Reliability of Morph searches in Logos vs Bibleworks vs Accordance

I think to be comparable, you need to run searches on the original language texts and compare. You cannot even run a comparable original language search using an English text with the other two software programs. You can run a Strong's search.

With that said, I do appreciate you bringing these differences to Logos attention as the original language searches should be scholar grade as well.

I am not proficient in Hebrew, but would suspect that those would be the texts that show the most differences.

As Francis mentioned, it's not just the LEB. It's every single Bible that's not named LHB, whether it is in English or not, including, for example, LHI, Logos LXX, LXXALT, NRSV, etc., etc.

Francis said:

Thank you for the response. I don't know what Roza has also noted in Septuagintal resources. Perhaps, much in the same way as there is a beta for features, there could be user-based testing of the language resources? It may be scary to do so, but a general invitation to scholars and qualified users to point out gaps and problems could help bring morphological materials in Logos to Cadillac level? I think that Logos is doing great in serving the large public but seems to be behind in terms of reputation among scholars. 

I simply ran your search on the Morph tab, and switched over to the Bible tab. In the Bible tab, run the search against ALL Bibles. Then switch to Grid view.

In the Grid view, what you'll see is that the exact same hits that are in the LHB but are not in the LEB are also not in the LXX or any other reverse interlinear. So, that's what I was referring to.

I can say in general that I am quite happy with the quality of the data in Logos, and in their responsiveness in fixing issues when they are identified (as this thread testifies). As well, another nice thing about Logos (at least compared to BibleWorks) is that they have so many different Morph databases. So, for serious research you can actually run the search in different databases and compare if you have any reason to doubt. 

FYI, I am constantly doing advanced searches at the Pontifical Biblical Institute and comparing to data from professors or from Biblework to verify the quality of Logos's data, and Logos has always come out just fine. Where I worry more about the quality of the data is in the areas where Logos is really breaking ground, such as the tagging of people, places, things, clause searching, etc. But that is more because these areas are so new, and are just being implemented, so they are naturally more prone to errors, or to not having been fully implemented, not because I think they aren't doing it well or haven't seen solid methodology, etc. 

As best I can tell, Logos's lack of penetration in some scholarly circles has more to do with the way Logos was 5-10 years ago than how the program is today.

Offer Bob some great Jerusalem food and you might have a deal - he seems to love traveling[:)]

Okay, I'll admit that the last time I visited Verbum they bought lunch. [;)]

A happy customer is the end of the progress [H]

The problem is how to press hard [8o|] and be constructive [8-|] at the same time

I change the keyboard to Hebrew and back.

In the Control panel -> Language I can change settings. Then a small icon comes to the bottom right and I can change the keyboard.

Windows 8.1 has also on-screen keyboard. It was intended for touch-screens but works also with the mouse. Examples

λογοσ עמר Вели Великии للل and so on

I made the setup 1.5 years ago and cannot be sure whether I can do it now, but I assume you can find instructions in the web - I utilized a Windows 8 book which is already a bit old.

David Knoll said:

In another software I just type: 

מה זה עשה

for three lemmas coming one after the other. and in Logos?

מה זאת עשׂית or "מה זאת עשׂית" if you want to make sure about the order.

Logos requires you to type the sin with dot left or dot right. This should probably be improved to just search either if you don't specify, but if you remember to include the dot left or right the search works.

Also, note that Logos distinguishes between searching for the manuscript form, the lemma, and the root. If you just search for עשׂית it will only find that manuscript form (ignoring vowels... if they are important, cf. here). For three lemmas one after the other it would be like this:

lemma:מָה BEFORE 1 WORDS lemma:זֹאת BEFORE 1 WORDS lemma:עשׂה:1

David Knoll said:

I am able to change the language to Hebrew (I am I Israeli) but it takes more time to move back and forth when it is clear that I won't search an English lemma when the text is set to WHM or LHB...

At times I've thought this myself, but in the end I've convinced myself its better as is. The reason is because of the usefulness of commands like:

lemma:

root:

WITHIN X WORDS

NEAR

BEFORE

AFTER

OR

etc. (cf. here for more on these and others).

David Knoll said:

this can be solved with keyboard shortcuts or context menus.

Yes, it could. It's just a matter of personal preference. Maybe because Hebrew isn't my native tongue. 

Another possible solution would be for Logos to always give you the dropdown, even without h: or g: or a:, but just based on what database is selected. Then, if you don't select anything from the dropdown it would just take what you typed in like it does now. 

David Knoll said:

All software packages distinguish between lemmas inflected forms and roots (how I longed for those when I was using Logos)

No, they don't. 

BibleWorks doesn't yet have Root searching. They do have lemma searching. cf. here: http://kb.bibleworksllc.com/kmp/index.php?/article/AA-02776/0/Can-I-Search-on-Root-Word-in-BibleWorks.html

David Knoll said:

actually there is a quicker way.

but how much time did you spend on typing what took me less than 10 seconds? You see why scholars detest it?

Honestly, it took me about 15 seconds, and had I omitted the optional BEFORE 1 WORDS to make it correspond to how other Bible software packages actually work, it would have been around 10 seconds. But I type quickly and am quite familiar with how Logos searches work.

The reason I included the BEFORE 1 WORDS was that you specified you wanted one lemma after another. You could also use simply BEFORE for that, if you don't care within how many words.

BTW, while I don't personally know any scholars who "detest" Logos (unless you and Lee are in that group?), I know a good number who use other software who wish they could do the type of stuff Verbum is capable of and are in the process of switching over or have already switched over. [8-|] I do know some scholars who didn't like what they saw 5-10 years ago from Logos, but I don't know of any who have seriously looked at what they offer today and haven't thought twice or three times about whether to switch. Of course, that's just my personal experience and I can't speak for others.

And, I do wish Logos catered more to the academic world. There is definitely room for improvement, not only in specific tools but also in giving priority to the top tools (an example would be how long the NA28 critical apparatus took to get out the door), even if that occasionally meant taking a little economic hit at the beginning. 

Faithlife has an important advantage over those other tools, in that economically Faithlife is much, much larger. That means they are able to actually dedicate resources to projects that are well above the capacities of smaller companies. The fruits of that are already being seen (e.g. tagging pronouns, implied subjects, etc.) and I imagine they will only become more visible as time goes on.

BTW, למדתי שלושה חודשים בהאוניברסיטת העברית בירושלים, at Rothberg International. I have long been excited about the HUBP project, and really hope Logos takes you up on the invitation to visit!

duplicate

David Knoll said:

I wonder how the user is supposed to figure that out for himself...

The user created Wiki is probably the best place to learn these things. Here is the Wiki page on Morph search, and it explains the Add Versions button: https://wiki.logos.com/Morphological_Search. There are a lot of pages on the Wiki dedicated to search.

David Knoll said:

What if I want to search a Greek lexicon for one of the words in the LXX on that search result. Can I do that directly? or must I open another window?

The easiest way would be to open the LXX search result by clicking on the highlighted text in the LXX, then right clicking the word or hovering over it. 

That is one of the reasons I said that for this type of work I would be inclined to use a layout with all of these translations linked so that they scroll together. That way you can search in however many versions you want, then click on the links and get full features.

BTW, when I was at the Hebrew University, I took a class taught by Avi Hurvitz on dating texts of the Hebrew Bible based on the words used in it, grammatical structures, etc. I'm sure you're very familiar with his methodology of studying early and late Hebrew, and bringing Aramaic in to show how Aramaic influenced late Hebrew, so I won't bother summarizing that, but I thought this might be of interest for you. During the class I developed a methodology to do what he was doing in Logos. He was quite blown away by it when he saw it. Given that you like comparing the Hebrew Bible and the Targums, I thought it might be of interest to you. Here is what the final result looks like:

This is a search that highlights the use of שֵׁשׁ in Hebrew, a word that apparently was replaced by בּוּץ in later Hebrew. Anyway, this search is searching 2 morph databases simultaneously and comparing the results. It is searching the Hebrew Bible database for the lemma שֵׁשׁ, and it is also searching the CAL Targums morph database for the lemma בוץ, and then displaying the results in a comparative table. 

On the right is the text of the LHB, which corresponds to the row of Green boxes. The other rows are the Targums that have at least one hit for בוץ. When the targums have colored boxes, that means that the word בוץ appears in that verse. When a circle with a line is there, the verse is not present in the Targum. An empty box indicates the verse is there, but no hit result. When both the Targums and the LHB have colored boxes, that means that the Hebrew text was translated from שֵׁשׁ in Hebrew to בוץ in Aramaic. As can be seen, this was almost always the case.

To try this out, create a collection, and add the LHB (or some other Hebrew Bible), plus the "series:"cal targums". I call it "Hebrew vs. Aramaic". Like this:

Now, how to build that search. It's a little complicated, because we are going to be searching against two morph databases simultaneously... so get your geek glasses ready. [8-|]

Run a morph search in Hebrew for lemma:שֵׁשׁ:3. Then, click over to the Bible tab. The search will be translated into a text like this, which you should then copy and paste into another document for later. ([field bible, content] <Lemma = lbs/he/שֵׁשׁ:3>)

Then, run a morph search in Aramaic on the CAL Targums for lemma:בוץ:0.N. Once again, click on the Bible tab, and the search will be "translated" into another format.

To that text, add "OR" and then copy and paste the search from the Hebrew database. Change the resource you want to search in to your collection, "Hebrew vs. Aramaic", then run the search. Your search string will look like this:

([field bible, content] <Lemma = cal/arc/בוץ:0.N>) OR ([field bible, content] <Lemma = lbs/he/שֵׁשׁ:3>)

Finally, switch over to the Grid view, and you'll get the view I have above. Clicking on the names of the Targums, or on LHB, will change the text on the right, and clicking on the boxes will open those texts to that verse.