Bug in NIV(2011) rev int.?

Rich DeRuiter
Rich DeRuiter MVP Posts: 6,729
edited November 21 in English Forum

Maybe this has come up already. I don't use the Android app, nor the Android forum very often. If so, forgive me.

The other day, I was in a Bible study looking at Zechariah 2:8 (in the NIV 2011) and a question was raised about the phrase "apple of His eye." Naturally I clicked on "apple" and a Hebrew phrase came up. I get that. But when I clicked on "Bible Word Study" all I got was a BWS on the definite article (הוּא). The results do work properly in the LEB, giving "בָּבָה" as expected. (I checked the ESV here, and it is also tagged as the LEB).

Further investigation (in my desktop app) suggests that the issue is that the NIV OT reverse interlinear is tagged differently than (and in an inferior way to) the LEB and the ESV. I've noticed a few other places where the NIV tagging seems inferior to the ESV and LEB Hebrew tagging, even when the English translations are identical, or very similar. (I will begin to make note of these differences as I discover them. So far, I've just moved on, since in the desktop app, this is not always the problem it is in the mobile app.)

The desktop app compensates for the inferior tagging by giving the user the option of which lemma to search as a BWS (or to go directly to a lexicon). The Android app does not. I was simply taken to the BWS entry for the first word of the phrase, which in this case was the least useful possible word to study! Can this be addressed in the Android app?

Also, is Faithlife aware of the discrepancy in the quality of the NIV(2011) OT rev int., and are there any plans to redo the rev int for the NIV(2011) OT?

 Help links: WIKI;  Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)

Tagged:

Comments

  • Bradley Grainger (Logos)
    Bradley Grainger (Logos) Administrator, Logos Employee Posts: 11,958

    I've noticed a few other places where the NIV tagging seems inferior to the ESV and LEB Hebrew tagging, even when the English translations are identical, or very similar. (I will begin to make note of these differences as I discover them.

    Since this issue is not directly related to the mobile apps, can you post further details in the "Logos 6" forum? (I know it's not specifically a Logos 6 issue either, but it's more likely to be noticed by the appropriate people.)

  • Bradley Grainger (Logos)
    Bradley Grainger (Logos) Administrator, Logos Employee Posts: 11,958

    Also, is Faithlife aware of the discrepancy in the quality of the NIV(2011) OT rev int., and are there any plans to redo the rev int for the NIV(2011) OT?

    I'm not personally aware of it; again, it would probably be best to post specific details in the Logos 6 forum.

  • Rich DeRuiter
    Rich DeRuiter MVP Posts: 6,729

    I've noticed a few other places where the NIV tagging seems inferior to the ESV and LEB Hebrew tagging, even when the English translations are identical, or very similar. (I will begin to make note of these differences as I discover them.

    Since this issue is not directly related to the mobile apps, can you post further details in the "Logos 6" forum? (I know it's not specifically a Logos 6 issue either, but it's more likely to be noticed by the appropriate people.)

    Sure. But it's a bigger problem in the mobile app, since we can't choose which lemma to search in case the rev int pops up an original language phrase.

     Help links: WIKI;  Logos 6 FAQ. (Phil. 2:14, NIV)

  • Kevin Byford (Faithlife)
    Kevin Byford (Faithlife) Member, Logos Employee Posts: 4,309

    Sure. But it's a bigger problem in the mobile app, since we can't choose which lemma to search in case the rev int pops up an original language phrase.

    True, but this issue can't be fixed in the mobile app or by the mobile dev team since it's not a mobile "bug".  The results you are seeing are delivered by our servers through a webview and posting to the Logos 6 forum will get better visibility.