB.Mick

It's a typo in the tagging of the Lexham LXX resource.

AFAICT, it's the same word, just accented differently.

No, there is no lemma ταρτάρος in Greek, just τάρταρος

How do I search so I get all 3 results, i.e. so the accents don't interfere with the results?

if you search another LXX resource for this lemma, you'll find all three instances. The accents don't interfere, as the morphological tagging contains the identically accented lexical form (=lemma) of all words. See my result:

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/260971#Comment_260971

It's a typo in the tagging of the Lexham LXX resource.

and in the Septuagint Morphologiocally Tagged, where I get the same wrong search results as you. See the tagging of Job 40:20 there

versus the in the LXX SESB which finds it correct.

I reported a typo in resource LLS:1.0.301 - 2006-11-28T03:53:40Z - LXX.lbxlls, you should do the same for the Lexham LXX Interlinear.

Mick

David Knoll

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/260973#Comment_260973

Same problem with the GÖTTINGEN of Job.

Allen Browne

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/261004#Comment_261004

Thank you dave, Mick, and David.

Thanks for confirming that it is a mistagging rather than something I"m doing wrong. Appreciated.

Makram Guendi

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/260971#Comment_260971

Many Thanks for these valuable information.

Also the Coptic OT needs to be well studied, I think that it is the best ancient translation at all, because the Latin version had been modified by Jerom, and that of Antioch by Loci, following Origen, but the only one which kept as it is, was the Coptic version.

But the Problem of it is that there is no Coptic OT in the writing form to be easily searched, but only scanned from old printed books.

I don't know the positions of "Tartaros" in Coptic OT, but only in Job 41: 23: "And the lowest part of the deep as a captive" and it has its special importance, because it could be a sign to the place where our Lord descended and put the captives to freedom and ascended with them to the heaven.

By the way, the Coptic version of both OT and NT, keeps the important Greek words as it is, as expressions.

I hope that the Coptic Version -with its English translation- will be available as written document, which will reveal its beauty and importance and its complete accuracy between OT and NT verses.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/727107#Comment_727107

Also the Coptic OT needs to be well studied, I think that it is the best ancient translation at all, because the Latin version had been modified by Jerom, and that of Antioch by Loci, following Origen, but the only one which kept as it is, was the Coptic version.

Welcome to the forums. You've touched on a topic of great interest to me. Do you have some suggestions for resources on the origins of the Coptic translations?

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/261004#Comment_261004

Same problem with the GÖTTINGEN of Job.

I can't speak of the Goettingen Septuagint, but the wrong lemma in the other two hasn't been fixed in the four years since then:

Makram Guendi

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/727118#Comment_727118

It is well known that the translations from Greek NT started in the countries which have another mother language.

But it started first in Egypt and Syria, because the learned people in these countries -under the occupy of the eastern part of the empire- were speaking fluent Greek beside their own mother language -Coptic and Syriac or Aramaic- so it was easier for them to translate accurate translation from Greek to their mother languages, more than the Latin speaking countries which were not under the influence of an occupier language.

So it started in the biggest counties under the occupy of the army and the culture of the eastern part of the Empire, which were Egypt and Syria.

So the translation started there very early, since the first centuries, and it was very accurate, because the translators were having the both languages as life language: the Greek in all their daily studies and lecturers and writings, and the Coptic, or Syrianic, in their daily relations with their families and citizens.

And after making these earlier accurate translations, some changes happened to the Greek Text of the Septuagint, because Origen believed the Jewish more than the Lord and his Apostols, and accepted their changes as it was the absolute right, and Jerome followed him in learning from the Jewish, and changed in the Septuagint to make it Compatible with what the Jewish made, instead of the earlier warnings of S. Justin and S. Irenaeus about the changes which the Jewish made in their period. And also a priest of Antioch called Luci or Lucian, followed Origen and made changes in their version of the Septuagint.

So , we find now differences between the text Greek from side, and the text of the NT and the Coptic version of OT from the other side>

That does not mean that the NT is wrong as the Jewish say, but because they made changes as S. Justin said.

So the NT is right, and also the Coptic OT is right, and the others are wrong. And if we want to follow the absolute right, we must follow Our Lord and his Apostols, and then we will find an important help from studying the Coptic and Syriac OT.

So,