how to turn off transliterations in Lexham analytical lexicon to the Greek New Testament

concerning:

Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament (shows transliterations)

It's kind of funny, it shows transliterations for the Greek words but not the Aramaic and Hebrew words it lists without vowels. So is the default assumption is that people read unpointed (voweless) Aramaic no problem but Greek is so very hard to read so better include

Is there a way to turn off the Greek transliterations like the LXX Lexicon?

Thanks,

-Jeremiah

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Simon’s Brother

I do not believe you can turn them off.

The transliterations are provided for the article headwords only. I would not consider it unusual to see the transliteration provided for the headord of a dictionary entry.

Transliterations are not typically provided for words within an dictionary entry hence why you do not see them for Hebrew, Aramaic or Greek words within the entry.

I agree with you in that it would be prefetable to have the vowels for Hebrew / Aramaic words. I would find this more useful than the Greek transliterations but I don't mind the transliterations as part of the headword entry as they will be useful to some. Some less technical commentaries use transliteration rather than Greek letters and so it may be helpful in some search scenarios.

concerning:

Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament (shows transliterations)

It's kind of funny, it shows transliterations for the Greek words but not the Aramaic and Hebrew words it lists without vowels. So is the default assumption is that people read unpointed (voweless) Aramaic no problem but Greek is so very hard to read so better include

Is there a way to turn off the Greek transliterations like the LXX Lexicon?

Thanks,

-Jeremiah

Jeremiah

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910925#Comment_910925

In retrospect, I get why they didn't list vowels for the Hebrew / Aramaic. They are only listing word roots, not actual words.

I'd love it if the next version would list the actual word in it's proper binyan lexical form. It could be organized under each "root" entry.

Often I have to piece it together, "Oh must be in Hifil because the Hifil word that comes from that root is such and such".

Also, I noticed sometimes the Hebrew words are actually 2 Hebrew words that have to go together like "from above" listed independently as separate instances like "from" and "above" as separate sources for the Greek LXX word.

Definitely room for improvement though I love having the functionality that's there already.

Regarding your comment on headword entries; my other Greek lexicons in logos don't list the headword transliterated,

nor do any of my Hebrew lexicons.

Jeremiah

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910930#Comment_910930

The Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Septuagint also doesn't transliterate the headwords (as I mentioned in my post)

Jeremiah

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910931#Comment_910931

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910930#Comment_910930

In retrospect, I get why they didn't list vowels for the Hebrew / Aramaic. They are only listing word roots, not actual words.

[Y]

Regarding your comment on headword entries; my other Greek lexicons in logos don't list the headword transliterated,

nor do any of my Hebrew lexicons.

I was not suggesting they all do, I simply said I don't think it is unusual as some of the ones I use in Logos do including but not limited to: Complete Word Study Dictionary: NT, Mounce Expository Dictionary, DBL Greek, Exegetical Dictionary of NT as screen shots from mobile app below show.

Jeremiah

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/910934#Comment_910934

OK thanks for sharing some of the lexicons *you* use. I said *mine* don't do the transliteration thingy. So I guess

I should share mine now?

next one...

Aramaic lexicon...

another Greek lexicon...

this next one is in the SAME lexham "Analytical" series. Only difference is it's for the LXX not the new testament.

It does exactly as I was mentioning I want the New testament Analytical lexicon to do. Same publisher, same style, no headword

transliterations.

I decided that was enough. If you want some more screenshots to prove my statement that "my other lexicons that I use don't do this (transliterate)" let me know and I'll send some more screenshots. My entire comment/question/point was that the other Greek lexicon from the exact same series by the exact same publisher had the behaviour I want (not showing the headword transliteration). Since these lexicons are in the same series by the same publisher and done in the same style, I thought maybe I had accidentally turned some setting on which activates the transliterations.

So it's in reference to:

Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament (has transliterations)

Lexham Analytical Leixcon to the Septuagint (no transliterations) [what I want-last screen shot above]

same format, same purpose, same style, same Hebrew alignment stuff, one does transliteration of Greek one doesn't.

Another point, this lexicon (Analytical to Greek New Testament) often shows complete declension information for entries as well as Hebrew word "Alignment". Doesn't seem like the kind of lexicon someone who can't read the letters would be using which is probably why the LXX version of the same series doesn't include the transliterations.

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/911047#Comment_911047

OK thanks for sharing some of the lexicons *you* use. I said *mine* don't do the transliteration thingy. So I guess

I should share mine now?

Thanks Jeremiah.

I decided that was enough. If you want some more screenshots to prove my statement that "my other lexicons that I use don't do this (transliterate)" let me know and I'll send some more screenshots.

I could show you more screenshots of more lexicons too with that do use transliterations in the head word entry but that would be pointless, I only posted a couple of screen shots because I thought you were indicating you have never seen any lexicon use transliteration in the headword but thank you for clarifying your comments were limited to the same series by the same publisher.

My entire comment/question/point was that the other Greek lexicon from the exact same series by the exact same publisher had the behaviour I want (not showing the headword transliteration). Since these lexicons are in the same series by the same publisher and done in the same style, I thought maybe I had accidentally turned some setting on which activates the transliterations.

Nope you weren't doing anything wrong. It's simply a case that we do not get to pick and choose the content lexicons display. BDAD, however through a visual filter does allow customization of how the content is displayed, but not what content is displayed.

.I can't comment on why the two resources use a different approach. It appears there were different editors heading up the projects, possibly they can answer that particular question.

Interestingly a reading I was doing today took me to another 'Lexicon' from the same publisher, but not the same series which uses transliterations throughout the article but the audience is different because the headwords are in english.so I understand why this lexicon from same publisher use a different approach. This resource has a complete different editor again - but I won't post any more screenshots as I am sure we both have posted enough for now.

Back to your question about inconsistent display of resources within the same series. There is a third resource for this series, the Hebrew version and the mocked up screen shots don't display transliterations in the headword entry.

https://www.logos.com/product/136784/lexham-analytical-lexicon-of-the-hebrew-bible

The editor is Isaiah Hoogendyk who was also the editor of the Septuagint volume from this series which also does not include transliterations so it looks like it possibly has come down to an editorial decision, but only Isaiah and Rick could confirm why the differences of format within the same series.

Your question as to why the series is inconsistent is a fair one Jeremiah so I hope you get an answer.

Jeremiah

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/911058#Comment_911058

Thanks Doc!