Blog & the Bible Sense Lexicon

After reading the blog and how I could use the BSL to see shades of meaning in the inspired english, greek, and hebrew (aramaic too, I think), I decided to give it another whirl (especially the inspired english words).

I typed in 'river' (boundary of the promise, river of life, and so on ... all very inspired).

Here's my results. First there's a greek word (that would be the greek for the inspired english). Then there's some hebrew closely associated words (which I assume their english is also inspired).

There's some sort of graph at the top (showing Ezra and Habakkuk, famous for their riverine language). If you mouse over it, it will ghost the other books of the Bible (probably not inspired english usage).

Then near the bottom there's a series of NT references. None of the OT ones were inspired (in english of course).

I got chastised roundly yesterday for being somewhat ironic. (Actually not reporting bugs!.) But I still don't understand. Don't the developers sometimes try out Logos5 and see what happens?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Mark Barnes

I got chastised roundly yesterday for being somewhat ironic. (Actually not reporting bugs!.) But I still don't understand. Don't the developers sometimes try out Logos5 and see what happens?

Denise, this is not a chastisement, but I've read through your post three times, and I'm still not sure what your point is. For the sake of a simple man like me, could you rephrase it in simple bullet points?

Mark Barnes

There's some sort of graph at the top (showing Ezra and Habakkuk, famous for their riverine language). If you mouse over it, it will ghost the other books of the Bible (probably not inspired english usage).

There's a bug with how this is displayed on your PC. On mine, the spark graph shows hits in most biblical books (perhaps you should report this as a bug).

Then near the bottom there's a series of NT references. None of the OT ones were inspired (in english of course).

If you click the elipsis, you'll see that there are many OT references as well, but they're not in canonical order, which is perhaps what confused you. Perhaps you could submit another bug report, suggesting that these verses are put inn canonical order.

all very inspired

I still have no idea why you keep mentioning that this is all "inspired". Sorry.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516074#Comment_516074

Thanks Mark, but I'm not in the bug reporting business (no offense).

The referenced blog promised that I could see the shades of meaning by the inspired writers. I find that fascinating.

But for the life of me (and ignoring the bug-prone display), I can't imagine what a pastor would do with this.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516082#Comment_516082

I can't imagine what a pastor would do with this.

My sympathies, Denise. To whom should I report the bug regarding your imagination?[:D] ("The devil made me do it")[A]

Seriously, the usefulness of the Bible Sense Lexicon varies with the word chosen and the background of the pastor. Think of it as a dictionary that includes additional information, especially hierarchical information, to help you understand a word more accurately Or think of it as a thesaurus that distinguishes between near-synonyms or near-antonyms. And recognize that the feature will mature as users become familiar with its usefulness.

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516082#Comment_516082

But for the life of me (and ignoring the bug-prone display), I can't imagine what a pastor would do with this.

I AM a pastor and I find that identifying the range of words that could have been used by the inspired authors allows me to better identify the sense of the particular word that he chose to use. Call me a heretic, but I believe the human authors were inspired when the Scriptures were recorded.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516095#Comment_516095

Well, Dave, I suspect our pastor would kind of chuckle if I told him I could use the BSL to see the shades of meaning in one of his sermons! And he doesn't even propose to suggest his words aren't his. And for me to suggest I could see shades of meaning in the language of the Holy Spirit in older times be blasphemous (but not today).

But actually my thread's point was to simply take the blog's point at face value, and see if indeed the wonderful results would be achieved.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516089#Comment_516089

MJ ... the bugginess of my imagination doesn't need to be emphasized.

But the phrase you used (not being argumentative) 'understand a word more accurately' is the part I disagree with (and do so without your expertise).

An Old Testament writer (eg Isaiah) might 'reach for' a word to express meaning. The choice is whatever he and his readers had to work with at the time (presumably during the Assyrian heyday). Moses would be a different proposition, and accepting his authorship, the semantic choices would no doubt be influenced by his Egyptian background.

So how does David think he's figuring out Moses, Isaiah, or any other historical writer (much less Jesus, who may not even be in the right language). David has no idea what Isaiah's semantic choices were (and often what a given word even means).

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516104#Comment_516104

The choice is whatever he and his readers had to work with at the time

I agree that as the product matures, it needs to include changes of meaning over time.

Lee

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516136#Comment_516136

Denise, this tool helps, but not uniformly across all authors, or across the entire body of vocabulary. MJ has also correctly pointed out the complication of diachronicity in Hebrew.

Basically, you are elucidating a feature in discourse analysis called "(lexical) markedness", to see if, beyond the surface meaning, there is some nuance involved in the choice or non-choice of particular terms. This sort of analysis can be fruitful, but not in every instance. This sort of work is not an exact science yet, so the key lies not so much in the blunt instrument, but the "inspired" interpreter / exegete.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516147#Comment_516147

Thank you, MJ and Lee.

Coincidentally, I'm just now (finally) finishing the book in honor of David Freedman's 70th birthday ('Fortunate the Eyes that See').

The last contributor, Roy Rappaport, wrote a section titled 'Logos, Liturgy, and the Evolution of Humanity'. And as you both seem to be familiar with all three of these, he starts off with 'logos' as it relates to various ethnic religions (including the hoshio of the Navajo here) and then works back into the greek, especially with Heraclitus the Obscure and his usage, noting the difficulty of personal usage vs common usage. As he moves forward, he notes how the word has moved along in usage, but the litergical use has become detached, plugging into a point in time.

And as we all of course know, both the OT and NT are not secular patterns; rather liturgical. The writers were religious.

Lee

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516196#Comment_516196

Logos, being used as a term of art in John's gospel, is a good lode to mine for discussion, yes... [H]

Jeremy Thompson

I think the blog post may have missed a distinction. So, maybe I can help a little. In order to get the shades of a word's meaning you need to approach the search box a little bit differently or use the Bible Word Study tool.

The distinction is that when you enter English into the search box you are searching for a sense (or meaning) and not a word. This is a little bit clearer with something other than "river," which is a physical entity that doesn't get a whole lot of metaphorical extension in the text of the Bible. Since we're talking about logos you can see that you're searching for meanings and not words if you enter "word" into the search box. What kind of "word" are you looking for? Are you looking for all the occurrences of "word" when it just means a generic word? Or are you looking for all of the occurrences of "word" when it means a command, like in our common English phrase "he gave the word"? Or "word" when it means a statement, as in our common English phrase "she gave a brief word of reply"? You can get to these types of distinctions when you type "word" in the search box of the Bible Sense Lexicon and clicking any one of those might take you to an entry where one of the words that expresses that sense is logos.

On the other hand, you can approach the search box by words and get to their shades of meanings, but you have to do the search a little differently. So, for example, try entering the string "g:logos" in the search box (below you can see - maybe if it's not too small - there are more than 15 meanings associated with logos in the Bible Sense Lexicon). You can then get to any of the shades of meaning of logos by clicking the meaning you want or using your keyboard arrow to move down and pressing enter.

Alternatively, you can get the shades of a words meaning by entering the Greek or Hebrew word in the Bible Word Study tool and looking at the "senses" section. These are the senses from the Bible Sense Lexicon.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516343#Comment_516343

Great post Jeremy.

Illustrated my 2 points really well: (1) Usability by a non-expert not really recommended, and (2) a secular semantic organization not likely appropriate to the original writers.

We'll ignore the bugs.

Jeremy Thompson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516360#Comment_516360

Well, I am one of the people who has worked on this project. So, I at least hope I haven't illustrated your points really well [:O].

David Thomas

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516368#Comment_516368

Well, I am one of the people who has worked on this project. So, I at least hope I haven't illustrated your points really well .

I thought you illustrated MY points very well. So I guess people see in this thread what they want to see.

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516370#Comment_516370

Now David. You seem to have forgotten your own advice (meaning = context). That's why I used a pastor as the example. Pastors, when explaining a meaning (and nearby semantic equivalents), almost never use the secular semantic organization (nor do commentaries, nor the Targums, etc.).

Logos is simply re-packaging the reverse interlinear database and calling it 'theological' (along with buggy graphs, and mixed up Bible references).

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516360#Comment_516360

(2) a secular semantic organization not likely appropriate to the original writers.

Which comes first? The written text or the theological/liturgical meaning? The semantic organization includes, ideally, the entire semantic domain so that the "secular organization" should not be a legitimate distinction - not saying that it isn't, just saying it should not be and I have not noticed it to be. Given the popularity of sites such as Visuword I have trouble viewing it as an "expert" system. I don't have trouble with viewing it as a tool one needs to learn how to use for it to be an improvement over a regular lexicon. I don't have trouble with concerns that some of the relationships may be too modern/Western and need eventual adjustment. I am still a bit uncomfortable with the mixing of Hebrew and Greek. I would definitely prefer to have the type of relationship shown in the hierarchy labeled . . . .

I'm just trying to say that although imperfect it is useful if one takes a bit of time to learn how to use it. I'm reminded of my brother sending his daughter off to kindergarten thinking that one calculated with a ruler and measured with a slide rule. Needless to say, she was not adept at either. Once she understood that the ruler was for measuring, it suddenly became an easy, useful tool. The slide rule presented a bigger problem. I'm just saying that the BSL is more like a ruler than a slide rule. (P.S. yes, this is the same brother who gave be a calculus book for Christmas when I was a fourth grader).

For those who memories don't extend into the pre-electronic calculator days:

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516438#Comment_516438

I find this discussion very interesting. I suspect your sliderule is the acceptance of a secular use of language (so Logos' BSL) applied to those who wrote 2,000+ years ago. A simple example is the one Jeremy uses: logos with a semantic organization surrounding 'message'. But if you look at the religious use of the word with the greeks, and its aramaic and hebrew nearest neighbor (eg DSS, 2ndTemple), the usage is much closer to a divine power with traces even in the Ugarit.

Now, you are right concerning the sliderule ... today's pastors would do just as well with 'message' or 'communication'. And so today's religions meld into secular nearest-meaning, with Logos employees perfectly comfortable.

Lee

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/516449#Comment_516449

Touche! [:)]

But let's just take this tool for what it is -- a mere instrument.