Rahlfs versus Swete versus Gottingen: List of Differences

This might be a good place to post this question, since the "Logos 5" forum is now dominated by 5.1 crash reports.

I'm sure Logos has a file displaying the verse differences between the Rahlfs LXX and the Swete LXX (and perhaps this is asking too much, the Gottingen LXX), since, for one thing, Logos has worked extensively with them (I have purchased most of Logos products related to these resources).

Is there any chance Logos could share this file? I believe Rick Bannan, who has done a lot of fine work on these resources, occasionally visits this forum. An email to him might get a response, but if it doesn't, maybe there is someone else on this forum who has or knows of such a file, and would be willing to share it with us. It's worth a shot.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

MJ. Smith

There is always the old-fashioned way ... the Logos text comparison tool.[:)]

BTW: This is definitely an appropriate forum for the question as it is not application specific.

Unix

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504265#Comment_504265

Which is better: Göttingen or the 2006 German Bible Society revision? I'm thinking of the text.

tfjern

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504265#Comment_504265

The Text Comparison Tool, is, as you said, old-fashioned, and it would take forever to complete. A simple text file / EXCEL spreadsheet, whatever, would save a lot of time.

Edit: plus, I can't figure out the Compare Parallel Bibles feature, or even if I have it (doubtful since I have the bare-bones Logos 5.1 edition). At least my Logos 5.1 doesn't crash, knock on wood.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504272#Comment_504272

Using Swete as the base text and showing the base when a difference is detected, this is what the Logos compare looks like ... ignoring the alternative text volumes:

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504272#Comment_504272

Compare Parallel Bibles feature

"Compare Parallel Bibles" is the L3 name for "Text Comparison" in L4/5. If you only have the bare-bones 5.1 edition, you may not have full Text Comparison functionality, by the way.

If you really want a list of differences, I would suggest using the Copy Bible Verses tool, and paste the two texts into two files. You could then use a specialist application to highlight the differences (either a programmer's 'diff' tool, or the revisions tool in Microsoft Word). Personally, I can't see why Logos would have such a file already (and although they have the data to produce one, they may not have the tools to do so simply),

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504276#Comment_504276

with alternative text:

tfjern

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504279#Comment_504279

Yes, M.J. Smith, that would do it, but I don't think I have the Compare Parallel Bibles feature with my edition of Logos 5.1. If I do have it, I can't seem to find it.

That is, the "A" (in your case two "A"s) on the menu doesn't appear, and I can't find any mention of it in the Settings. If I do have it, I would appreciate some help here locating it. Sorry to be so dense, but I didn't know Logos had such a feature.

I hope I don't have to upgrade to a higher version just to be able to use it. Alas!

tfjern

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504278#Comment_504278

Yes, Mark Barnes. I'm afraid I don't quality for this feature. Bummer.

Also, I am well aware that there are many tedious ways to perform this task using specific software (even MS Word has a text / file comparison feature, but it sucks. Used it many times. There are others, but they are too expensive.).

It would be nice for Logos to share this information since I have already purchased all three LXXs (over $1,000!) and since I'm sure Logos already has such a file sitting on someone's computer.

I suppose I would be willing to pay for the thing, knowing Logos probably would never be willing to give away something like that for free.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504281#Comment_504281

To open the tool, you have to open Tools:

Once you have the tool opened, assuming you have it, you enter the abbreviated titles of the bibles you wish to compare in the text box. I "cheat" and have mine set up as a collection. Clicking on the arrow in the lower right-hand side of the icon for the compare, gives you access to the options for the tool.

tfjern

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504284#Comment_504284

Yes, I have tried that. And since the "Show differences" does not appear, this means my version of Logos 5 is economy class. I can't afford to upgrade now, so I'm out of luck.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504283#Comment_504283

since I'm sure Logos already has such a file sitting on someone's computer.

I share Mark's pessimism that such a file already exists - I suspect it "exists" not as a single file but as a group of pieces in various pieces of software e.g. software for morphology tagging, software for interlinear alignments etc ... Even if it all exists as a single file somewhere, that file is likely manipulated to match the needs of the project and person who has the files.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504285#Comment_504285

I can't afford to upgrade now, so I'm out of luck.

Sorry about that. I'll hope your finances improve as it is a useful feature. The report can be exported or printed so if you are working on a specific passage someone might be able to run a report for you until my hopes are realized.

tfjern

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504289#Comment_504289

Your sympathy is more than welcome. Donations would be, too. Give to everyone who asks of you. (Luke 6:30).

M.J. Smith and / or Mark, which edition of Logos do you have? Just curious.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504290#Comment_504290

M.J. Smith and / or Mark, which edition of Logos do you have? Just curious.

I've been using Logos for more than 10 years, and have built up an very extensive collection of resources. I first bought individual resources, before getting L3 Silver in 2005, which I upgraded to L3 Gold (OC) in 2006, and L4 Portfolio in 2009 and L5 Portfolio in 2012. If you only have add-on resources, and no base package, you do miss out on a lot of useful functionality.

fgh

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504285#Comment_504285

since the "Show differences" does not appear, this means my version of Logos 5 is economy class. I can't afford to upgrade now, so I'm out of luck.

Though it doesn't say for sure, I believe that feature should come with the Logos 4 Minimal Crossgrade, which may not cost you many dollars if you have an L4 or L5 base package (make sure you're logged in when you check the price).

Bruce Dunning

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504291#Comment_504291

which I upgraded to ... and L5 Portfolio in 2009.

Mark, that's impressive. How did you manage that in 2009? [;)]

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504297#Comment_504297

Mark, that's impressive. How did you manage that in 2009?

Well spotted!

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504302#Comment_504302

The text comparison tool would be an excellent area to expand sophistication, especially with Noet. The present tool primarily looks at final text but ignores the tremendous sophistication in the Logos datasets. Luckily George is still having his breakfast, but textual comparison of morph lines (interlinear ... shhhh) is considerably more useful.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504283#Comment_504283

Yes, Mark Barnes. I'm afraid I don't quality for this feature. Bummer.

Also, I am well aware that there are many tedious ways to perform this task using specific software (even MS Word has a text / file comparison feature, but it sucks. Used it many times. There are others, but they are too expensive.).

It would be nice for Logos to share this information since I have already purchased all three LXXs (over $1,000!) and since I'm sure Logos already has such a file sitting on someone's computer.

I suppose I would be willing to pay for the thing, knowing Logos probably would never be willing to give away something like that for free.

You could pay the $59.95 (or whatever the price is, I forget) and get the minimal crossgrade which should give you that function. There's nothing like doing it yourself. As they say, "Give a man a fish …"

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504327#Comment_504327

The text comparison tool would be an excellent area to expand sophistication, especially with Noet. The present tool primarily looks at final text but ignores the tremendous sophistication in the Logos datasets. Luckily George is still having his breakfast, but textual comparison of morph lines (interlinear ... shhhh) is considerably more useful.

Never eat breakfast before Rush Limbaugh starts.

Rick Brannan

I'm sure Logos has a file displaying the verse differences between the Rahlfs LXX and the Swete LXX (and perhaps this is asking too much, the Gottingen LXX), since, for one thing, Logos has worked extensively with them (I have purchased most of Logos products related to these resources).

Is there any chance Logos could share this file? I believe Rick Bannan, who has done a lot of fine work on these resources, occasionally visits this forum. An email to him might get a response, but if it doesn't, maybe there is someone else on this forum who has or knows of such a file, and would be willing to share it with us. It's worth a shot.

Actually, we do not have a file of these differences just sitting around. However, if you have both Swete and Göttingen (which you imply) then both of those texts have apparatuses, and the primary differences can be had in these apparatuses. Swete's apparatus is primarily uncial material listing major variants (though he does at times refer to the Holmes/Parsons LXX); Göttingen of course gets into more minutiae in its apparatus.

Many of the responses to this thread are correct, the best place to look for such data is the use of Text Comparison on a particular passage. I only know the data and cannot speak to which packages the Text Comparison functionality is included (or not included).

I do not know of a version collation in print or elsewhere, but that's not to say it doesn't exist. As an analogue, the NA27 print has an apparatus of edition differences in the back (please don't ask for this electronically, we've already requested the data but do not know if it will ever be available). I am unsure if Rahlf's LXX print has similar material, or if the Rahlfs LXX apparatus (or Göttingen, for that matter) refer to Swete as an entity within the apparatus. The modern trend is to cite manuscripts instead of editions; older editions (particularly NT stuff; see Tischendorf and early Nestle editions) tended to cite editions along with other textual witnesses.

Lee

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504337#Comment_504337

As an analogue, the NA27 print has an apparatus of edition differences in the back (please don't ask for this electronically, we've already requested the data but do not know if it will ever be available).

This is really weird logic on the part of certain publishers. Really disappointing!

Rick Brannan (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504413#Comment_504413

As an analogue, the NA27 print has an apparatus of edition differences in the back (please don't ask for this electronically, we've already requested the data but do not know if it will ever be available).

This is really weird logic on the part of certain publishers. Really disappointing!

This apparatus (Editionum Differentiae, I think it is called, but I'm going on memory and my Latin is horrible) is in NA27 but is not in NA28 — which is why I'm guessing is unavailable at present. I didn't mean to imply that it would never happen; I only meant to communicate that we know about it and have requested it, but have not received any representative data for this material. Also, it is not comprehensive, only supplemental.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504327#Comment_504327

textual comparison of morph lines (interlinear ... shhhh) is considerably more useful.

I'd agree if Logos showed alternatives rather than a single value without explanation when debatable.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/504327#Comment_504327

(interlinear ... shhhh

I heard that. [:P]