When I do a Bible Word Study or a search on the lemma צֶלֶם, neither PS 39:6 nor Ps 73:20 are listed as places where this word occurs. Why?
I can't answer your question, but you might need to post a screen shot. Context does matter.
I don't know ...
lemma:צֶ֫לֶם.2 is used in LHB for BHS Ps 39:7 & Ps 73:20 because of the meaning "phantoms/shadow", whereas lemma:צֶ֫לֶם.1 is used for "image".
lemma:צלם is used in AFAT for BHS Ps 39:7, Ps 73:20 and other verses - no homonym distinction
lemma:צֶלֶם is used in BHS/WIVU for BHS Ps 39:7, Ps 73:20 and other verses - no homonym distinction
BHW 4.2 and 4.18 also use homonyms.
As for BWS, I entered 'phantoms' and the translation ring in Hebrew Words gave the link to the Hebrew BWS (צֶ֫לֶם 2 when BHW 4.18 is preferred Hebrew bible). If you enter "image" you have to be careful to select the Hebrew word (with BWs for צֶ֫לֶם 1), else you get the Aramaic word with results in Daniel and BWS for צְלֵם.
Thanks for the input. Very helpful. So if I understand it correctly, the issue is that certain morphologies distinguish between lemma:צֶ֫לֶם.2 and lemma:צֶ֫לֶם.1 based on the english translation in the various passages. That's frustrating because it skews the results of lemma searches based on decisions made by previous interpreters.
So if someone wants to simply search for every occurrence of a Hebrew lemma regardless of the meaning given to it by previous translators, is BHS/WIVU the best resource to use?
I just tried doing a Bible Word Study on lemma:צֶלֶם in BHS/WIVU by right clicking on the occurrence in Gen 1:26, choosing lemma:צֶלֶם and then clicking on Bible Word Study. Although the morph search done the same way shows 17 occurrences, the translation section of the Bible Word Study only shows 14, apparently based on the translation "image." The textual search section of the Bible Word Study shows 17 occurrences, however.
Shouldn't the translation circle in the Bible Word Study include "phantom/shadow" and show the occurrences in the psalms?
I'd show you a screen shot but I can't figure out how to insert one into the blog post. Sorry. I tried clicking on the insert image icon, but it only lets me put in a url for an image - it won't let me upload the image itself.
No, the Translation section first converts the lemma you clicked on (WIVU) into the equivalent lemma in the reverse interlinear (LHB) and then searches for all translations of that lemma.
Similarly, if there was a single LHB lemma that conflated two WIVU lemmas (I'm not sure if there is one or not), starting a BWS from one of those WIVU lemmas would show you translations for both (because the translations are based on the LHB lemma that covers both WIVU lemmas).
Thanks Bradley. So it's all a matter of the translation section of the BWS being based on the LHB morphology. Is there a way of choosing which morphology to link the translation section to? And does anyone know which morphology does the least breaking up of lemmas into spearate meanings?
So it's all a matter of the translation section of the BWS being based on the LHB morphology. Is there a way of choosing which morphology to link the translation section to?
The Reverse Interlinear bibles you can select have an OT based on Logos Hebrew Morphology, which is primarily used in the LHB and LHI Hebrew bibles. Their NT is based on Logos Greek Morphology, as are the LXX bibles you can choose!
The Textual Searches section will use the Hebrew/Greek bible from which you launched the BWS, otherwise it will use your preferred Hebrew/Greek bible.
And does anyone know which morphology does the least breaking up of lemmas into spearate meanings?
Which reality do you prefer e.g. which meaning of "live" or "well" do you prefer?
"least" is meaningless because you will have to find a bible that doesn't give you a lemma with homonyms for that specific word.
If you want to read up on the complexities of what you're tying to do, then this thread and this post give some of the detail (although both are a little dated now, so some details are no longer accurate).
The TLDR version is that Logos attempts to map different morphologies onto one another to provide some consistency between morphologies, but also that some parts of the BWS use data from the currently selected morphology, and some from a fixed morphology, hence there are sometimes discrepancies within the BWS.
So, specific to your query, the translation section depends on reverse-interlinears to calculate it's data, and in Logos 5 all reverse interlinears are based on Logos Hebrew morphology (the same as the LHB). When you run a BWS from another morphology, Logos has to map the lemma you've selected to the equivalent lemma in Logos Hebrew morphology.
However, in the textual searches section it's no problem to use the morphology you've selected. The net result is that for some lemmas you'll get a different count from the translation section than you will from the textual searches section.
Finally, a minor correction. You said that the editors distinguish between lemma "based on the english translation in the various passages". That's not quite correct. The point is that you have a word which can take two different meanings. Are they two different words, or one word.
Take the word 'hold' in English, for example. As a noun, it can refer to a handhold, or the storage area of a ship. They're two different words that happen to the spelt the same way. The same is true in Hebrew. Except sometimes it's not clear whether a word is the same or not. If I say "I'll pay with my card", is that the same word as when I say "would you like to play cards"? Should they be separate entries in the dictionary, or sub-sections of the same entry? If the former, then they're separate lemmas, if the latter then they're not. Inevitably linguists are going to differ on questions like this, which is partly why Logos offers a choice of morphologies.
Thanks everyone for the extremely helpful explanations.
Re Mark's point/question "Are they two different words, or one word?" You've hit the nail on the head. In the English example "hold" is it really two different words, or a semantic range of one word? Or, back to my original question, are the occurrences of צֶלֶם in the psalms really a different word than in Genesis, or only a different shade (pardon the potential pun) of meaning?
There are times that a search based on one meaning rather than all meanings for a specific combination of letters (i.e. a word) is helpful. But there are also times that I want to see every occurrence of that combination of letters and decide from the context what the meaning is, not on the basis of the decision made by whomever put together the morphology. This thread has shown me how I can do that - so thanks again to everyone who took the time to respond!
are the occurrences of צֶלֶם in the psalms really a different word than in Genesis, or only a different shade...
צֶלֶם m. with suff. צַלְמוֹ—(1) a shadow, Psalm 39:7; metaph. used of any thing vain, Psal. 73:20. Hence—(2) an image, likeness (so called from its shadowing forth; compare σκία, σκίασμα, σκιαγραφέω), Genesis 1:27; 5:3; 9:6; an image, idol, 2 Kings 11:18; Am. 5:26. (Syr. and Chald. ܨܠܰܡܐܳ, צַלְמָא id., Arab. صَنَمُ an image, the letters נ and ל being interchanged.)Wilhelm Gesenius and Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures
But there are also times that I want to see every occurrence of that combination of letters and decide from the context what the meaning is
You might normally expect that from a root search, but I'm afraid that Logos Hebrew Morph uses root:צלם:2 for the 2x Psalms and many other verses, which uncovers another heritage of use:
צֶלֶם, צְלֵם Ch. emphat. state, צַלְמָא m. an image, idol, Dan. 2:31, seqq.; 3:1, seqq.צַלְמוֹן (“shady”), [Zalmon, Salmon], pr.n.—(1) of a mountain in Samaria, near Shechem, Jud. 9:48; this apparently is the one spoken of as covered with snow, Ps. 68:15.(2) of one of David’s captains, 2 Sa. 23:28.צַלְמוֹנָה (“shady”), [Zalmonah], pr.n. of a station of the Israelites in the desert, Nu. 33:41.צַלְמָוֶת f. pr. shadow of death (comp. of צֵל shadow, and מָוֶת death), poet. for very thick darkness, Job 3:5; 10:21; 28:3; 34:22; 38:17, שַׁעֲרֵי צַלְמָוֶת “the gates of darkness.”צַלְמֻנָּע (perhaps for צֵל מְמֻנָּע “to whom shadow is denied”), [Zalmunna], pr.n. of a prince of the Midianites, Jud. 8:5; Ps. 83:12.Wilhelm Gesenius and Samuel Prideaux Tregelles, Gesenius’ Hebrew and Chaldee Lexicon to the Old Testament Scriptures
Thanks Dave! You've reinforced the point in a way. If a word is used as a metaphor, does that mean it is actually a different word in that instance? But that gets us into a whole range of lexical issues beyond the original question in this thread. The joys of language!!! The main thing is, now I understand better how Logos functions in its searches and BWS. Thanks again!
Available Now
Build your biblical library with a new trusted commentary or resource every month. Yours to keep forever.
