Hebrew textual criticism question

Ah, yes, @Kristin. I'm looking at the The Lexham Hebrew-English Interlinear Bible and it shows the קְרֵי.

Hi @Lew Worthington,

Thank you for the screenshots. Ya, I have the Lexham Hebrew, and I see that now. Thank you! So if I am understanding correctly, no text in Logos displays the words in the text like Accordance. However, the Lexham will show you the words in the text if I hover over  ק, while the BHS doesn't show it in the text at all. Is that correct? Apart from the Lexham being tagged better, are there other differences between Lexham and BHS/W? Or are they otherwise the same text?

Likewise, I am super confused about "BHW" vs "BHS". I had the BHW open in my screenshot, yet the * spoke of the BHS.

Just curious … on your Accordance side, I assume you're looking at the BHS apparatus (the BHS-T module). In Logos the BHS apparatus is attached to BHS; not BHW. And the BHW has an interlinear for Q/Ks. Am I misunderstanding?

Hi @DMB,

I don't think I am. To be honest, in Accordance I just used my "Hebrew" without thinking much of it. Textual issues were just sitting there in the text, and it just wasn't something I thought about. Then when Logos didn't have that specific text, it has made me uneasy since I don't understand the differences between them. Anyway, in Accordance my screenshot was from the HMT-W4, which is the "Masoretic Text with Westminster Hebrew Morphology."

Also, I was surprised by your screenshot, as your BHS has little footnotes going to an apparatus, while you can see that my screenshot doesn't. I guess this is something you can turn off an on? Could you explain how you got that?

Somewhat off-topic relative to offensive language, the Targum uses the qere, below. One of many reasons I love Logos (so many books).

That is interesting about the Aramaic. :)

@Kristin Below, I put Accordance on the left; Logos on the right. Then, for Logos, going down, what is called BHW (what you used), and then BHS, followed by its apparatus. For info/source, I put the boilerplate for each, on the far-right. BHW shows its 'notes' either thru pop-overs or interlinear lines (Q/K), and (I believe) is packaged by Logos (they're slightly behind Accordance on morphs). The BHS and apparatus are from GBS (separately sold in Logos), and that's what you saw in my layout. So … I 'think' you arrived where you needed (ignoring the curious Logos note … there's many like that in the Logos BHW).

Hi @DMB,

Thanks for the screenshot. I see. So it appears that the Lexham has the textual discrepancy as something I can hover over, the BHS has it as the little alphabetical footnotes going to the apparatus, and the BHW has none of it. So of all the Hebrew options, I should stay away from the BHW. Is that right? (I have all three Hebrew texts, I just literally don't know what to use. In Accordance I am pretty sure I just had that one, but I would have to check).

I'm sorry. AFAIK, I've never been within an arm's reach of Accordance 😉 so I can make no comparison. But my BHS also shows text critical stuff as well as qere/ketiv:

Hi @Lew Worthington,

Ya, my BHS also shows the text critical stuff too (thankfully). I guess the moral is to stay away from BHW? Is there a reason to use it?

@Kristin Your screenshots are frequently difficult to follow because you include only a small portion of your screen. Larger screenshots are more helpful. Nonetheless, MJ is correct. You would need to locate Markers via the Visual Filters button.

Hi @Aaron Hamilton,

Thank you for letting me know, and I will try to provide better screenshots in the future. :) I also see the problem, the "speaker" I had turned off was apparently for the "Factbook." I finally went to the three dots of "Visual Filters" next to it and turned it off. :) Ya, if I had shown a larger screenshot, it would have been obvious what I was doing wrong. Thanks again.

Hi @DMB, Thanks for the clear explanation of the three texts. I appreciate it. I guess the concern I have is that sometimes I am seeing textual differences, and sometimes I am not. So for example, I realized that if I opened the BHS, that it had those little footnotes, but then after closing it and reopening it, it seems to be gone. SoI see the numbers in the apparatus, but not in the actual text. I feel like I must have turned something off, but I am not sure what it is.

Hi @Lew Worthington,

I think I do. If I am not mistaken, that is the third thing on the right in my screenshot above. I think.

Since I am finding it confusing, here is a screenshot of my library if I type "bh" in the search box. The three things on the top with the "reading" circles are the three in my screenshot in order.

I don't think any of the "unread" stuff is relevant here, but I will include them in the screenshot just in case it is.

Hi @Lew Worthington, @DMB, and @Aaron Hamilton,

Thank you all for the help and for the screenshots, ya, the footnotes were turned off, so I turned them on, and now they appear. :) I found it under the Visual Filter, but also, there is this little squiggle, but it is unclear what it is. It seems to just flip the version? Without it being a parallel? What is the point of that?

Also, I think I have the textual issues in the text now, I think. So they show up under the text between the lines? Compared to my text in Accordance, they don't seem to be the same though.

I am attaching a screenshot where the textual issues are indicated with arrows. The pink arrow agrees with Accordance, but the blue arrows don't. I literally can't tell if it really is saying something different, or it is just because I am so unfamiliar with how Logos handles "bracketed" words.

I can address #1 and #2, but I'm less tuned into the details of what you want for #3 and #4 (Hebrew Bible expert, not software designer). If my answer seems too introductory, I apologize since I don't know how much background you have in Biblical Hebrew or OT textual criticism.

Hi @Doug Mangum (Lexham),

Thank you for your response, and no, it isn't too introductory at all. I consider myself a translator who cares deeply about textual accuracy, but I am not a textual critic. (I was taught the basics of it in seminary). So in the NT when there are issues I look at Comfort and Metzger, and I trust and follow their scholarship. I do check the CNTTS, but I defer to the work of textual critics.

In the OT, by contrast, I have really felt at a lost since there isn't a "Metzger" OT equivalent that I am aware of, so I have felt like it is up to me to check the DDS when a random commentary mentions something odd. (Like the Deut 32:6 issue, for example).

By contrast, when a word is in brackets in Accordance, I have sort of handled it as a bracketed word (like a sheer textual discrepancy (for example צֵידָה [צָֽיִד׃] in Gen 27:3). If I am understanding correctly though, this is not a textual issue (like Deut 32:6), but rather just what is written (צֵידָה) vs what is said (צָֽיִד)? If that is so, what on earth would be the point? There isn't a theological reason for making such a change, so it seems like the qere/ketiv is just for the sake of doing it??

 A diplomatic critical edition reproduces the text of L (more or less) and adding apparatus notes to show textual issues.

If I am understanding correctly, the apparatus shows the qere/ketiv but also textual issues all sort of lumped together.

NT text criticism is a different story. They reconstruct texts that never actually existed (because all copies have some mistakes) to make a corrected version. With Hebrew, your apparatus notes usually point out textual variants from other witnesses including reconstructed Hebrew readings, sometimes (like LXX says XYZ which would be ABC in Hebrew). On occasion, the text critic suggests an emendation, a speculative guess usually motivated by serious difficulties in the Hebrew such that even all other witnesses offer little help.

Thank you for saying this, and I think this is the root of my confusion, as I have been trying to make sense of textual issues in the OT just like the NT. Regarding such textual issues, I have been relying on general commentators, but is there a specific resource addressing this?

With the ESV and the Hebrew interlinear display, most words do have Hebrew aligned. And most of those have Strong's numbers. You can also right-click and get the menu where you could select the Hebrew lemma among other options. In your screenshot, I see no Strong's alignment for the conjunction, the definite article, and some prepositions. Strong's doesn't have an entry on those. In other cases, ESV interlinear may show no alignment because English grammar or style requires more words, usually words that are implied by the inflected Hebrew form.

Thank you for clarifying this, and that helps a lot. I turned off the Hebrew under the ESV, and to see the lex and lemma I am able to right click to confirm the Hebrew. Ya, I am aware that Strongs doesn't have keys for certain words. I understand that Strongs had his issues, I don't dispute that, but something I really respect him for is giving a genuine effort to provide one key for one word, without distinguishing between theological beliefs (like one key for κύριος, for example while LN has I think four keys). So for years I have been organizing my personal dictionary according to Greek and Hebrew lemmas as well as Strongs numbers, since it is legions easier to organize numbers than Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic words. So for words like ו and the article in Hebrew, those are only in my dictionary as their lemma without a Strongs key, but a few hundred keyless words is far better than 13,000+ keyless words. As a result of this, it is super important that if I find a lemma in Logos, that I can have assurance that it is matching the correct key.

Using the ESV interlinear, you also have the problem (and perhaps this is what you are raising in #3) where the word order follows the English so the Hebrew text gets all shuffled around.

Yes, you are correct. I can't stand Hebrew written left to right, it is just simply too difficult to read, so as a general rule I don't like interlinears.

Thank you again.

Unfortunately this is an area of some weakness at the moment. You are correct about how you would need to adjust this, with the minor clarification that "layout" means all currently open panels (tabs), so you wouldn't be closing/opening the layout. You would just be closing/opening the panel.

Hi @Andrew Batishko,

Thank you for clarifying this that I am not missing anything. While I wish I could control the settings of all the parallels open, I am grateful to hear that I just need to close that specific text and reopen it, as opposed to closing the entire layout, that is helpful.

You need to go to the panel menu and turn on the "Show locator bar" option. The panel menu is the button in the upper right corner of the panel with the three vertically stacked dots.

Thank you, that fixed the issue. :)

@Kristin for OT textual issues, I don't know of any single resource to wrangle all (or even most) of them. Have you looked at the UBS Handbooks (though they cover translation issues broadly, not textual only)? You've got me thinking, though. Maybe there's a need for an OT textual commentary, Metzger-style. Lexham Textual Notes on the Bible is too brief and selective. It doesn't even cover 2 Kgs 18:27, for example.

Hi @Doug Mangum (Lexham),

Thank you for clarifying this, and yes, I love UBS. :) Once in while they get into something specific with textual issues, but like you mentioned, that isn't really their focus.

If I ever get around to creating an OT-equivalent to Metzger, I'll let you know (it will take a back seat to several other large projects that your fellow forumites are clamoring for).

That would be great. :)

Baylor Handbooks is about as close as it gets for Hebrew (and not a lot to work with). As above, the issue has more to do with the language (as written), then a selection of manuscripts (Metzger).

Hi @DMB, thanks for letting me know. I just looked at the preview of it in Logos, and if I am understanding correctly, this is sort of a grammar style book clarifying why words were used? Like you said, this seems to be pretty distinct from textual criticism, but I appreciate you letting me know.

I know enough Hebrew to be dangerous

haha :)

and this might not be suitable for your research and study purposes, but have you looked at the translation notes in Word Biblical Commentary? I often consult them when I have a Metzger type of question for Hebrew. It is at least a starting point for me as I go out to troll technical commentaries and any journals that refer to the passage of scripture in question.

Hi @Donovan R. Palmer, Thank you very much, and ya, the type of stuff you copied from Word would be helpful. However, I am not seeing this. I have Word, but what it is saying for both Deut 32:1 and Deut 32:6 is useful, but something different from what you wrote. How did you access this in Word?

Also this has left me with a few questions. As a preface though, I would like to say I have been feeling A LOT better about the functionality of Logos. A few days ago @Aaron Hamilton had suggested that I might like to organize favorites and drag them to the left toolbar as a shortcut. That has been HUGE and setting up very specific layouts with floating windows, links of A, B, and C, and "send hyperlinks here" has been extremely helpful. So thank you. :) With that all as a preface, I have a few functional / practical issues.

1. Regarding the "one layout at a time" situation I think right now is a good example. Before reading this post I had been in the middle of setting up a very complicated layout, but it just isn't set up how I need it quite yet. (Since it might be relevant, I am trying to organize the Ugaritic material and don't have a Bible open). So now with what you wrote, Donovan, I wanted to go check Word. Yet I CAN'T without destroying my partial layout in Logos, so I had to look at Word in Accordance. Functionally, what do people do in this type of situation? In Accordance if something interrupts my work, I simply open a new Workspace, address the issue, close the new workspace and go back to my work. So how do I do this here?

2. What is the easiest way to open a specific resource in Logos? While I went to Accordance to check this since I had an active partial layout open in Logos, I also gravitated to Accordance since it was clear what to do. If I want to check Deut 32:1 and Deut 32:6, I go to the verses in the Bible, open the Info Pane, click on Word and there it is. I think the equivalent might be to start with the book instead of the passage? So without a Bible open, go to the Library, open Word, then from there type Deut 32? Or maybe Start with the Bible and then click "All" for the verse and scroll down to commentaries until I find Word? Or what is the best way to mimic the simplicity in Accordance?

3) Last night I was watching a YouTube video about the BHS and its apparatus which was super helpful, and as an example he was discussing Josh 21:27 and 1Chr 6:56 (1Chr 6:71 ESV), so I typed these verses into my Hebrew in Accordance, and there they are. Regarding Logos, I had previously been told it isn't possible to look up more than one verse at a time, and the only work around is to create a "Passage List." But my recollection from doing that before is that it truly just creates a list which is separate from the active Bible tab I had been working with. I am hoping someone can tell me I am misunderstanding something and I in fact can type more than one verse at a time, as this is just basic functionality. Even BibleGateway lets me do this. So while watching the video, I pretty much had to use Accordance since I needed to see two verses at the same time. I will post a screenshot with a book open to show what I am trying to reproduce.

Not sure why what you are seeing is different. Here's my screen shot.

As far as where to put Word Biblical Commentary in your layout so that you can refer to it, if you can post a screenshot of your entire layout, I or other Logosians might be able to offer a suggestion.

I'll take the liberty of pinging @Rick Mansfield (Logos) as he has straddled both worlds forever, but I am 99% sure you can't do this in Logos.

Hi @Donovan R. Palmer, Thank you very much for the screenshot. Well, a wrench in this whole thing is that I apparently don't own Word in Logos. haha :) I seriously have a hard time keeping track of what I own where. Anyway, I will post my screenshot in Accordance, as the fundamental question still remains. In my screenshot I just randomly opened Word next to the Deut passage, but I ONLY see the commentary, not the notes. So then on the right I opened Word on it's own and finally did a word search of a random phrase in what you pasted, and now I found the notes. However, there doesn't seem to be a way that I would have known about these notes, as there are NO footnotes linking to the notes from the Deut passage. Likewise, if on the the notes part if I click on 1a (on that first note), it doesn't link to the passage, but just some extra footnote. On your end, if you are reading Word in Deut, do you have footnotes to the notes? And if so, can you post a screenshot? Likewise, you don't seem to have any way to get to the verse from the notes section either, correct? Ironically, your 1a isn't hyperlinked, and SPENT just leads to a def.

I have pushed for this ability over the years. The only way to isolate a series of scriptures or a range of texts is with a passage list, which creates a lot of friction in a workflow. I've included a screenshot below. It does work, though and I occasionally use it when I just want to zero in on some text.

That's wild something so basic wasn't in Logos version 1, as just though the process of writing a sermon people usually need to compare more than one verse. I agree completely that the Passage List creates a lot of friction, and while I only looked at it briefly, it seemed pretty limited.

I think the in-book search (forgot name) supports multi-refs?

Hi @DMB,

I am grateful to here there is potentially a way to do this.

Hi @NB.Mick,

Could you clarify how you created your layout in your screenshot? I can't find anywhere like that. I found something, but it's closer to a passage list where it is just a list you can't do much with and isn't in the normal bible pane. It is also collecting a bunch of footnotes. :( How do I turn that off? If I click the "match case" thing or not it doesn't matter.

So, I went to play with this and I triggered a memory synapse that I did indeed try this some years ago. The first is that it sometimes picks up more than just the references. Also, I could not figure out how to put in a range, without it also picking up more than it should. Am I still missing something, or have I hit the limit with this functionality? I suspect my hope might be dashed again!

I just need to say I find it really wild that we are literally needing to have a brainstorming discussion about how to see two verses at a time… in a Bible software. :/

So, WBC is a bit of an oddball. I don't know how Accordance shows this in its TOC, but here it is in Logos: … So for the translation notes for 32:1 or verse 32:6, you will need to scroll up to the Notes section. It is not hard to find the notes that you want, but it is not automatically scrolled like Metzger.

Hi @Donovan R. Palmer,

Thank you for your help! Ya, I found them now, thank you! It seriously never occurred to me it had to be read like that. Normally when I open a book, I read the section for the verse, and then I read what comes before and after it to see if there is anything else relevant, but it actually never occurred to me to scroll so far up as to go ABOVE the comments for more "comments." I seriously wonder why Word didn't link the sections? The fact that both Accordance and Logos handles it the same makes me think it is Word as opposed to the software. It seems to me that on Deut 32:6, for example, there should be a little footnote going to the notes, and then at the notes there is a footnote going back to the comments of v.6, like almost any other book. Whatever the case, thank you again for clarifying this!

To be fair, most commentaries begin with a lot of information at the beginning… setting, authorship, etc. which you need to scroll up to read if you want to see the approach that the commentary is taking in the verse by verse comments.

Hi @Donovan R. Palmer,

You raise a really good point. I think that motivates me to read the intro of every major work I typically refer to and make important notes (like this "journal" situation), to make sure I'm not missing anything. I do tend to read the beginning when I buy a book, but I admit I don't always do so, especially if it is a book I have had for a long time (like if I already had a paper copy of it etc).