LN numbers prioritized over Strongs?

One workaround for the NA28 is that in the information window, I have prioritised DBL so that it provides me with several launch points, including Strong's number. I have prioritised my resources so that I can also access Strong's lexicon when I click on this. I suspect that this may introduce a lot of friction into your workflow, but in my use case, I refer to it occasionally for historical purposes.

Hi @Donovan R. Palmer,

Thank you for the detailed information and screenshots. I appreciate it. Would you mind clarifying how you prioritized the Strongs numbers in the Information column? When I open the Info column, I was able to move the word info section, but it is still just showing LN numbers.

Another option is to run another resource in the same pane, which gives the strongs number. Again, possibly more friction depending on your workflow.

This reminds me that I sometimes have issues finding things in my Library. I checked the UBS (which everyone here agrees doesn't have Strongs), so then I tried to open the Lexham Greek, but in my Library I could only find the Lexham LXX. I finally went to the Logos store and checked for the Lexham Greek NT and it said I own it. Should I be able to find it searching "Lexham"? Or what should I type in for it to show up in my Library? I think once I find it I will try to create a collection of all my Greek texts so I stop losing them.

Anyway, if all else fails, I can keep the ESV next to me, as it has Strongs. I just always felt safer clicking on the Greek word to find the key as opposed to the English, as I would get nervous if something is mistagged. I would feel better with another Greek text as I can see for myself if the words match, but I kind of think no Greek text here has Strongs.

@Kristin I don't know if this is causing you more trouble than good, but I love your questions and your approach to original language studies. It forces me to pull out the software and explore other ways to achieve original language tasks. Thanks for being part of the community.

Thank you for saying this, and I appreciate being part of the community too! :) I admit that there are certain things about Logos which are very frustrating, but at the same time the more I use it, the better it is, as I learn certain ways to customize it. (Like pinning the Greek and Hebrew to the left as opposed to saving them as Layouts. That might seem minor, but it has been really helpful.

Thank you for the tip, @NichtnurBibelleser. :) I think that might be somewhat separate from what I am trying to do, but I appreciate it.

I don't work with Strongs very much, but I know that it is the basis of your research.

• and -

There's really no reason to tie Strong's to the NA28 as Strong's is keyed to the English. (It is also rather dated and has been surpassed significantly by newer resources so I don't see a reason to spend $$ to update it.)

• and -

If updates are needed, LN would be a great place to start. However, I much prefer semantic domains.

Hi @Donovan R. Palmer, @Doc B and @Garrell Calton,

I would just like to take a minute and explain, as I think everyone is sort of wondering why I am using Strongs. As a preface, I would say that I like the LN lexicon, and I also am aware of problems with Strongs. However, while Strongs does have his issues, he seems to truly do his best to use ONE number for ONE lemma, which is what I appreciate. So in my research I follow Strongs simply to keep things organized. (It is far easier to organize words by numbers than Hebrew and Greek words), and then I just make various modifications when there is an obvious issue with Strongs. Issues or not, it works.

By contrast, LN numbers (from my perspective!) are totally unusable because the use MORE THAN ONE number to represent ONE lemma. And for my purposes, that would create chaos. So while Strongs does have his issues, and I get that the text is archaic, it is still FAR better than LN numbers because Strongs uses a 1 to 1 number for lemmas. I would like to say again I really do like the LN lexicon, I just can't deal with their numbering system.

Are you referring to the lexham syntactic greek new testament?

Hi @Graham Criddle, apparently. :) Thank you, and I will create a collection of the Greek texts. Tbh, I had seen this and thought is was some sort of syntax grammar guide.

If you are using an inline search, then it's always searching the "leading" text. Right clicking in the text of the right is just showing you pieces of data (like lemma, sense, etc) that are attached to that text. Carrying out the inline search will then search that piece of data in the "leading" text.

Oh, ok. That is very helpful to know, and it makes sense. I will for sure keep that in mind! Just as a test, with the ESV on the left I right clicked on κύριος and clicked the word κύριος again to search it, as opposed to Inline, and that did bring 716 hits.

While that does make sense about the Inline searching the leading text, I am kind of confused that it was bringing up 713 hits, as the the only way it seems to have got that number is from Strongs? I guess with everything with this thread, I would have expected it to pull 552 hits following LN. I don't care which it pulls, as they are both inaccurate, but it was surprising.

The problem is that there are some places in the English translation that don't have a mapping from the English to the Greek lemma because the translators didn't choose a translation that was amenable to a mapping.

Ya, for sure. That is why I ALWAYS click on the Greek text and I never click to find the lemma from an English version, as I don't trust the English lemma results.

Due to issues like this, if you care about word counts or word order you should always be searching an original language Bible and not a modern translation.

I care a lot about word counts, and after this, I will for sure make sure the original text is leading if I want to search for the word.

What I am used to is that there is a difference if I click on the lemma from the original text, or if I click on it from the English, but I will remember that I not only need to click on the original text, but do so ONLY if the text is on the left.

The practical concern I have here is that sometimes I am reading in a random version, and then I am curious about something, so I will open up the original language as a parallel to check something, right click and look that up, but now apparently if I am reading in an English version and want to check something in the original language, I need to actively open an entire new tab with the original on the left to do so. That seems kind of convoluted though.

No, it's simply that there are 713 words in the ESV (which is what I think you were using) that have been tagged with the word κύριος

It is nothing to do with Strong's number - but to do with how lemma tags were applied when the reverse interlinear was created.

Hi @Graham Criddle,

Ok, that makes sense that the number is somewhat of a coincidence that it is matching Strongs, and not since it is following Strongs. Thanks for clarifying!

You can still do this. Just don't do it as an inline search. If the general search tool opens up, your search is no longer limited by the leading book.

Hi @Aaron Hamilton,

Ok, great. :) That for sure is good to know that the issue is located to the Inline search, and I can understand why it would be if the inline search is attached to the leading text.

@Kristin I'm still not understanding why you're not just using the Lexham NT w/interlinear (with Strongs). It's NA27 but very close to NA28 (link it). Or misunderstanding.

Hi @DMB,

Thank you for the screenshot, and you raise an interesting point. I suppose the reason is just that I am not familiar with it. If I am understanding correctly, the Lexham NT actually IS the NA27, and not just close to it, but is the NA27 text, and the "lexham" part of it is the tagging. Is this correct?

If so, that might be the easiest solution, it would really just depend on how close the NA27 and NA28 is. I think it might be a good idea for me to try to track down a list of specific changes. Just doing a preliminary search seemed to indicate that some of the changes were significant, but I will look into this. Thank you for the idea.

Yes … the product title is NA 27 (with Lexham) and copyright GBS (I think).

I wasn't recommending to use NA27 (sorry). Just set it beside your NA28 (maybe a narrow panel, linked). Then just glance over to it, for your Strongs number, as you procede thru NA28. NA28 had limited changes.

Hi @DMB,

Thanks for clarifying. I read a few articles and I agree the changes were minor, (so I considered just making a note or something in all the places), but it was making me too nervous. I like your idea of it in a small pane like your screenshot. How did you get the numbers to be under the words?

Hi @DMB,

I'm still missing something. Even if I turn everything on, I don't see the numbers. Here is a screenshot.