BWS ESV vs. Westminster 4.2
In a study of the word "delight" in the ESV I get the results below. I select one of the less frequent words--חפצי-בה and it shows one occurrence in Is. 62:4. That's all good. Then I click on the Hebrew term which opens a Bible Word Study on חפצי-בה. But in this BWS, under textual searches "Hebrew Bible" it pulls one reference but its not Is. 62:4, its 2 Ki 21:1 where it is used as a proper name. I understand why 2 Ki 21:1 does not appear in the ESV, but why didn't Is. 62:4 appear in the Hebrew Bible search.
Comments
-
Scott Miles said:
I understand why 2 Ki 21:1 does not appear in the ESV,
2 King 21:1 does appear in the ESV. Following your steps, the second BWS provides 2 results in the Translation section for the ESV (is this what you got?), and the Textual Search also showed 2 results for the Hebrew Bible ---> and my preferred Hebrew is the Lexham Hebrew Bible; which showed both Is 62:4 and 2 King 21:1. But I get your result if I use BHW 4.2.
This isn't surprising as most(all) English translations with Reverse Interlinears have their OT Hebrew based on the LHB, so the lexeme only finds 2 King 21:1 in BHW 4.2. The most recent BHW 4.18 gets both results, whereas BHS/SESB and BHS/WIVU get no results!
Dave
===Windows 11 & Android 13
0 -
Thanks--broad, general question...I am used to BHS from my school days--still like to take the big bulky thing in hand for reading. Is Lexham up to muster? I've never used it, perhaps I should switch. Are all of the Lexham resources to be preferred in Logos? Maybe I'm an old dog that needs some new tricks.
0 -
Scott Miles said:
Thanks--broad, general question...I am used to BHS from my school days--still like to take the big bulky thing in hand for reading. Is Lexham up to muster? I've never used it, perhaps I should switch. Are all of the Lexham resources to be preferred in Logos? Maybe I'm an old dog that needs some new tricks.
The Lexham Hebrew Bible (LHB) is a transcription of the Leningrad Codex, like BHS. It has morphological and lexical tagging similar to the Westminster or WIVU editions of BHS available in Logos, but unlike the Westminster or WIVU editions, Logos created and controls the tagging for LHB. I've used it as my primary Hebrew Bible for years. The only time I need BHS it is the SESB version because I'm consulting the textual apparatus. In the times I've been using both to consult the same passage, the consonantal text is identical, but sometimes the tagging has been slightly different. The advantage of the Lexham resources like this is that we had more flexibility for integrating them into the workings of Logos.
0
