lbs vs lls in lemma searches

I'm doing some simple searches on lemmas in the LXX. I have three tagged LXX resources, (1) Septuagint with Logos Morphology, (2) Septuaginta: Morphologically Tagged Edition, and (3) Lexham LXX Interlinear.

I'm not entirely sure of the differences between (1) and (2), but in (1) and (3) I have to search for <Lemma = lbs/el/λαλέω> whereas in (2) I have to search for <Lemma = lls/el/λαλέω>.

This slightly different syntax is not only confusing, it prevents grouping resources into collections for searching together. Does anyone know why there is a difference and whether I can do anything about it?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

John Fugh, Jr.

Lemma = lbs/el/λαλέω

Sorry, Mark, I don't have an answer for you, but your post got me thinking. Is there a syntax guide (I could find one in the Help file) for what all this means. I know what lemma is but don't know "lbs" or "el." Does anyone know about where I can find the syntax/definitions of the possible search ranges?

Thanks!

John

EDIT: ALL please answer Mark's question first since this is his thread.

Mark Barnes

John: The syntax I'm using is the one Logos 4 generates if you right-click on a word and choose search. It goes something like this:

Lemma = xx/yy/lemma, where xx is the morphology code and yy=language code.

So el is Greek, he is Hebrew, syr is Syriac.

I guess what I'm asking is (a) Why are the different morphology codes necessary? and (b) Why do the two resources have different morphological databases anyway?

Rick Brannan (Logos)

I'm not entirely sure of the differences between (1) and (2), but in (1) and (3) I have to search for <Lemma = lbs/el/λαλέω> whereas in (2) I have to search for <Lemma = lls/el/λαλέω>.

This slightly different syntax is not only confusing, it prevents grouping resources into collections for searching together. Does anyone know why there is a difference and whether I can do anything about it?

The issue is that your items (1) [the LXX w/Logos Morphology] and (2) [the LXX with an older and somewhat problematic morphology] use different morphological analyses and have different lemma analyses as well. Items (1) and (3) [the Lexham LXX Interlinear] share the same morphological analysis. Searching both (1) and (3) for lemma/morph items will essentially give you duplicates (where content overlaps; the Lexham LXX Interlinear is not complete yet). Searching items (1) and (2) will mostly duplicate the result, I'd guess, and item (1) would be the more accurate of the two.

Also note the Septuagint with Logos Morphology (Alternate Texts), which has variant editions of some portions (Joshua) and some whole books (Tobit, Judges, Daniel & Additions) which you might want to include in your searching.

Mark Barnes

Thanks Rick. Should I delete the Septuaginta (and also the Parallal LXX/MT) as now having been replaced by the Septuagint with Logos Morphology (with it's new interlinear functionality)? Or do those old resource have info that the new resource doesn't have?