Controlling Lemma Search Resources

Y'all:

When I right click on a word in the interlinear and select the lemma or mss, I get a list of resources in which I can search for the lemma or word. I want to be able to change the resources available in that list; specifically, I'd like to be able to add a collection to search in here.

Is there any way to do this?

Russ

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Fred Chapman

Y'all:

When I right click on a word in the interlinear and select the lemma or mss, I get a list of resources in which I can search for the lemma or word. I want to be able to change the resources available in that list; specifically, I'd like to be able to add a collection to search in here.

Is there any way to do this?

Russ

Yes. The list your are seeing is determined by your prioritized resources. If you have none it is based on L4's default settings. Review the information on this link to understand the benefits of prioritizing and how to do it.

http://wiki.logos.com/Library

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146151#Comment_146151

Thanks--but it looks like the categories are broken. If I select the lemma, it only allows me to list lexicons here, and what I really want to list is a resource like Mounce's expository, or Vine's expository... Some of these will show up under the strong's tab, but not the lemma tab. It seems like --contrary to what Logos themselves say on the matter of lexicons-- the only resources you can use here are lexicons.

:-)

Russ

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146162#Comment_146162

but it looks like the categories are broken. If I select the lemma, it only allows me to list lexicons here

Not broken - if you select a lemma you can only select from other resources that are indexed by lemma; if you select a passage reference you can only select from other resources that are indexed by reference. You need to use a search when there is not a match in index types.

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146168#Comment_146168

From this, it looks like there is no way to get Mounce and Vine's in there--they don't fit into any of the categories shown on the wiki entry. Perhaps it's time to ask for a feature in this space.

:-)

Russ

Fred Chapman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146174#Comment_146174

Mounce is one of my prioritized resources and it shows up in my look-up screen. Can you post a screen shot of your prioritized resources and the look up screen?

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146182#Comment_146182

See Below...

Another interesting thing --when I try to create a new guide that will let me search these resources specifically, I run into limitations that don't make any sense to me. I can create a copy of the word study guide and modify it, but there's no way to include a search through these specific resources in the copy of the guide --the sections just don't exist. I can use a standard guide, but then I don't get the option to include the sections from the word study guide I want to include, such as the word wheels.

It really looks like these expository dictionaries are rather limited in their use inside Logos... There are few places you can include them in any sort of grouping or guide, and you generally must select the word, and then do a specific search within the dictionary to get any results from them. It's really not making any sense to me as to why these specific resources are so restricted in their use (?).

:-)

Russ

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146189#Comment_146189

I run into limitations that don't make any sense to me

The Passage and Exegetical Guides run off a Bible Passage; the Bible Word Study runs off a word or lemma. So it makes sense that their sections are not interchangeable. However, it sounds as if you would like to add some sections to the Bible Word Study - searches of specified collections. That is a very good suggestion and should be submitted through the Suggestions and the user voice site. I would expect it to get solid support once the missing features are completed.

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146174#Comment_146174

From this, it looks like there is no way to get Mounce and Vine's in ther

Russ,

I don't have Mounce but you can get Vine's to work. I tried both versions I have. Drag Vines to your prioritized resources list in Library and make it the first of the dictionaries you have listed.

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146192#Comment_146192

But if the expository dictionaries are indexed on the words, shouldn't they be able to be included in the word study? If I try to, however, by limiting the "definition" tab to just that collection, I get no results when searching on the word through the word study section --even if I'm selecting word study from the English gloss, rather than the lemma. When I open the section in the word study to my entire collection, no results show up from any of the expository dictionaries.It looks like the "definition" tab is restricted to dictionaries, and the expository dictionaries don't seem to be tagged as dictionaries at all.

It seems like a tagging issue, to me... Although I would like to have another couple of sections in the word study, not being able to include the expository dictionaries in the word search seems like a pretty blatant omission. After looking through the ones I already had, and adding a couple of more, this seems like the first place you'd want to look among your resources when studying a word --but Logos hasn't really tagged them so you can look in them through just about any part of the interface. I see some in my "strongs" search on a word in the interlinear, but even there not all of them area available --and it looks like the tags on the ones that are missing just don't allow them to show up there. The Mounce, specifically, is missing from that list.

It just seems odd to me.

:-)

Russ

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146195#Comment_146195

To annotate Mark's helpful screenshot...

The right side of the the right click menu is important. If you want to go to your prioritized dictionaries you must select Lemma. If selection is selected then you will only see English dictionaries (in the case of an English RI).

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146199#Comment_146199

Okay--I've simply removed all the other dictionaries from my priorities, and then restarted Logos to make certain things are "clean." This is what I have:

You'll notice that under the selection, none of the expository dictionaries show up at all. They also don't show up under the lemmas, and only two of the three I have are showing up under the strong's. This implies that the expository dictionaries are tagged by strong's numbers, not by the words --I don't understand why this would be, actually. And I don't understand why Mounce doesn't show up under the strong's section at all.

:-)

Russ

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146202#Comment_146202

Mark and Kevin:

Could you try with different words? Trying different words, I get different resources available in the right click menu under lemma. That is really odd... For instance:

I now see that I get different options based on the specific word I choose. For "the," Vine's shows up first, for "God," Mounce and TWOT show up, but not Vines, and for "create," see the screen shots from before. I wonder if my indexes are just messed up?

:-)

Russ

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146210#Comment_146210

I played around with it for a little bit and it's working as expected (based on my priority list). I don't use Vines and I don't have Mounce so I can't check those out for you. However, when you right click on a word, select lemma etc Logos runs a search and only displays the books that have that option. Double check to see if there is an article for the words you think are missing. If the book has one and the right click doesn't catch it perhaps you should rebuild indexes.... However, I think it unlikely that would be the problem, usually a bad index results in crashes.

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146213#Comment_146213

Okay--but that doesn't explain it... If I right click, and then select "strongs," I get TWOT, for instance, on the word "created." I click there, and I get the article. If I right click and select lemma on "create," the TWOT doesn't show up under the lemma, which seems to indicate that its only indexed on the strong's numbers. But then if I click on some other word, right click, and... TWOT shows up under the lemma, but not under strong's. Apparently something someplace is messed up.

:-)

Russ

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146215#Comment_146215

Okay, I just forced it to reindex, and things are still the same, so that's not it. There must be a tagging problem in some of these resources that they show up in different places at different times. I'll open a case with Logos.

:-)

Russ

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146260#Comment_146260

Rang up tech support... They can replicate it in house --it's most likely a problem with the three resources involved. They tossed it over to the resource team to look at, and they might be posting some stuff here.

:-)

Russ

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146204#Comment_146204

Hi Russ,

The problem you are having is not one of tagging nor indexing - it is simply an issue of the resource and Prioritizing. NB. I don't have Mounce.

Okay--I've simply removed all the other dictionaries from my priorities, and then restarted Logos to make certain things are "clean." This is what I have:

1. Selection created - Vine's doesn't contain this word so that list of dictionaries is to be expected. Same must apply to Mounce.

2. & 3. Lemma Hebrew homonym ברא:1 - Don't expect Vine's to be tagged for homonyms! Get there by selecting the Hebrew Strong's number (where you have Prioritized it second after TWOT). Mounce doesn't appear to be tagged for Strong's numbers as it is not listed.

This implies that the expository dictionaries are tagged by strong's numbers, not by the words --I don't understand why this would be, actually. And I don't understand why Mounce doesn't show up under the strong's section at all.

To see the tagging for Mounce open the resource, select Resource Information (the i icon) & scroll down to Indexes, as below:-

Post an image for Mounce.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146199#Comment_146199

But if the expository dictionaries are indexed on the words, shouldn't they be able to be included in the word study? If I try to, however, by limiting the "definition" tab to just that collection, I get no results when searching on the word through the word study section --even if I'm selecting word study from the English gloss, rather than the lemma.

Again this depends on the word being in the dictionary! There may be no entry for "created" but Vine's has one for "create" against which there is an exposition of the Hebrew lemma בָּרָא. If you enter that lemma manually Word Study (BWS) will show you a choice of homonyms so this will preclude Vine's from being listed! Note that TWOT is also not listed. Choose a (Hebrew/Greek) word without homonyms and there is a good chance that Vine's will have it. It cannot compete with lexicons like DBL, BDB, HALOT & BAGD.

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146291#Comment_146291

"1. Selection created - Vine's doesn't contain this word
so that list of dictionaries is to be expected. Same must apply to
Mounce."

Then why, when I go through the Strong's, does the word show up in Vines? Look at:

http://www.riw.us/temp/vines.jpg
(too big to post here)

There is clearly a lemma (headword) in Vine's for this specific entry, which leaves only two possibilities:

1. The cross reference is through the English word, and "create" doesn't match "created." This doesn't make sense to me at all. If the cross reference is through the English gloss, this leaves me with all sorts of problems. What's the point of the Hebrew headwords if they aren't used for cross indexing? And why should there be listings under the lemma's at all, rather than the gloss, if there's no real cross references at the lemma level? In fact, why does the resource say its indexed on Hebrew headwords if it's not, really, indexed on Hebrew headwords at all? If it's only an English cross reference, then why does it matter if the Hebrew headwords are listed in the indexes as you show above, and as for Mounce, below?

2. The tags are not complete in this instance.

Now, for some other oddities... When I move to the word before this one in the English --God-- Vine's shows this in the lemma as a cross reference, but not in the Strong's. Are you saying that Logos will prefer to put the cross reference in the lemma section rather than the Strong's, if such a reference exists, but will put it in the Strong's if no lemma cross reference exists (based on the English, rather than the actual Hebrew lemma, as above)? That doesn't make any sense to me. If I've chosen to prefer Vine's, for instance, it should show up in every pane of this menu where the cross reference exists, not just in one of the three.

Mounce does have the Hebrew headwords --it shows up on some words, and not on others. Again, it sometimes shows up in the lemma pane, sometimes in the Strong's pane, and sometimes not at all. In every case I've back checked, and the Hebrew headwords exist for the word I'm looking at in the reverse interlinear.

Hebrew headwords are listed here.

For the final oddity --I went through and did a standard search through Mounce, Vine's, and TWOT for "created." All three hit the entry for "create," along with others where the word "created" and "create" both are used. The entry for "create," however, was highlighted, which probably means something, though I don't know what (?). The only way for the definition search not to work in the word study guide is if it is:

1. Only searching the English headword index.

2. It is not not taking the root of the word you're searching for.

Since the standard search does, in fact, look for the root, and not just the entire word, I'm not certain why a search within the index alone wouldn't do the same thing. Do you know of any reason why a standard search would pick up instances of "create" when you look for "created," but an index search wouldn't?

:-)

Russ

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146304#Comment_146304

"1. Selection created - Vine's doesn't contain this word
so that list of dictionaries is to be expected. Same must apply to
Mounce."

Then why, when I go through the Strong's, does the word show up in Vines? Look at:

http://www.riw.us/temp/vines.jpg
(too big to post here)

There is clearly a lemma (headword) in Vine's for this specific entry, which leaves only two possibilities:

The available index entries for the article "To Create" are shown below (click in the text box):-

Vine's has an Index for English headwords but "created" is not one of them! You must select the word "create" to access this entry.

Vine's has an Index for Hebrew Strong's Number so you can see why the article will be found with the Strong's number.

Vine's has an Index for Hebrew headwords (lemmas) but it does not have entries for homonyms ie. multiple meanings, unlike the lexicons I quoted above. "Heavens" שׁמַיִם in Gen 1:1 has no homonym and is found in Vine's via the right-click menu on the lemma, the Strong's number and the Selection or gloss, utilising the respective Index. You can affect a "cross-reference" by choosing one of the three available methods to access Vine's. But don't expect heaven to be a cross-reference for "heavens" when it is not listed in that entry. If you select "heaven" in Gen 1:8 you will see that it is a cross-reference for "Air" as that is the article it is linked with in Vine's! The article explains the relevance but it serves to illustrate why Vine's is an expository dictionary AND that it is best to use Strong's or the lemma to get to the appropriate entry.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146304#Comment_146304

Now, for some other oddities... When I move to the word before this one in the English --God-- Vine's shows this in the lemma as a cross reference, but not in the Strong's. Are you saying that Logos will prefer to put the cross reference in the lemma section rather than the Strong's, if such a reference exists, but will put it in the Strong's if no lemma cross reference exists (based on the English, rather than the actual Hebrew lemma, as above)? That doesn't make any sense to me. If I've chosen to prefer Vine's, for instance, it should show up in every pane of this menu where the cross reference exists, not just in one of the three.

It's not a matter of what Logos prefer. Vine's does not have an entry for H430 or chooses NOT to discuss "God" with this Strong's number - it uses H410, H426 and H433 instead (H430 is the plural of H433 according to Strong's Lexicon). Nor does Vine's have an entry for the lemma (what did you mean?).

In this case you will only access Vine's via the English headword "God". When you Prioritize a resource it simply means that it will be preferred to other resources IF it has an entry for the word (or associated data type) that you have selected.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146304#Comment_146304

For the final oddity --I went through and did a standard search through Mounce, Vine's, and TWOT for "created." All three hit the entry for "create," along with others where the word "created" and "create" both are used. The entry for "create," however, was highlighted, which probably means something, though I don't know what (?). The only way for the definition search not to work in the word study guide is if it is:

1. Only searching the English headword index.

2. It is not not taking the root of the word you're searching for.

Please don't confuse a standard word search with an headword look-up/search. Headwords may be in the text but the results of a Basic Search will not readily distinguish headwords from other words. One could reasonably conclude that an article heading/title contains headwords but you have to click in the text entry box (as per my image in a previous post) to see the headwords.

BWS does a headword look-up. It will not find "created" unless it is exists as a headword. If you manually enter "created" it will suggest "create"!

Since the standard search does, in fact, look for the root, and not just the entire word, I'm not certain why a search within the index alone wouldn't do the same thing. Do you know of any reason why a standard search would pick up instances of "create" when you look for "created," but an index search wouldn't?

A Basic Search will find "create" if you allow it to match all word forms in the Options menu:-

Untick the option for an exact word search.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146304#Comment_146304

Mounce does have the Hebrew headwords --it shows up on some words, and not on others. Again, it sometimes shows up in the lemma pane, sometimes in the Strong's pane, and sometimes not at all. In every case I've back checked, and the Hebrew headwords exist for the word I'm looking at in the reverse interlinear.

Unless you truncated the list in the image Mounce is not indexed by Strong's number?

Hopefully you "back checked" correctly (eg. in the list of headwords for the article) but otherwise Mounce has the same limitations as Vine's. Neither book is a lexicon of all Greek & Hebrew words, but I note that Mounce is promoted as "more accurate,
more thorough dictionary of Bible words" than Vine's!

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146324#Comment_146324

[quote]Vine's has an Index for English headwords but "created" is not
one of them! You must select the word "create" to access this entry.

Vine's has an Index for Hebrew Strong's Number so you can see
why the article will be found with the Strong's number.

Vine's has an Index for Hebrew headwords (lemmas) but it does
not have entries for homonyms

If the tags are created manually, then why aren't the homonyms disambiguated? This makes no sense. The homonyms are disambiguated within the ESV itself, and within other resources, but not Vine's --this makes the Vine's resource useless for the type of work specifically shown in the new Hebrew videos Logos just released.

[quote]Please don't confuse a standard word search with an headword
look-up/search. Headwords may be in the text but the results of a Basic
Search will not readily distinguish headwords from other words. One
could reasonably conclude that an article heading/title contains
headwords but you have to click in the text entry box (as per my image
in a previous post) to see the headwords.

This doesn't answer the question --in the standard search, all forms of the word are found. "Create" and "creates" are found when "created" is entered.

What you're saying is that the headword search is different, it will only find "create" if "create" is a perfect match. Can you explain why this would be? Given there are two different options, then why aren't those options exposed in the dictionary results of the word study guide?

[quote]Hopefully you "back checked" correctly (eg. in the list of headwords for
the article) but otherwise Mounce has the same limitations as Vine's.
Neither book is a lexicon of all Greek & Hebrew words, but I note
that Mounce is promoted as "more accurate,
more thorough dictionary of Bible words" than Vine's!

The screen shot above is from Mounce --note there is an entry for "bara," which is listed under "create." So it must be that it's not being caught in the lemma search because it's a homonym. In which case, as I suspected, the resources aren't tagged
correctly --more specifically, the tags should disambiguate homonyms.

:-)

Russ

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146386#Comment_146386

[quote]Please don't confuse a standard word search with an headword
look-up/search. Headwords may be in the text but the results of a Basic
Search will not readily distinguish headwords from other words. One
could reasonably conclude that an article heading/title contains
headwords but you have to click in the text entry box (as per my image
in a previous post) to see the headwords.

This doesn't answer the question --in the standard search, all forms of the word are found. "Create" and "creates" are found when "created" is entered.

I showed that that happens because the option "Match all word forms" is selected and that deselecting it causes an exact word match.

What you're saying is that the headword search is different, it will only find "create" if "create" is a perfect match. Can you explain why this would be? Given there are two different options, then why aren't those options exposed in the dictionary results of the word study guide?

Headword "search" is vastly different to a standard Search! The basic reason there is no option to "Match all word forms" is to make a headword lookup as relevant as possible. For example do you prefer an article on "Anoint" to one on "Anointed One" because Tyndale has both (verb versus noun). "Heavens" is not a simple plural of "heaven" and Vine's has articles on both + "heavenly" & "heavenlies". Therefore if Mounce and Vine's do not have an article on "created" then use another resource from the list in the context menu. If you want a lookup for "create" use BWS manually. However, I have an issue with Logos because BWS suggestions are limited to a subset of "bible" words but Logos consider this "by design" - see the discussion at http://community.logos.com/forums/p/17904/136971.aspx

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146386#Comment_146386

If the tags are created manually, then why aren't the homonyms disambiguated? This makes no sense. The homonyms are disambiguated within the ESV itself, and within other resources, but not Vine's

If I understand you correctly every homonym in the source (ESV) should be matched to a definition in Vine's & Mounce. But why? They aren't designed as lexicons. However, I would like a homonym source word to match an available definition in the destination, although it probably doesn't make much sense to match the noun "well" with the adjective "well"[:)] There is more to Hebrew word matching without homonyms but I'm not a Hebrew scholar!

Russ White

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/146427#Comment_146427

[quote]If I understand you correctly every homonym in the source (ESV) should
be matched to a definition in Vine's & Mounce. But why? They aren't
designed as lexicons.

Every lemma should match the correct definition, whether they are homonyms or not... Why? Because otherwise they're not useful from the reverse interlinear, but only as a standalone resource. What's the use of a resource you can't use directly from the text itself? If the DBD contains such matches, and the actual interlinear contains such matches, I don't know why the expositional dictionaries wouldn't contain such matches.

Why would I want this? Because when I'm doing a word study, I'm interested in more than the number of times a given lemma has been translated using a specific English gloss. In fact, I don't even need the lexicon for that information, I can get that from a search within Logos itself (the tags are, essentially, a lexicon of sorts). What I want is deeper information on the word than the English gloss various translators have used for that word --the entomological background, the reasoning behind specific translations, and other information are much more useful than a list of glosses and the number of times each gloss has been used. The main thing the lexicon gets you that's useful is the form of the word --tense, voice, etc-- but all of that is built into the reverse interlinear inline, so I don't need that specific information.

Now that I've watched the first couple of hours of Dr. Heiser's videos, I understand why he wrote about lexicons --it's not because the idea isn't useful, it's that you can get the same information in Logos without referring to the lexicon itself. This lets you concentrate on meaning through word pair studies, frequency in literature, word background (what the expositional dictionary gives you), and other sources of information.

:-)

Russ