gloss uses Strong's (please change)

When you mouse over a word in the NA27 it give you a translation
gloss, this is also the same word listed as "English literal
translation" in the NA27 interlinear. These are all based on Strong's
which is notoriously bad, and as a result these translations are quite
often wrong.

The most obvious one I've run across is the word

ἄρα which Strong's thinks means

an
"untranslatable
interrogative particle expressing anxiety or impatience." While
anxiety and impatience may be what I feel when I read Strong's, this is
not what ἄρα means. It is

an inferential (illative) particle meaning "therefore"

Please please please change these to link to Louw-Nida or DBL Greek!...really
any other Greek lexicon would be a huge improvement.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

George Somsel

When you mouse over a word in the NA27 it give you a translation gloss, this is also the same word listed as "English literal translation" in the NA27 interlinear. These are all based on Strong's which is notoriously bad, and as a result these translations are quite often wrong.

The most obvious one I've run across is the word ἄρα which Strong's thinks means an "untranslatable interrogative particle expressing anxiety or impatience." While anxiety and impatience may be what I feel when I read Strong's, this is not what ἄρα means. It is an inferential (illative) particle meaning "therefore"

Please please please change these to link to Louw-Nida or DBL Greek!...really any other Greek lexicon would be a huge improvement.

Two questions:

1. Is this in L3 or L4 ?
2. If in L4, do you have Strong's prioritized? If in L3, I'll reply after you answer.

shark tacos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/121972#Comment_121972

same behavior in both L3 and L4 (I use both since L4 is so slow).

No, I don't have Strong's prioritized. I don't think it is even listed.

Rick Brannan (Logos)

These longer glosses in NA27INT are not from Strongs, but they come from the old CDWord Library program (circa 1988/89 as I recall), which Logos integrated into the old "Logos Library System", circa 1995 (which predates Libronix Digital Library System, which predates Logos 4). I don't know their history or source apart from that. But they are not looked up on the fly from Strongs and have no direct relationship with any form of Strongs lexicon within the context of LDLS3 or Logos 4.

If you're using the latest version of LOGOSNA27.logos4 (and I believe the latest of LOGOSNA27.lbxlls, though I can't check at present) these glosses are not from CDWord, but instead from the Lexham Greek-English Interlinear New Testament. For example, with LOGOSNA27 in Logos 4, αρα in Mt 7.20 has "consequently, as a result" as the gloss that fires.

I'd recommend instead using either LOGOSNA27 or the Lexham Greek-English Interlinear New Testament (LGNTI) if you find NA27 or NA27INT inadequate for these purposes. I believe the interlinear is included in Scholar's Silver and above, so if you've upgraded to one of these packages and synched your licenses, then I'd imagine you should have it on both LDLS3 and Logos 4.

shark tacos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122151#Comment_122151

Thanks for the clarification Rick.

I have the Original languages package which does not come with the LGNTI. Upgrading to Silver would cost almost $700 which of course would quite an extravagant price to pay just to fix a bad gloss.

How about instead Logos (both L3 and L4) use the existing Greek-English lexicons/interlinears in the given package instead of the inaccurate CDWord?

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122160#Comment_122160

Thanks for the clarification Rick.

I have the Original languages package which does not come with the LGNTI. Upgrading to Silver would cost almost $700 which of course would quite an extravagant price to pay just to fix a bad gloss.

How about instead Logos (both L3 and L4) use the existing Greek-English lexicons/interlinears in the given package instead of the inaccurate CDWord?

I have a better solution. Why not click on the word to bring up BDAG and read the full entry there (The same applies to Hebrew with the reference being changed to BDB or HAL).

shark tacos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122195#Comment_122195

From a software point of view that is not a better idea, that is simply a work around for a faulty feature.

If my kitchen faucet is broken I can get water from the garden hose. That does not mean wont call a plumber.

So of course I can do that. However nonetheless the function should be fixed to reference a lexicon without errors.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122236#Comment_122236

to reference a lexicon without errors

I've never seen such a lexicon. Is it published by Apostles' Press, 12 Golden Street, New Jerusalem?

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122236#Comment_122236

From a software point of view that is not a better idea, that is simply a work around for a faulty feature.

If my kitchen faucet is broken I can get water from the garden hose. That does not mean wont call a plumber.

So of course I can do that. However nonetheless the function should be fixed to reference a lexicon without errors.

Martha has already commented on "a lexicon without errors" so I will move on. Are you interested in a better software solution (and is it really a better software solution?) or are you interested in a better solution for understanding the text?

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122160#Comment_122160

I have the Original languages package which does not come with the LGNTI. Upgrading to Silver would cost almost $700 which of course would quite an extravagant price to pay just to fix a bad gloss.

You don't have to upgrade to Silver to get LGNTI. It is available as a standalone product: http://www.logos.com/products/details/3614

I'm not sure why LOGOSNA27 is not. Rick?

shark tacos

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122245#Comment_122245

I suppose I could. But this is the "software suggestion" forum. So I'm suggesting this be addressed in a future update of the software.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122247#Comment_122247

So I'm suggesting this be addressed in a future update of the software.

It's more accurately described as a data problem - the basis of my smartaleck response. It is really no different from some of the questionable translations or interpretations especially of the older materials. After all some of the materials in the Early Church Fathers is heretical and erroneous. I would not want Logos to "correct" these resources to match current opinion. Nor would I want Logos to modify language resources from 1880 to meet the 1980 understanding. I want the resource to accuracy present the resource as it exists and I will provide the mental updates.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/122247#Comment_122247

I suppose I could. But this is the "software suggestion" forum. So I'm suggesting this be addressed in a future update of the software.

Just a fine technical point: it would be a future update of that particular resource that you're looking for, not the software. Those glosses are built into the resource files. I agree, this is something that could stand improvement in the future if it the glosses are based on such an outdated/inaccurate lexicon. But I concur with the others who have said there is no such thing as a perfect lexicon.