Biblia Hebraica Westmonasteriensis

Page 1 of 1 (17 items)
This post has 16 Replies | 4 Followers

Posts 133
Piet Huttenga | Forum Activity | Posted: Thu, Nov 21 2013 12:28 AM

I have bought this, but think that I have made a mistake. I would appreciate if somebody could explain to me clearly what advantages this new Westminster morphology 4.18 has. Further it should give the Qere reading in the interlinear, but I do not see it. Could somebody give me a verse to look, where it clearly should appear. Finally, I miss any introduction, any guidance and any explanation. I have read what is written about the book:

Key Features

  • Identifies places where the text of Biblia Hebraica Westmonasteriensis corrects the Codex Leningradensis, as well as places where other popular editions, such as the BHS and the new BHQ fascicles, read or correct Leningradensis differently than Biblia Hebraica Westmonasteriensis
  • Includes the qere readings from the manuscript margins, as well as reconstructed vocalization for thekethiv readings from the main line (which, by design, only have consonants in the Codex Leningradensis)
  • Aligns to Koehler-Baumgartner-Stamm’s Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, with some corrections and analytical differences
  • Provides the most detailed morphological analysis available, tagging many features not found in other databases
  • Remains popular with scholars since its inception (thus, it has benefitted from the attention and suggestions of many qualified readers)
  • Integrates a word-selector tool with English glosses, making it easy to perform searches on a selected word, particularly in the case of homographs—words that are spelled the same but have different meanings

The first point "identifies", but how?

Second point, where can I find the qere readings.

"aligns to HALOT ... with some corrections and analytical differences" what does that mean? 

"Provides the most detailed morphological analysis available, tagging many features not found in other databases." Which features. I saw in another post an attempt to an explanation, but I could not read it, because the letters were so small.

Integrates a word-selector tool with English glosses, making it easy to perform searches on a selected word, particularly in the case of homographs—words that are spelled the same but have different meanings. Can anyone explain this to me with some examples.

I consider to ask for a refund, but maybe I am wrong. Is anyone willing to give me further advice.

Thank you very much in advance,

Piet

 

Posts 133
Piet Huttenga | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 12:31 AM

I forgot to ask where I can find the English glosses connected to the word selector tool.

I really would appreciate some help.

Piet

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 3:42 AM

Look at Jer 18:16. The Qere is printed under the Ketib (If not you can set this with the Display drop box to the right of the reference box)

If you hover on the asterisk it says they read a consonant differently than BHS (In this place the Qere which is printed in BHS is שריקת but WHM read שריקות when they collated against  the Leningrad Codex)

In some instances a Hebrew word can have a different meaning than another word which is written the same way. In these instances when you click a certain occurrence of the word in the text it is linked to the correct definition in the HALOT dictionary and not to a definition of a different word which is written the same way.

When you search morphologically such words (try it: lemma:זעף) you get to choose between  all the words which are written the same way and WHM provides you with an English translation of each word so that you can distinguish between them (since in Hebrew they all look the same).

Posts 133
Piet Huttenga | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 5:43 AM

Dear David,

 

Thank you for the explanation and the example of Jeremiah 18:16

"In some instances a Hebrew word can have a different meaning than another word which is written the same way. In these instances when you click a certain occurrence of the word in the text it is linked to the correct definition in the HALOT dictionary and not to a definition of a different word which is written the same way."

 

I will try the other suggestion later on!

 

Are the things you mention different from, more insightful than other Biblical Hebrew texts?  I mean to find out whether this text has better search options?

 

Thank you very much for your reaction,

 

Piet

 

Posts 433
Vincent Setterholm | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 5:54 AM

Thanks for providing the examples, David!

a couple pieces of additional information: the HALOT integration happens at a few different levels. The first David mentions is in KeyLinking to the lexicon - getting to the right spot when you look up a word's definition. In our software this is handled by some hand-crafted look-up tables and is not strictly a feature of the morph analysis. In fact, despite great differences between spelling, homograph numbers and analysis, you'll find that this database will do a nice job of linking to BDB as well, and that's because of our own in house indexing.

But having the spelling and homograph numbers in the database itself mostly correspond to HALOT has additional advantages for searching. Another database might still be able to link to the lexicon, but if you run a search for a particular word, you might get back a very different set of words than you'd expect from reading the lexicon entry because their following a different lexicon (often their own). There's absolutely nothing wrong with organizing lexical information in some other way - but HALOT is currently the most popular lexicon, and for people who enjoy using it, this database works very well with it.

There are a lot of features that WHM tags that most other databases don't. For example most databases tag the yiqtol-derived volitives 'cohortative' and 'jussive', but the Westminster folk have done a nice job of adding very precise tags about when one of these volitives is 'in form only' (where it looks like a volitive, but the context doesn't really support it), 'in meaning only' (where the context really expects a volitive but the form is not lengthened or shortened), and 'in form and meaning' (where the form of the word and the function clearly are in happy agreement). They also tag features like energic nun, that many databases don't identify either because they haven't gotten around to it yet, or because it's often unclear what difference the feature makes to translation or interpretation, but it's handy to have that label if you're trying to understand the form of the word you are looking at.

i should point out that WHM isn't providing the English glosses in the word picker, we are. Any errors you spot are mine. :)

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 5:58 AM

In my opinion WHM is the best morphologically tagged text available. 

If for example we compare it to LHB and WIVU, it is more accurate in tagging Qal passive forms as יקח in Job 28:2 and 87 other occurrences. 

AFAT and WIVU do not distinguish between the two זעף homographs mentioned above. (for זעף 2 see: Gen 40:6 and Dan 1:10)

There are many more such tagging decisions which make WHM simply the best.

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 6:06 AM

Vincent Setterholm:
There are a lot of features that WHM tags that most other databases don't. For example most databases tag the yiqtol-derived volitives 'cohortative' and 'jussive', but the Westminster folk have done a nice job of adding very precise tags about when one of these volitives is 'in form only' (where it looks like a volitive, but the context doesn't really support it), 'in meaning only' (where the context really expects a volitive but the form is not lengthened or shortened), and 'in form and meaning' (where the form of the word and the function clearly are in happy agreement). They also tag features like energic nun, that many databases don't identify either because they haven't gotten around to it yet, or because it's often unclear what difference the feature makes to translation or interpretation, but it's handy to have that label if you're trying to understand the form of the word you are looking at.

Yeah the form/meaning tags are excellent!

Posts 133
Piet Huttenga | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 6:11 AM

Thank you for your replies. I will try your suggestions. But what I do miss is a proper introduction and a motivation for choices. Is there any literature about this tekst?

 

Piet

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 6:16 AM

I learned from experience. The motivation is Hebrew grammars I guess. When you let the machine parse the text you need to make human adjustments after that to accomodate for less common morphemes. It is these adjustments and fine tuning which make this text what it is.

Maybe Vincent can refer us to an introduction. I would love to read one as well. 

Posts 433
Vincent Setterholm | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 6:44 AM

There's a long series of release notes for each version going back to version 3.5, but all their examples deal with the raw data which looks very different from the finished product, and it was really written for people implementing the data.

when preparing the latest updates to our Glossary of Morpho-Syntactic Database Terminology, I made sure that the glossary covered all the tags used in the Westminster database, with links into grammars for more discussion. This is the resource that pops up information when you hover over a term in the morph search panel, but you can also open it up as a resource to follow the links between articles and to the grammars.

The highlights from the release notes are spelled out on the product page, but I didn't have a chance to go over that since marketing did a pass on it, I think I can make all that more concise.

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 7:33 AM

Vincent Setterholm:

There's a long series of release notes for each version going back to version 3.5, but all their examples deal with the raw data which looks very different from the finished product, and it was really written for people implementing the data.

when preparing the latest updates to our Glossary of Morpho-Syntactic Database Terminology, I made sure that the glossary covered all the tags used in the Westminster database, with links into grammars for more discussion. This is the resource that pops up information when you hover over a term in the morph search panel, but you can also open it up as a resource to follow the links between articles and to the grammars.

The highlights from the release notes are spelled out on the product page, but I didn't have a chance to go over that since marketing did a pass on it, I think I can make all that more concise.

Thank you. The Glossay is very informative and clear. However the search for:

"second person, unexpected — Indicates a form that appears to be first person, but is interpreted in context as an archaic form of the second person. E.g. וְהַחֲרַמְתִּי in Mic 4.13. There are several instance of this phenomenon where the archaic ending in the Kethiḇ has a ‘corrected’ form in the Qere. See GKC §44h."

returns only that example, when I know of at least 21 additional cases (from Bergsträsser). Is it the only instance of this phenomenon tagged?

Posts 433
Vincent Setterholm | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 7:59 AM

I'm too far away from my PC to give a detailed answer on this specific tag. I do know that they've added many more unexpected form tags to their data that will show up in the next update. This part of the tagging is still relatively new.

Posts 912
David Knoll | Forum Activity | Replied: Thu, Nov 21 2013 8:02 AM

Vincent Setterholm:

I'm too far away from my PC to give a detailed answer on this specific tag. I do know that they've added many more unexpected form tags to their data that will show up in the next update. This part of the tagging is still relatively new.

Do you mean the next WHM version or a Logos update of 4.18?

Posts 16
Gabriel Couary Mateos | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Nov 24 2018 12:53 PM

Buena tarde a todos . Disculpen mi pregunta. 

Está biblia incluye el Nuevo Testamento en el idioma Hebreo? Gracias. 

Posts 1265
HJ. van der Wal | Forum Activity | Replied: Sat, Nov 24 2018 1:17 PM

No, está biblia incluye sólo el Antiguo Testamento. Si desea un Nuevo Testamento en hebreo moderno, debe comprar el siguiente recurso:

https://www.logos.com/product/3157/hebrew-new-testament 

Posts 16
Gabriel Couary Mateos | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Nov 25 2018 3:02 PM

Muchas gracias por su consejo. La compraré  Gracias. 

Posts 16
Gabriel Couary Mateos | Forum Activity | Replied: Sun, Nov 25 2018 3:04 PM

Muchas gracias por su consejo. La compraré  Gracias nuevamente  

Page 1 of 1 (17 items) | RSS