OT Equivalent to Louw-Nida?
Does anybody know if there is an OT equivalent to Louw-Nida. For Greek L-N is a very useful tool and it would be equally helpful to have the same function in the OT.
Thanks.
Martin.
Comments
-
Martin J Webster said:
Does anybody know if there is an OT equivalent to Louw-Nida. For Greek L-N is a very useful tool and it would be equally helpful to have the same function in the OT.
Thanks.
Martin.
First of all, I would recommend BDAG rather than Louw-Nida for Greek. About the only time I use L-N is when I want to see what other words in the same Wortfeld might have been used rather than what the author wrote. There is no exact equivalent for L-N in Hebrew though you can work around it if you wish to make the effort. You need to use Swanson and find the L-N numbers in L-N then search for them in Swanson. You can also work it the other way around and find the word in Swanson then view the L-N numbers given there. I would recommend either Köhler-Baumgartner (HALOT) or BDB rather than Swanson.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
Martin J Webster said:
Does anybody know if there is an OT equivalent to Louw-Nida. For Greek L-N is a very useful tool and it would be equally helpful to have the same function in the OT.
Welcome [:D]
Suggest reading thread => Louw-Nida in Old Testament doesn't work that includes comments about Swanson's use of Louw-Nida ranges.
George Somsel said:First of all, I would recommend BDAG rather than Louw-Nida for Greek. About the only time I use L-N is when I want to see what other words in the same Wortfeld might have been used rather than what the author wrote. There is no exact equivalent for L-N in Hebrew though you can work around it if you wish to make the effort. You need to use Swanson and find the L-N numbers in L-N then search for them in Swanson. You can also work it the other way around and find the word in Swanson then view the L-N numbers given there. I would recommend either Köhler-Baumgartner (HALOT) or BDB rather than Swanson.
Louw-Nida numbering is later scholarship than BDAG, personally dreaming of a reformatted BDAG for Logos digital use that is much easier to read (integrated with Louw-Nida #'s would be awesome). When BDAG does not include verse reference in the scholarly notes within a definition listing, then BDAG is like several lexicons and dictionaries with list of word meanings, need to consider context for appropriate meaning.
Forum thread => never default to the article. includes more BDAG discussion (with screen shots).
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
Louw-Nida numbering is later scholarship than BDAG, personally dreaming of a reformatted BDAG for Logos digital use that is much easier to read (integrated with Louw-Nida #'s would be awesome).
There are various nuances to Greek words just as there are various nuances to English words. Links to L-N take you to one particular nuance of the word. That means that the lexicographers are determining how you are going to understand the text. I don't like that. I prefer to examine the various meanings of a word and the way in which they are used in particular contexts to make my own judgment. If you aren't going to do that, why not simply use a translation? L-N is not really later scholarship than BDAG, and I think BDAG is much superior.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:
Louw-Nida numbering is later scholarship than BDAG, personally dreaming of a reformatted BDAG for Logos digital use that is much easier to read (integrated with Louw-Nida #'s would be awesome).
There are various nuances to Greek words just as there are various nuances to English words. Links to L-N take you to one particular nuance of the word. That means that the lexicographers are determining how you are going to understand the text. I don't like that. I prefer to examine the various meanings of a word and the way in which they are used in particular contexts to make my own judgment. If you aren't going to do that, why not simply use a translation? L-N is not really later scholarship than BDAG, and I think BDAG is much superior.
Concur with word nuances: e.g. NRSV translation of generosity in Galatians 5:22 for ἀγαθωσύνη that is translated goodness in a number of other translations (also BDAG does not list a number of LXX references). Personally learned doing a Basic Search of my Entire Library for ἀγαθωσύνη* found more results, including BDAG introduction (bit surprised that ἀγαθωσύνη* did not have any Perseus collection results, but did find the Epistle of Barnabas 2.9)
Looking at copyright dates, BDAG (1957) precedes Louw-Nida (1988) by 3 decades so suspect BDAG was available when Louw-Nida numbering and domains were being developed. Caveat: BDAG includes references to a much wider range of Greek references: "Other Early Christian Literature".
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
George Somsel said:
I prefer to examine the various meanings of a word and the way in which they are used in particular contexts to make my own judgment
Not all exegetes are equally adept in the original languages to substitute their own judgment for that of others in the body of Christ. I consult with both Louw-Nida AND BDAG. It doesn't have to be a "rather than" between two resources that are written for different purposes. To guard myself against examining all the various glosses and using ONLY my own judgment to choose a preferred gloss, I run my "working hypothesis" through the fallacies exposed in this Logos resource. http://www.logos.com/product/6874/exegetical-fallacies-second-edition
Making Disciples! Logos Ecosystem = LogosMax on Microsoft Surface Pro 7 (Win11), Android app on tablet, FSB on iPhone & iPad mini, Proclaim (Proclaim Remote on Fire Tablet).
0 -
Looking at copyright dates, BDAG (1957) precedes Louw-Nida (1988) by 3 decades so suspect BDAG was available when Louw-Nida numbering and domains were being developed. Caveat: BDAG includes references to a much wider range of Greek references: "Other Early Christian Literature".
Not sure where that copyright date came from. According to Wikipedia, the fourth German edition was completed in 1957. Regardless, the latest (3rd) English edition (BDAG, as opposed to BADG) was published in 2000. The 2nd edition of Louw-Nida was published in 1999, so it seems the scholarship on both is around the same age (assuming the revisions were significant).
0 -
mitchellisdumb said:
Looking at copyright dates, BDAG (1957) precedes Louw-Nida (1988) by 3 decades so suspect BDAG was available when Louw-Nida numbering and domains were being developed. Caveat: BDAG includes references to a much wider range of Greek references: "Other Early Christian Literature".
Not sure where that copyright date came from. According to Wikipedia, the fourth German edition was completed in 1957. Regardless, the latest (3rd) English edition (BDAG, as opposed to BADG) was published in 2000. The 2nd edition of Louw-Nida was published in 1999, so it seems the scholarship on both is around the same age (assuming the revisions were significant).
You are correct.
Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker and Walter Bauer. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
You are correct George and Mitchell. The BDAG (not to be confused with the BADG which is an earlier version) was last updated in 2000 so technically it is newer/later than L-N. This does not mean it is automatically superior but in my opinion if the goal is to have a fuller field of data for word usage to determine meaning (as the author not the lexicographer determines) then BDAG is superior for this task.
I use both resources actually but I use them differently. As George mentioned, those that are not seeking to understand nuances based on word usage are probably going with what a translation committee has determined a word or phrase means and is probably using a translation with an occasional run to a lexicon here and there.
L-N semantic domains are very helpful but I would say I find BDAG getting much more game time in my study patterns.
Logos 5, Windows & Android perfect together....
0 -
Kevin Taylor said:
You are correct George and Mitchell. The BDAG (not to be confused with the BADG which is an earlier version) was last updated in 2000 so technically it is newer/later than L-N.
My apologies: BDAG 3rd edition is newer than Louw-Nida, however, BDAG BAGD 2nd and BAG 1st editions preceded initial Louw-Nida edition by a number of years:
Edit: personally living and learning while reading Louw-Nida Introduction, found BDAG BAGD reference and comparison: logosres:louwnida;art=i.2
Also found BDAG's Forward to the Revised Edition fascinating to read: logosres:bdag;art=foreword
Keep Smiling [:)]
0 -
mitchellisdumb said:
Looking at copyright dates, BDAG (1957) precedes Louw-Nida (1988) by 3 decades so suspect BDAG was available when Louw-Nida numbering and domains were being developed. Caveat: BDAG includes references to a much wider range of Greek references: "Other Early Christian Literature".
Not sure where that copyright date came from. According to Wikipedia, the fourth German edition was completed in 1957. Regardless, the latest (3rd) English edition (BDAG, as opposed to BADG) was published in 2000. The 2nd edition of Louw-Nida was published in 1999, so it seems the scholarship on both is around the same age (assuming the revisions were significant).
Appears BDAG 3rd edition incorporates more intertestamental resources ("Other Early Christian Literature") for word nuance research:
A signal contribution of the German sixth edition of Walter Bauer’s lexicon is the generous account taken of intertestamental resources. The broader coverage of early Christian literature includes especially apocryphal material associated with the name of Paul, and notably the Acts of Paul in various papyrus fragments. Also welcome is the vastly increased use of early Christian apologists (esp. Aristides, Athenagoras, Justin, and Tatian) for the understanding of NT diction. Among other frequent visitors from the past are Irenaeus and Origen. The present revision incorporates the new material, sometimes in updated and corrected form, as is apparent, e.g., from entries based on AcPl BMM (s. Abbreviation List 1). To assist the user in more ready location of early Christian material formerly found in generally inaccessible German publications, use is made of Prof. Kurt Aland’s Synopsis Quattuor Evangeliorum13 1988 by citation of section number and line for such items as GPt and GNaass. Bauer received some criticism for proliferation of references to Greek literature, but contemporary biblical study endorses his judgment, and the present edition increases the coverage, in part to reinforce Bauer’s awareness of the role of non-verbal linguistic components relating especially to socio-cultural perspectives. Indeed, in some instances the heaping of references is necessary to discourage risky assumptions of literary dependency on a single alleged source. Also, where Semitic influence appears to be strong, parallel Hellenic usage indicates that the Semitic cast may not be barbarous, as noted in G. H. R. Horsley’s study on bilingualism in New Documents 5 (1989) 5–40. The latter work, now in eight volumes, has also been mined for papyrological and epigraphical references, which supplement material derived from Moulton-Milligan (M-M), Vocabulary of the Greek Testament. In this connection it is necessary to note that some entries in the Vocabulary are, in the absence of papyrus evidence, sources only for literary data or exegetical observations. For detailed etymological observations the reader is urged to note the acronym “DELG”, with occasional reference to “Frisk” (s. List 6 for both).
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Also noted criticism about abbreviations (that coincides with dream of a digital BDAG that is easier to read and cross reference):
To meet one of the major criticisms of previous editions, this revision offers a total overhaul of the lists of abbreviations. Users have complained that many references were in such abbreviated form that it was difficult to trace the sources. ...
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Keep Smiling [:)]
0
said:
