Source for Literary Type section in Passage Guide

Antony Brennan
Antony Brennan Member Posts: 835 ✭✭✭
edited March 12 in English Forum

In the Passage Guide, in Logos Max, there is a section called Literary Typing which outlines the text by groups of verses and applies a literary type to each section. The literary types are linked to the definition of that type in the Lexham Glossary of Literary Types.

My question is: Does anyone know if the verse groupings are sourced form some particular resource?

👁️ 👁️

Best Answers

  • Renold Burke
    Renold Burke Member Posts: 102 ✭✭
    Answer ✓

    The verse groupings in the Literary Typing section of the Passage Guide in Logos Max are not explicitly sourced from a single, specific resource in the way that, say, a commentary or lexicon might be cited. Instead, they are derived from a combination of data and analysis developed by the team at Faithlife (the parent company of Logos Bible Software) and integrated into the Logos ecosystem. The Literary Typing feature relies on the underlying tagging and categorization of biblical texts according to literary genres, which is then linked to definitions in the Lexham Glossary of Literary Types.The Lexham Glossary of Literary Types itself is a proprietary resource created by Logos, designed to classify and define the literary forms found in Scripture—such as narrative, poetry, prophecy, parable, epistle, etc. The verse groupings you see in the Literary Typing section are likely the result of Logos’s internal methodology, which involves analyzing the text of the Bible and segmenting it into units based on shifts in genre or literary style. This process is informed by biblical scholarship, linguistic analysis, and the expertise of the Logos team, rather than being directly lifted from a single external resource like a specific commentary or study Bible.While I don’t have access to an official statement pinpointing an exact source (Logos doesn’t publicly document the precise algorithm or dataset for this feature), it’s reasonable to conclude that the groupings are a product of Logos’s own tagging system, possibly refined over time with input from resources in their vast library—like scholarly works on biblical genres or rhetorical criticism—combined with computational analysis of the text. The linkage to the Lexham Glossary suggests that the definitions and classifications are standardized within Logos’s framework, but the verse-by-verse or section-by-section delineation is likely a unique output of their software’s design.If you’re looking for a more definitive answer, you might need to reach out to Logos support or consult their official documentation/forums, as the exact process isn’t fully transparent in public-facing materials. That said, the feature is a practical tool meant to reflect widely accepted literary distinctions in biblical studies, tailored to enhance the user’s understanding of the text’s structure and style.

    Titles impress people, obedience impresses God.

  • Andrew Batishko
    Andrew Batishko Member, Community Manager, Logos Employee Posts: 5,461
    Answer ✓

    The verse groupings are the results of Tooman's and Mackie's analysis. This dataset was put together over 10 years ago now, so further details are difficult to find.

    Andrew Batishko | Logos software developer

Comments

  • Andrew Batishko
    Andrew Batishko Member, Community Manager, Logos Employee Posts: 5,461

    The description of the Lexham Glossary of Literary Types says this:

    This glossary defines the types and devices identified in the Tooman Literary Type Analysis of the Old Testament and the Mackie Literary Type Analysis of the New Testament.

    Andrew Batishko | Logos software developer

  • Renold Burke
    Renold Burke Member Posts: 102 ✭✭
    Answer ✓

    The verse groupings in the Literary Typing section of the Passage Guide in Logos Max are not explicitly sourced from a single, specific resource in the way that, say, a commentary or lexicon might be cited. Instead, they are derived from a combination of data and analysis developed by the team at Faithlife (the parent company of Logos Bible Software) and integrated into the Logos ecosystem. The Literary Typing feature relies on the underlying tagging and categorization of biblical texts according to literary genres, which is then linked to definitions in the Lexham Glossary of Literary Types.The Lexham Glossary of Literary Types itself is a proprietary resource created by Logos, designed to classify and define the literary forms found in Scripture—such as narrative, poetry, prophecy, parable, epistle, etc. The verse groupings you see in the Literary Typing section are likely the result of Logos’s internal methodology, which involves analyzing the text of the Bible and segmenting it into units based on shifts in genre or literary style. This process is informed by biblical scholarship, linguistic analysis, and the expertise of the Logos team, rather than being directly lifted from a single external resource like a specific commentary or study Bible.While I don’t have access to an official statement pinpointing an exact source (Logos doesn’t publicly document the precise algorithm or dataset for this feature), it’s reasonable to conclude that the groupings are a product of Logos’s own tagging system, possibly refined over time with input from resources in their vast library—like scholarly works on biblical genres or rhetorical criticism—combined with computational analysis of the text. The linkage to the Lexham Glossary suggests that the definitions and classifications are standardized within Logos’s framework, but the verse-by-verse or section-by-section delineation is likely a unique output of their software’s design.If you’re looking for a more definitive answer, you might need to reach out to Logos support or consult their official documentation/forums, as the exact process isn’t fully transparent in public-facing materials. That said, the feature is a practical tool meant to reflect widely accepted literary distinctions in biblical studies, tailored to enhance the user’s understanding of the text’s structure and style.

    Titles impress people, obedience impresses God.

  • Antony Brennan
    Antony Brennan Member Posts: 835 ✭✭✭
    edited March 12

    Hi Andrew,

    I get it that the definitions of Literary Type in the Lexham Glossary are derived from other texts. Do you think it is as as Renold says above that “The verse groupings you see in the Literary Typing section are likely the result of Logos’s internal methodology, which involves analyzing the text of the Bible and segmenting it into units based on shifts in genre or literary style.”

    So could it be the verse breakdown is as a result of the identification of the literary type of the verses? That seems to make sense.

    👁️ 👁️

  • Andrew Batishko
    Andrew Batishko Member, Community Manager, Logos Employee Posts: 5,461
    Answer ✓

    The verse groupings are the results of Tooman's and Mackie's analysis. This dataset was put together over 10 years ago now, so further details are difficult to find.

    Andrew Batishko | Logos software developer

  • Antony Brennan
    Antony Brennan Member Posts: 835 ✭✭✭
    edited March 12

    Errant un-deletable post 😱

    👁️ 👁️

  • Bradley Grainger (Logos)
    Bradley Grainger (Logos) Administrator, Logos Employee Posts: 12,061

    @Renold Burke are you just pasting answers from Grok or ChatGPT into a post?

    If so, please stop doing that, as it's not contributing to the discussion but just muddying the waters with inaccurate information. At the very least, please prefix AI-generated answers with "This is AI-generated and may be inaccurate" so that other forum readers can process the post accordingly.

  • DMB
    DMB Member Posts: 14,190 ✭✭✭✭

    I agree, regarding using AI-generated quotes, esp without documenting (if indeed the case).

    The original question does seem unanswered (lists/glossary, yes, but verse-assignments?).

    That said, I suppose Bob's still looking:

    "If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.

  • Antony Brennan
    Antony Brennan Member Posts: 835 ✭✭✭
    edited March 12

    I took is that what Andrew was saying in his second post answered the question in that: "The verse groupings are the results of Tooman's and Mackie's analysis."

    So having analysed the genre of the verses they are then grouped accordingly. It works for me 🎉.

    I was just trying to better understand what I was seeing.

    👁️ 👁️

  • DMB
    DMB Member Posts: 14,190 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 13

    But then who are they? Expertise? Personally, I never used them but it's been an on-going discussion.

    "If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.

  • MJ. Smith
    MJ. Smith MVP Posts: 54,763

    This was a summer intern project IIRC. It took us years to get definitions. Did you know that in Buddhist studies, students using Chinese as their primary language are concerned with the sources and their credentials while students using Sanskrit as their primary language are used to a person writing for 900 years i.e. the person credited with a text may be counterfactual. [Personal observation not a formal study.] Why mention this? At this point isn't the relevant question whether or not a user finds them accurate and useful?

    Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."

  • DMB
    DMB Member Posts: 14,190 ✭✭✭✭
    edited March 13

    Nope … not given there's multiple methods (something you've discussed). And users making the trusting assumption it's either staff (as above) or a google-able source one can look to.

    Why I've never bothered with it.

    "If myth is ideology in narrative form, then scholarship is myth with footnotes." B. Lincolm 1999.

  • Antony Brennan
    Antony Brennan Member Posts: 835 ✭✭✭

    For me, it is useful to have different ways to consider and reflect on the text, and this is one of them.

    👁️ 👁️

  • Renold Burke
    Renold Burke Member Posts: 102 ✭✭

    Hey, @Bradley Grainger (Logos)

    Thanks for jumping into this chat with a cool, chill vibe—I really appreciate you looking out for the Logos community! I’m Renold, and I’ve poured over $12,000 into Logos stuff over the years, so I’m pretty into it. I totally get why you’re worried about (other)AI stuff messing things up, and I respect the forum rules. Going forward, I’ll make sure to tag any AI help I use with something like “This is AI-generated and may be inaccurate” to keep things clear.

    That said, I wanna share a friendly take. Using AI, like Grok, ChatGPT…, has been a total lifesaver for me—it cuts down on time and effort, especially when I’m digging into tricky stuff like the Tooman Literary Genre Coding that David J. Sugg brought up. Logos’ own AI is awesome inside the platform, but searching the wider Logos web feels like “ looking for a needle in a haystack"—super frustrating! Waiting on the Logos helpdesk or customer service hasn’t always been spot-on or quick, so AI’s been my go-to. I think it’s a great tool, but yeah, you’re right that checking if it’s accurate is on all of us, and I’ll keep that in mind.

    I did feel a bit called out on the forum, though, and I was a little bummed since I’m trying my best to learn and contribute. I totally get the “muddy waters” thing, though, and I’m actually kinda glad it’s stirring the pot! Maybe it’ll get a Logos pro to jump in and tackle those unanswered bits, like David J. SuggAug 26, 2011 mentioned. I’m cool with the rules and wanna contribute in a good way, and I’m super thankful for your pointers.

    Thanks for keeping this community awesome, Bradley. Let’s keep talking—I’m here to learn and grow with everyone!

    Cheers, Renold Burke
    (Assisted by an AI agent)

    Titles impress people, obedience impresses God.

  • Bradley Grainger (Logos)
    Bradley Grainger (Logos) Administrator, Logos Employee Posts: 12,061

    it cuts down on time and effort

    But it increases time and effort for the other participants in this thread who now have to wade through AI-generated slop.

    checking if it’s accurate is on all of us

    No, it's on you. Please don't post AI-generated replies when you don't know if they're accurate or not. If in doubt, don't send it.