If interested, I made a request for the literal standard version Bible which supposedly improves young’s translation
https://feedback.faithlife.com/boards/logos-book-requests/posts/literal-standard-version-bible
https://www.lsvbible.com/
I'm certainly not against the LSV's presence in Logos. But I do wonder at the version's agenda (eg solving what problem?). Just reading the notes, mixing the MT, LXX and Majority, while holding to the 'big-3' Egyptians, and the DSS, but promising the inerrancy of the original, while quite obviously offering an amalgam of this and that.
One would do better to just learn greek (assuming an english version is forever a problem demanding multiple new translations per decade).
One would do better to just learn greek (assuming an english version is forever a problem demanding multiple new translations per decade
Is Greek any better? We are on NA28 - even the Greek versions are multiplying.
They actually give it away for free pretty much in several formats. They even have an "accordance" format that you can upload but not a DOCX or Logos format that I can see. There is a plain text version but the horrors of tagging such a thing give me the shakes.
https://www.lsvbible.com/p/get-lsv.html
Smiling. I've wondered if you could select from a menu ... MSS248, a touch of MSS871, and hints of MSS1028. Or better still, the software could 'roll the dice' (scriptural for getting Holy Spirit decisions ... Acts) and get a selection of MSS's. There'd be a greater chance of seeing the original! Again, smiling.
One would do better to just learn greek (assuming an english version is forever a problem demanding multiple new translations per decade Is Greek any better? We are on NA28 - even the Greek versions are multiplying.
Maybe not - but I my experience is that people who can read the Greek tend to be a lot less likely to get caught up in the wars over which translation is best. That's worth something.
Interesting take on Literalness by Faithlife's Mark Ward,
https://youtu.be/Z5635azlOAE (10 minutes video)
Agreed always find Mark’s material worth the time to listen / read.
Interesting take on Literalness by Faithlife's Mark Ward, https://youtu.be/Z5635azlOAE (10 minutes video)
Agree with OP that it would be good to have this in Logos, not because it is a better translation than others but simply to add to the mix when comparing translation choice.
Will be interesting how this compares to LSB, which I will be comparing to NASB95. Not holding my breath that either LSB or LSV will be a replacing improvement. LEB isn't, touted though it is. Apart from the text, the notes in NASB are pretty effective at making the underlying OL clear. The percentage of issues it doesn't address is pretty small, and used in conjunction with NET notes, the coverage verges on being complete. NASB95 does have room for improvement (NASB2020 seems to have lost as much as it may have gained), but it's going to be pretty hard for LSB or LSV to hit that relatively small sweet spot.
As far as the video goes, it somewhat addresses my pet peeve with regard to how the term "literal" is typically used. "Literal" is not and cannot be properly opposed to "figurative"...they are not antonyms. Anything literal is literally also figurative. That is because anything composed of letters is inherently figurative, because language itself is inherently figurative, pretty much by both definition and ontology. Words are always abstractions and not the things being referenced. Literal doesn't mean "true" or "real" or "actual", period.
Most dictionaries manage to place 'literal' opposite 'figurative' or similar. Which then presents literal as mindless. From Cambridge:
"A literal translation of a text is done by translating each word separately, without looking at how the words are used together in a phrase or sentence."
I'm not literally sure what literal means ... even in simplistic translation, one must literally choose a gloss .... and be wrong most of the time. In today's AMP2020 post, the characterization was instead 'accurate'. I don't know if that's an accurate description.
I use 'literal' (denomination) as writing taken a face-value ... pre-churchmen.
I made a Logos pre-version.
1768.LSV Bible.docx
I guess the Covenant Press Team will do some improvements.
Fabian
I'm certainly not against the LSV's presence in Logos. But I do wonder at the version's agenda (eg solving what problem?). Just reading the notes, mixing the MT, LXX and Majority, while holding to the 'big-3' Egyptians, and the DSS, but promising the inerrancy of the original, while quite obviously offering an amalgam of this and that. One would do better to just learn greek (assuming an english version is forever a problem demanding multiple new translations per decade).
The LXX part is in [[ ]] like footnotes. Especially where the years differ to the MT. In my opinion the MT is here incorrect see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VI1yRTC6kGE
Wow! Thank you
I made a Logos pre-version. 1768.LSV Bible.docx Known issues: I have not done the images in the Bible in the Bible. You can put it where you want. A bug with the [[ see https://community.logos.com/forums/p/202295/1176182.aspx#1176182 I have solved it right now with a non breaking space between the [[. So you can search where it is. I know you have always „Chapter x“ in central front of the chapters. I have for example „Gen x“ and left. But you can change it if you wish. May the „Key Scripture“ part can be more nice. You can try in Word to do it better. I guess the Covenant Press Team will do some improvements. Fabian
Known issues:
I'm not able to upload it. I get all the time an error. But Mr. Luna has got it from me. His email address is in the profile.
A certain competitor may or may not be giving this translation away for free right now. You didn't hear that from me.
It sure would be nice to have this in Logos, preferably tagged.
A certain competitor may or may not be giving this translation away for free right now. You didn't hear that from me. It sure would be nice to have this in Logos, preferably tagged.
The publisher has first to check the tagging. I have seen many errors in it. There is a website with the tagged version, https://ebible.org/study/?v1=JN1_1&t1=local%3Aenglsv&w1=bible&w2=bible&t2=local%3Agrcmt&v2=JN1_1
