How do I find who a pronoun refers to in a verse where the pronoun is not part of the Biblical text

If I open the NIV (2011) at Colossians 1:21 and right-click on the word "I" near the end of verse 23, then the context menu that appears lets me know that in this case "I" refers to Paul which is clearly the case given the rest of the text of the verse. However, if I right-click on the word "he" at the beginning of verse 22, the context menu does not have a Person referent and through trial and error it seems to me that when the pronoun is part of the Biblical text, then the Person referent is available but when the pronoun is not part of the Biblical text but has been added by the translators presumably to make the text more readable then the Person referent is not listed. Does the Biblical Reference database assign referents to pronouns that are not part of the Biblical text but have been added by the translators, and, if so, how do I display those referents? Thanks.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Graham Criddle

Does the Biblical Reference database assign referents to pronouns that are not part of the Biblical text but have been added by the translators,

Sorry but the underlying tagging is done against the original text so there is no referent information for these types of cases.

I think that one needs to work it out from context

Dave Hooton

However, if I right-click on the word "he" at the beginning of verse 22, the context menu does not have a Person referent

There is a referent for "he" in NIV 1984, but "a Church" is clearly incorrect (it was likely meant for the following "you", which has no referent and is also inserted!?).

through trial and error it seems to me that... when the pronoun is not part of the Biblical text... then the Person referent is not listed.

In NIV 1984, "he" in Col 2:13 has a referent. It is omitted in v14 but is present in v15, v18, v19!

Does the Biblical Reference database assign referents to pronouns that are not part of the Biblical text but have been added by the translators, and, if so, how do I display those referents?

The answer to the first part is "Yes", but not as consistently as you would like.

To identify these pronouns you can make a Visual Filter from a query like he NOTEQUALS <LN 1-93> in a Reverse Interlinear bible. Thereafter, any available referent can be displayed from the context menu.

[Words in the biblical text are assigned Louw-Nida numbers with domains that range in value from 1 to 93. The above query looks for words that have NOT been aligned with/assigned LN numbers. Words that are aligned with LN numbers can be found by using ANDEQUALS]

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/614913#Comment_614913

However, if I right-click on the word "he" at the beginning of verse 22, the context menu does not have a Person referent

There is a referent for "he" in NIV 1984, but "a Church" is clearly incorrect (it was likely meant for the following "you", which has no referent and is also inserted!?).

I reported this error when I chose not to try to answer the question.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/614916#Comment_614916

I reported this error when I chose not to try to answer the question.

That makes two reports!

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/614913#Comment_614913

There is a referent for "he" in NIV 1984, but "a Church" is clearly incorrect (it was likely meant for the following "you", which has no referent and is also inserted!?).

"he" comes from "he has reconciled". The Greek verb is ἀποκατηλλάγητε, which a more literal translation (like LEB) translates as "you have been reconciled".

Now you can see that the referent (which is correct) is the object of the verb. A translation can sometimes cause these kind of "false positives" when the literal meaning of the Greek (which is what the referent tags are applied to) is reworded in English.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/614913#Comment_614913

In NIV 1984, "he" in Col 2:13 has a referent. It is omitted in v14

Are you talking about "he" in "he took"? I would expect this to be tagged with the implied subject of the verb, so you could report this as a tagging error to data@logos.com.

Does the Biblical Reference database assign referents to pronouns that are not part of the Biblical text but have been added by the translators, and, if so, how do I display those referents?

The answer to the first part is "Yes", but not as consistently as you would like.

The Referent Database is only aligned to Greek and Hebrew text, so pronouns that English translators insert—that are not associated with any underlying Greek or Hebrew word—will not have any referent tagging.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/614949#Comment_614949

"he" comes from "he has reconciled". The Greek verb is ἀποκατηλλάγητε, which a more literal translation (like LEB) translates as "you have been reconciled".

It doesn't help that there is no referent for the derived "he" in the ESV, NIV2011(?), NKJV, AV1873, KJV1900, NLT.

There is a referent in NRSV which has exactly the same translation & alignment as the ESV i.e. "he has now reconciled".

In NASB95 the referent comes from "has reconciled you" and it shows that the preceding "He" is is not derived from the Greek verb!

The NLT and NIV84 show "you" as not derived from the verb, but NIV84 has a referent for "he".

The LEB stands in wondrous isolation amidst this sea of inconsistency.

Now you can see that the referent (which is correct) is the object of the verb.

I am aware that many pronouns are derived from a Greek verb and indicated as such in the interlinear. Now I am aware that they do not always clarity the original text.[:(]

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/614951#Comment_614951

Are you talking about "he" in "he took"? I would expect this to be tagged with the implied subject of the verb, so you could report this as a tagging error to data@logos.com.

Reported as a Typo.

The Referent Database is only aligned to Greek and Hebrew text

That doesn't come across when you examine/compare the referent tagging in the various translations as per my previous post.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/615093#Comment_615093

The Referent Database is only aligned to Greek and Hebrew text

That doesn't come across when you examine/compare the referent tagging in the various translations as per my previous post.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say here, sorry.

There is no referent tagging in the translations. When you start from an English translation, the context menu (and Information Tool) takes the current word, looks it up in the reverse interlinear, finds the corresponding Greek/Hebrew word, then looks up the referent tag(s) for that word; this is then displayed in the UI.

Because the referent tagging is mediated by the reverse interlinear, the quality of the results you get will depend on a) the actual underlying tagging itself (check LHB or SBLGNT to verify this); b) the reverse interlinear alignment (look at the ribbon); c) the literalness (or lack) of the translation. A very dynamic translation may seem to give false positives if it changes the voice of verbs, adds pronouns (or even proper nouns) for clarity, etc.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/615109#Comment_615109

There is no referent tagging in the translations...

Thanks for the clarification.

the quality of the results you get will depend on a) the actual underlying tagging itself (check LHB or SBLGNT to verify this)

The tagging in the referent database?

b) the reverse interlinear alignment (look at the ribbon);

I provided instances where the same aligned word ("he") was/was not assigned a referent, and your explanation doesn't cover this.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/615163#Comment_615163

the quality of the results you get will depend on a) the actual underlying tagging itself (check LHB or SBLGNT to verify this)

The tagging in the referent database?

Yes, that's what I meant. The most direct way to "see" the tags in the referent database is to see how they're exposed in the text that was originally marked up to create the tags (LHB & SBLGNT).

b) the reverse interlinear alignment (look at the ribbon);

I provided instances where the same aligned word ("he") was/was not assigned a referent, and your explanation doesn't cover this.

Sorry, I didn't actually see that post yet. (I skipped down to your second reply.) I'll take a look.

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/615089#Comment_615089

It doesn't help that there is no referent for the derived "he" in the ESV, NIV2011(?), NKJV, AV1873, KJV1900, NLT.

SBLGNT has ἀποκατηλλάγητε. This word is tagged as "Church at Colossae" and "A Church".

ESV, NKJV, KJV1900, NLT have ἀποκατήλλαξεν. Not all textual variants (from the SBLGNT) are tagged yet. (That requires someone to go through the variants and make sure the variant isn't changing the meaning of the word; the most obvious example of this would be Ὃς ("He") vs Θεὸς ("God") in 1 Tim 3:16.)

NIV2011: "he" isn't aligned with ἀποκατηλλάγητε; there are no tags on unaligned words.

NRSV and NIV84 use ἀποκατηλλάγητε and aligns "he" to it. You could argue that "he" should be treated as an inserted, not an aligned word. This kind of error (in reverse interlinear alignment) can be reported to data@logos.com.

NASB95 uses ἀποκατηλλάγητε and aligns "you" to it.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/615239#Comment_615239

NRSV and NIV84 use ἀποκατηλλάγητε and aligns "he" to it. You could argue that "he" should be treated as an inserted, not an aligned word. This kind of error (in reverse interlinear alignment) can be reported to data@logos.com.

Thanks, I've done that because it's important for Logos to make good on their data to improve user confidence as well as accuracy/consistency/reliability; whether resource metadata, Biblical Facts, RI datasets or Logos 5 feature databases.