Bug: Louw-Nida lookup is broken in reverse interlinears

Mark Barnes

This is a little tricky to explain, so bear with me.

Reproducible steps:

Prioritise your Louw-Nida lexicon so it's one of your top five lexicons.
Open a reverse-interlinear NT, and right-click on a word. The word zeloo in James 4:2 (covet in the NIV) is my example.
Select lemma on the right hand side, and then choose the Louw-Nida lexicon from the bottom of the left hand side of the menu.
The lexicon will open at Louw Nida 25.21. This shouldn't happen.

Expected behaviour:

The lexicon should open at ζηλόω, as it would if I did the look up from a Greek NT that didn't have LN tagging. That's because I had lemma selected, so it should open to the lemma. Currently it's always opening as if I had the LN number selected.

If the lemma is selected it should open here:

If the LN number is selected it should open here:

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

This is by design, and doesn't require a reverse interlinear (it happens in SBLGNT too, for example).

Many Greek NTs and Hebrew Bibles in Logos 5 are tagged with "word numbers" that uniquely identify each word in the text. Many lexicons are also tagged with these word numbers, specifying which article to display for a specific word number.

The primary use of these word numbers is to disambiguate Hebrew homographs (and it's also a primary reason we recommend avoiding the old BHSMORPH resource, which doesn't have word numbers and often won't KeyLink to Hebrew lexicons properly). However, they're also used (albeit much less frequently) in Greek; LN is an example of where we use word numbers to disambiguate between (in this case) four potential destination articles.

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/565856#Comment_565856

This is by design, and doesn't require a reverse interlinear (it happens in SBLGNT too, for example).

Can I humbly suggest you change the design in the Greek NT?

The reason you have all this extra tagging is one of the reasons I love Logos, and I am very grateful for anything that helps disentangle Hebrew homographs.

But, where texts are tagged with lemmas and LN numbers, and we have the choice of specifying which we want to look up, Logos should respect our choice. I don't mind if the double-click takes you straight to the LN number, but if a user specifies the lemma, it should look up the lemma.

Those who know Greek don't want to be bound by the editor's choices. Heck, I don't know Greek properly, and I don't want to be bound by the editors choices. I want to see those four different choices for myself. At least with homographs there's a right/wrong destination (most of the time, anyway). But with LN numbers, it's a matter of judgement, and there are lots of times when reader's judgement will differ from your editor's judgement - and when we're expressing a preference by choosing 'lemma' and not 'Louw-Nida', you ought to respect that choice.

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/565940#Comment_565940

I agree with Mark, and, in addition, I also think that each LN headword in volume 1 should link to the index entry in volume 2 so that it's easier to go back and forth.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/565952#Comment_565952

Bibles don't need an embedded LN# to take advantage of the feature, so it works in LogosWH and I had to go to TR1550MR to get a true lemma lookup (different morphology, different lemma). I'm somewhat ambivalent about a true lemma lookup but I agree that a link is needed between Volume 1 and Volume 2.

Beloved Amodeo

Expected behaviour:

The lexicon should open at ζηλόω, as it would if I did the look up from a Greek NT that didn't have LN tagging. That's because I had lemma selected, so it should open to the lemma. Currently it's always opening as if I had the LN number selected.

If the lemma is selected it should open here:

Mark, Todd and Dave,

Allow me to enter this discussion. My humble input extends from how I understand Louw Nida works inside the Logos platform. I hope this will be helpful. Here goes.

1. I agree and follow Mark's observations up thru step "3."

2. The behavior noted in step "4." is expected and correct. I hope my illustrations below will support why I believe this to be so.

3. The superscript above ζηλόω indicates that there are at least 2 other meanings consitent with this lemma.

4. As you all are aware volume 2 (the index) is where these other meanings can be found.

5. If I follow your objections to how L5 currently functions; the fact that the program does not open to the index when lemma is selected is where all of you prefer this behavior over the way L5 currently functions.

6. But, I believe there may be confusion with the way in which L5 handles this.

7. Allow me to explain. If you right-click on the head word ζηλόω then select Louw Nida from the left menu it will take you straight way to the index. I personally have no problem with this behavior as it support the consensus opinion of the scholars on translation. If your curiosity is peaked, you may easily follow the above explained procedure. So for me, no change is needed.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/566251#Comment_566251

7. Allow me to explain. If you right-click on the head word ζηλόω then select Louw Nida from the left menu it will take you straight way to the index.

Indeed it does, thank you - provided you first select the lemma on the RHS, and then select the LN lexicon on the LHS.

I personally have no problem with this behavior as it support the consensus opinion of the scholars on translation.

We trust LN well enough when we want the lemmas that fall within specific semantic domains or sub-domains and i've welcomed its use for context sensitive meanings in bibles. Therefore, with ready access to the Index I can't object to the right-click lookup of lemmas. The other consideration is that LN is not my primary lexicon.

tom

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/565940#Comment_565940

Can I humbly suggest you change the design in the Greek NT?

The reason you have all this extra tagging is one of the reasons I love Logos, and I am very grateful for anything that helps disentangle Hebrew homographs.

But, where texts are tagged with lemmas and LN numbers, and we have the choice of specifying which we want to look up, Logos should respect our choice. I don't mind if the double-click takes you straight to the LN number, but if a user specifies the lemma, it should look up the lemma.

Those who know Greek don't want to be bound by the editor's choices. Heck, I don't know Greek properly, and I don't want to be bound by the editors choices. I want to see those four different choices for myself. At least with homographs there's a right/wrong destination (most of the time, anyway). But with LN numbers, it's a matter of judgement, and there are lots of times when reader's judgement will differ from your editor's judgement - and when we're expressing a preference by choosing 'lemma' and not 'Louw-Nida', you ought to respect that choice.

[y][y][y][y]