Preview the Evangelical Exegetical Commentary
I just checked the blog, I could not see anything regarding the EEC.
Same here, no joy yet.
Ted
Yep, I'm keeping my preorder.
There are just a few sentences of preview of Ezra. Extremely disappointing !
Just a few sentences and want us to give funding for their work until 2019 or more ?!
don't you see the NEXT button. There are several pages of preview.
You have to hover your mouse toward the right hand side (near the top of the preview) and you'll see quite a few pages of preview. The formatting reminds me of WBC a bit, and at a glance looks certainly well researched.
Thanks for the preview[Y]. Of course I have pre-ordered from the very first when Logos announced this large scale commentary project. I am looking forward to this series. Kudos Logos. Blessing.
There are just a few sentences of preview of Ezra. Extremely disappointing ! Just a few sentences and want us to give funding for their work until 2019 or more ?!
Yes, a list of translations used and a couple of bibliographical references are supposed to inspire us to want the resource? Sorry, I'm not buying that.
EDIT: I see that there really is more that I had originally thought. Logos is being too cute for their own good. When it is necessary to mouse-over to even know that there is the possibility of moving to another page, this does not encourage the average user to continue. It may be considered "cutting edge" programming technique, but the object of posting the material is not to display one's programming expertise. Keep it simple, stupid.
I just checked the blog, I could not see anything regarding the EEC. I have to post the thread before I can post the blog. This way i can link to the thread from the blog post.
I am sorry, but this is a "horrible" preview. Please post a better preview, this is way to difficult to navigate.
Though the total project will be out by 2019, most of the volumes will be produced much earlier.
You have to hover your mouse toward the right hand side (near the top of the preview) and you'll see quite a few pages of preview.
Correctamundo! Sure, we don't get a whole commentary, and only a NT OT one, but there is quite a bit to go on.
he formatting reminds me of WBC a bit, and at a glance looks certainly well researched.
Exactly what I thought. Especially the font/heading.
Edit: fixed a mistake
I just checked the blog, I could not see anything regarding the EEC. I have to post the thread before I can post the blog. This way i can link to the thread from the blog post. I am sorry, but this is a "horrible" preview. Please post a better preview, this is way to difficult to navigate.
i didn't find it so. btw, you don't have to navigate to "next", just click on the the page and it advances to the next screen shot.
The only thing I would like more is an actual Logos preview: to see links, etc. And I thought that at least some of the volumes were somehow tied to Logos technology--not really sure what that meant, but I thought it had to do with particular features in Logos, and not just links to works within it. Anybody know any more?
The total project will be out by 2008.
Perhaps 2018? [:D]
George, at the top right hand corner of the preview page there is a NEXT button.
When it is necessary to mouse-over to even know that there is the possibility of moving to another page, this does not encourage the average user to continue. It may be considered "cutting edge" programming technique, but the object of posting the material is not to display one's programming expertise. Keep it simple, stupid.
A little testy, there, George. Really, calling someone S*****?? [:S] i know that is a phrase, but real people posted that preview. And several of us average users did figure it out.
Welcome to the Logos Forum.
We welcome your input on this series. We have had lots of questions.
Job is shown with an estimated release date of 2019. Several other volumes don't have dates. Some don't have authors listed yet.
Given the normal delays of large commentary series, many Logos customers wonder what is realistic.
How very nice that the editor of the series posted in the forums. [:D]
Dr. House,
I'm assuming you didn't mean 2008. [:)] 2018 perhaps?
it does seem like the WBC formatting.
May I report a typo, already? On the fourth page of the preview it says "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, historisch Entwickelt" in the footnotes. As "entwickelt" is an adjective it has to be written in small letters. I know, it's German - anyway, correct quotation should be part of any academic ethos! [;)]
Edit: Same typo on the second page, of course.
Oh, come on!!! First page: "Deustsche Bibelgesellschaft" - it's "Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft"! Is this the ready-to-publish version yet?
A little testy, there, George. Really, calling someone S*****?? i know that is a phrase, but real people posted that preview. And several of us average users did figure it out.
Of course it wasn't meant to characterize the individual as stupid ! Aren't we getting a bit PC ? As for "average users" figuring it out, I did too, but not initially. It should be obvious to anyone who looks at it. I would suggest a ¼" border with an arrow visible at all times to show that there is more (As is the case with Amazon though you can scroll through the sample pages if you desire). Again, the purpose is not to display programming expertise, but to display samples of the product.
May I report a typo, already? On the fourth page of the preview it says "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, historisch Entwickelt" in the footnotes. As "entwickelt" is an adjective it has to be written in small letters. I know, it's German - anyway, correct quotation should be part of any academic ethos! Edit: Same typo on the second page, of course.
May I report a typo, already? On the fourth page of the preview it says "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, historisch Entwickelt" in the footnotes. As "entwickelt" is an adjective it has to be written in small letters. I know, it's German - anyway, correct quotation should be part of any academic ethos!
An adjective? It looks like a verb to me.
Nice catch. Thanks.
--John
George,
"entwickelt" is past participle of the German verb "entwickeln" and thus serves as an adjective in this setting. However we may try to define it - believe me, it has to be written in small letters! [:D]
An adjective? It looks like a verb to me. George, "entwickelt" is past participle of the German verb "entwickeln" and thus serves as an adjective in this setting. However we may try to define it - believe me, it has to be written in small letters!
"entwickelt" is past participle of the German verb "entwickeln" and thus serves as an adjective in this setting. However we may try to define it - believe me, it has to be written in small letters!
I wouldn't deny that it should not be capitalized, but as a past participle it is a verb form.
As I said - it is a verb form which, as well as "historisch", in this specific case serves as and adjective to "Vorträge". Believe me, I'm German. [:D]
Edit: Rearranged, the book's title could be "Die historisch entwickelten gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden" or "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, wie sich sich historisch entwickelt haben" or "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden in ihrer historischen Entwicklung" [;)]
I agree with some of the former comments thus:
For those struggling to view the preview please note that the current preview of Ezra displays 11 pages of introductory material and about 15 pages of commentary on the first pericope of Ezra 1:1-4. At least 26 pages of preview.
While I would greatly appreciate more previews in the near future this one at least has sufficiently whet my appetite for more of the EEC.
How I wish some of the introductory material for Leviticus (2017?!?!?!) were available - though I would gladly settle for a chapter of Romans (TBA?!)
It seems like the other 2011 book is 1-3 John. Any chance on a similar preview of that volume?
Anyways, I am grateful Jayson on behalf of Logos for the preview - I yearn for more before June 1, as do many I'm certain.
Alas, I have to return to today's studies though now. I wish I had an EEC for that...
Dr House, thanks for Joining us. Could we bug you incessantly but nicely for a preview of 1 -2 Corinthians, Philemon or Colossians? [:)]
George, As I said - it is a verb form which, as well as "historisch", in this specific case serves as and adjective to "Vorträge". Believe me, I'm German. Edit: Rearranged, the book's title could be "Die historisch entwickelten gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden" or "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, wie sich sich historisch entwickelt haben" or "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden in ihrer historischen Entwicklung"
As I said - it is a verb form which, as well as "historisch", in this specific case serves as and adjective to "Vorträge". Believe me, I'm German.
Edit: Rearranged, the book's title could be "Die historisch entwickelten gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden" or "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden, wie sich sich historisch entwickelt haben" or "Die gottesdienstlichen Vorträge der Juden in ihrer historischen Entwicklung"
If I may illustrate in English since that is easier, "The Religious ... Historically Developed." (Capitalization as in English -- since it is English)
When it is necessary to mouse-over to even know that there is the possibility of moving to another page, this does not encourage the average user to continue. It may be considered "cutting edge" programming technique, but the object of posting the material is not to display one's programming expertise.
I would suggest that they put the NEXT button next to the close button. And this is just good salesmanship, but CLOSE should not be a bigger font than NEXT. [:D]
Yes, George. That doesn't change that "entwickelt" as past participle can be seen an adjective at the same time (as can all past participles in German - and in English as well, I believe!?) and is in this case used in predicate position (sorry, I'm really lost when it comes to correct English terminology here - is there an English grammar term "predicate"? - I guess you get my point) for "Vorträge". Be it as it may: small letters. [;)]
If I may illustrate in English since that is easier, "The Religious ... Historically Developed." (Capitalization as in English -- since it is English) Yes, George. That doesn't change that "entwickelt" as past participle can be seen an adjective at the same time (as can all past participles in German - and in English as well, I believe!?) and is in this case used in predicate position (sorry, I'm really lost when it comes to correct English terminology here - is there an English grammar term "predicate"? - I guess you get my point) for "Vorträge". Be it as it may: small letters.
Yes, George. That doesn't change that "entwickelt" as past participle can be seen an adjective at the same time (as can all past participles in German - and in English as well, I believe!?) and is in this case used in predicate position (sorry, I'm really lost when it comes to correct English terminology here - is there an English grammar term "predicate"? - I guess you get my point) for "Vorträge". Be it as it may: small letters.
You may be German, but I know grammar. It is not an adjective. It is clearly a verb (and verbs aren't capitalized in German any more than adjectives are).
Ok, maybe we should make a contest here. [:D] I know grammar, too (don't try to study theology along with Hebrew, Greek and Latin in Germany when you don't know your grammar ...) - so, who knows it better? I claim, as I did before, that every past participle can be used as an adjective within the German language. I could show it to you in every printed grammar. So, what have you got? [:D]
Edit: First proof - go to http://www.mein-deutschbuch.de/lernen.php?menu_id=69 (that's an German online grammar for pupils) and look for "Das Partizip II als Adjektiv." - there you have it!
and verbs aren't capitalized in German any more than adjectives are
There's one exception, of course: Gerund.
Ok, maybe we should make a contest here. I know grammar, too (don't try to study theology along with Hebrew, Greek and Latin in Germany when you don't know your grammar ...) - so, who knows it better? I claim, as I did before, that every past participle can be used as an adjective within the German language. I could show it to you in every printed grammar. So, what have you got? Edit: First proof - go to http://www.mein-deutschbuch.de/lernen.php?menu_id=69 (that's an online German grammar for pupils) and look for "Das Partizip II als Adjektiv." - there you have it!
Ok, maybe we should make a contest here. I know grammar, too (don't try to study theology along with Hebrew, Greek and Latin in Germany when you don't know your grammar ...) - so, who knows it better? I claim, as I did before, that every past participle can be used as an adjective within the German language. I could show it to you in every printed grammar. So, what have you got?
Edit: First proof - go to http://www.mein-deutschbuch.de/lernen.php?menu_id=69 (that's an online German grammar for pupils) and look for "Das Partizip II als Adjektiv." - there you have it!
It actually is NOT a past participle though, as regards form, it could be. It is simply a past tense of entwickeln. He is simply claiming in his title to have developed it historically.
Sorry, George, but at this stage, I really think you first have to get your German straight. [:D]
Yes, "entwickelt" is "Partizip II" in German, which is called past participle in English - since there's only one form "entwickelt" in German, it not only "could be" but "is"! [:)]
and verbs aren't capitalized in German any more than adjectives are There's one exception, of course: Gerund.
That isn't really an exception since a gerund is a noun.
Oh my goodness, please children, could you please stop this nonsense ?
Love one another, report that it needs to be changed, and open up another thread for this discussion, please !
Oh my goodness, please children, could you please stop this nonsense ?Love one another, report that it needs to be changed, and open up another thread for this discussion, please !
Wait a second here - I was having fun watching the children play. [:)]
Pastor Andy,
I think we do love one another (at least speaking for my part) - we're just discussing grammar. But, yes, we could open up another thread for this.
@George:
Of course a gerund is a noun. But it is a noun consisting of an infinitive verb form (in German: "substantiviertes Verb")
Sorry, stoppin' here. [:)]
Pastor Andy, I think we do love one another (at least speaking for my part) - we're just discussing grammar. But, yes, we could open up another thread for this. @George: Of course a gerund is a noun. But it is a noun consisting of an infinitive verb form (in German: "substantiviertes Verb") Sorry, stoppin' here.
Sorry, stoppin' here.
I agree. This isn't about any dislike for one another but simply about the syntax of a sentence title. I already stopped since we weren't getting anywhere and aren't likely to. You staked out your position, and I staked out mine. We simply don't agree.
Back to the topic of the thread...this preview really excites me even further for the EEC. I'm definitely keeping my pre-order and looking forward to June 1 and December 1! I really wish there were more volumes coming sooner! [:(]
Back to the topic of the thread...this preview really excites me even further for the EEC. I'm definitely keeping my pre-order and looking forward to June 1 and December 1! I really wish there were more volumes coming sooner!
[Y]. Same here. I wish there were more volumes being released; like a New Testament volume. This series looks very promising In terms of depth of coverage and scholarship. I like what I have seen so far, enough to convince me that It is worth having In my library.
[B] Let's agree that we don't agree and have a Wittenbergisch beer on it, like Luther would have said! Or, in case you abstain from alcohol, let's just shake hands (unfortunately, there's no icon for this here).
I agree. This isn't about any dislike for one another but simply about the syntax of a sentence title. I already stopped since we weren't getting anywhere and aren't likely to. You staked out your position, and I staked out mine. We simply don't agree. Let's agree that we don't agree and have a Wittenbergisch beer on it, like Luther would have said! Or, in case you abstain from alcohol, let's just shake hands (unfortunately, there's no icon for this here).
Let's agree that we don't agree and have a Wittenbergisch beer on it, like Luther would have said! Or, in case you abstain from alcohol, let's just shake hands (unfortunately, there's no icon for this here).
Whoops, that's a whole 6-pack !
I should not give you information beyond what is to be announced by Logos, but there are some good things happening later this spring and early summer.
For those struggling to read the website, here's a PDF preview. The same files, just in an easier format for you:
EEC Ezra Preview (PDF)
As for the fonts, etc., this hasn't been typeset. When most books are published, usually the author writes the book in Word, then sends it to the publisher for editing (which also happens in Word). It's only when the book is finalised that it's properly typeset. Of course, as this is an electronic production, no typesetting is required (though tagging is needed instead). That's why it looks basic, and why the font is Times New Roman.
Incidentally, I was initially surprised by the footnote style, where the whole title of a book is repeated rather than ibid. or idem. being used (look at footnotes 17 & 18 on pg 9 of the PDF as an example). But in hindsight, the suggested format is much better for an electronic book, where scanning earlier footnotes to see what the ibid. or idem. relates to can be very annoying. I guess there'll be other small advantages in being straight to electronic we'll find over time.
