Were Strong's Numbers Re-assigned to Interlinears in Logos 4?

In the NASB 95 in Logos 3, the word "tabernacle" in Ps 27:5 was assigned to Hebrew Strong's number 5520 (sok). The ESV translated it "shelter" and assigned 5521 (sukkah). In Logos 4, the NASB now follows the ESV and gives it 5521 and not 5520. I realize these are related words, but why was it different before? The strange thing is that, in Logos 4, if I search the NASB for <H5520> it gives me four occurrences in four verses, one of which is Ps 27:5. So, in the NASB interlinear it says "H5521" even though a search suggests that the Strong's number is "H5520". The following search in the NASB gives the same four verses: <H5520> ANDEQUALS <H5521>, suggesting that Logos has assigned both of these numbers to "tabernacle" in Ps 27:5 (and other verses), but only 5521 appears in the interlinear text. I'm not so concerned about which one is "right" because I realize that 55521 is derrived from 5520 and that they may as well be considered the same "lemma"--but I'm confused about the mixed search results in Logos and I'm trying to figure out how Strong's numbers have changed from Logos 3 to Logos 4.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Bobby Terhune

The folks who produced the NASB dictionary of Greek & Hebrew words created their own numbering system that closely followed Strong's, but was still different (they added more distinctions than Strong's did). Strong's was produced in 1890 and needed improvement, but everyone was so used to the Strong's numbering system, so Lockman's system confuses users who expect to click on a number in the NASB in Libronix 3 and pull up lexicons keyed to Strong's. The Lockman's system only works with their dictionary, The "New American Standard Hebrew-Aramaic and Greek Dictionaries".

I believe in Logos 4, Logos "remapped" Lockman's numbering system to make it pull up the right Greek or Hebrew lemma in Strong's encoded lexicons. Which, by the way I'm very thankful for.

Travis Arnold

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/139598#Comment_139598

Me too! But I wonder why Logos assigned certain Strong's numbers to
certain words in the NASB in Logos 3 then changed it in Logos 4. And I
wonder why some words have two Strong's numbers assigned to them when
only one of those appears in the interlinear.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/139602#Comment_139602

Me too! But I wonder why Logos assigned certain Strong's numbers to
certain words in the NASB in Logos 3 then changed it in Logos 4.

They were NAS assignments that Logos rationalised in L4. See my comment in http://community.logos.com/forums/p/5010/129568.aspx

And I
wonder why some words have two Strong's numbers assigned to them when
only one of those appears in the interlinear.

Two numbers in NAS in L3 vs. one in NAS in L4? Can you provide an example?

Travis Arnold

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/139609#Comment_139609

I figured that Logos improved them and made them more congruent with the ESV interlinears. (I haven't read your comment yet but am about to). By two numbers, this is what I mean: In L4, in the NAS, Ps 27:5 has H5521 assigned to "tabernacle" and no other numbers appear. But searching the NAS for H5520 will confirm that "tabernacle" in Ps 27:5 corresponds to H5520. The following search will prove that the NAS recognizes both numbers as the source of "tabernacle" in Ps 27:5 (and other verses): <H5521> ANDEQUALS <H5520>. However, the interlinear NAS only shows H5521 and not H5520. Is the existence of H5520 in the NAS just a ghost of L3? (I hope that makes sense.)

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/139616#Comment_139616

However, the interlinear NAS only shows H5521 and not H5520. Is the existence of H5520 in the NAS just a ghost of L3? (I hope that makes sense.)

Yes! There are problems with Strong's in the NAS that have been notified to Logos e.g. Results_are_doubled_for_Strong%27s_search_in_NASB95 (try <H5521>)
This is slightly different so I'll make separate mention of it.

Bobby Terhune

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/139616#Comment_139616

Travis,

They were not Strong's numbers that were assigned to the NASB in Libronix 3, they were the numbers the Lockman Foundation assigned to them to correspond to their Hebrew & Greek dictionary they produced to replace the Strong's Exhaustive Dictionary for their translation.

All Logos did in Logos 4 was to remap the (few) numbers that were different in the Lockman's NASB95, to correctly link to the lexicons. Bob has stated that Logos is moving away from the Strong's system since it really is a symbol (Strong's Number) representing the underlying Greek or Hebrew Lemma. With the reverse interlinear it is not as needful as it once was.

Travis Arnold

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/139627#Comment_139627

Yes that has always bugged me!

Travis Arnold

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/139630#Comment_139630

Thanks Bobby!

I never realized that the NASB in L3 was not originally linked to Strong's numbers. That probably explains many of the problems one encounters when searching the NASB for Strong's numbers.

Although, I still see value in Strong's numbers, some of the reasons for which I've described here: http://community.logos.com/forums/p/8452/139601.aspx#139601