Jump to content

Tag Apocrypha Translations


DGill
 Share

Recommended Posts

I just learned from Martha Halladay that none of the English translation modules contain Tagged Apocryphal books. (I own the Apocrypha [and Pseudepigrapha] in original languages, and several English versions which contain the Apocryphal book--but none are tagged.)

 

Does anyone else wish Accordance would tag translations of the Apocrypha?

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At one point in time Accordance had planned to tag the NRSV Apocrypha, indeed some initial tagging  was done, but the project got abandoned as being beyond the scope they were comfortable with. I am very glad to have it tagged in Logos, but I do not know if Accordance would consider trying it again.

 

-Dan

 

EDIT: If you go to Tobit 1.1 in the NRSVS you will see that the odd word is tagged to Strongs.

Edited by Dan Francis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, Deborah!

 

Over the years, there have been a number of proposals to tag the apocrypha, as well as the LXX, and even extra-biblical books (pseudipigrapha, apocalypses, etc.). None of them has gained a lot of traction, either here at Accordance or in other groups. It could be done, though it would require expanding existing key number system(s) dramatically. The real question is exactly how many people would really use it, just as you have asked.

 

While everyone agrees it might be nice, Key Numbers are used most often by those without knowledge of biblical languages (or very limited knowledge). Those people's main interest is usually in the core biblical texts (OT, NT), not these other texts. Scholars tend to be interested in a wider range of texts, but the same training that has convinced them of the value of these texts has usually included courses in biblical languages. They don't need the Key Numbers.

 

I am pleased you've put this question out there. I'm interested in seeing just how many people respond positively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

post-29263-0-49802300-1430844369_thumb.png

 

Yes and to correct any misunderstandings... Logos/Verbum ties the english text to original text but is not directly tied to the strongs system.. See attachments in which the english word formed in verse 2 was hovered over. And others have complained that 2 Esdras (the latin based intro and post) is not tied to the latin, this does not bother me because although I do not speak latin I can usually open up the Vulgate and quick enough find the root of the translation. I personally find the Apocrypha tied to OL very useful and helping me understand how close a connection phrasing from it compares to similar phrasing in the NT. I am not sure if the numbers warrant going ahead with it, but I will say when dealing with the original language Accordance is my goto APP, and generally I only hit Verbum when it is outside of the protestant canon. And looking up in the lexicons in their system requires a couple of steps to get you there.

 

Dan

Edited by Dan Francis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim accurately summarizes the issue with undertaking this, i.e. Strong's was not developed for the Apocrypha and therefore would require significant editing. Logos solved that problem (to an extent) by tagging it with the underlying Greek lemma (though not all texts are primarily translated from Greek, which is an entirely different issue). That method doesn't really work for us since it breaks the logic of a 'key number' text.

 

At one point I looked into another source for the apocrypha already tagged, but it was not complete. If something like that ever is finished, I would lean more toward trying to adapt it into a new resource in Accordance (i.e. not trying to force it into the 'key number' paradigm).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully understand what you are saying Rick and, while less than ideal Verbum works ok for my needs and I understand the task may be more than Accordance wishes to take on. IF YOU DID, you could follow the model of NASB Strongs, that added in numbers not there with letters.

 

19a. ἀγαθουργέω agathourgeo; contr. form of 14; to do good: —did good(1).

 
19b. ἀγαθωσύνη agathosune; from 18; goodness: —goodness(4).
 
Greek Dictionary of the New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance, s.v. “αγαθουργεω,” n.p.
 
-Dan
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would be interested in upgrades to the most current (some of the volumes forthcoming) Editions of especially Göttingen text - I would not require the apparatuses to be upgraded although I would eventually use the upgraded apparatuses if I can get hold of them. Hanhart 2004 would be the alternative (as an upgrade to Ralph's). I would use the 1996 LSJ frequently - I have used it but sold my Verbum copy. I have some Septuagint lexicon in Accordance.

My interest doesn't stem from classes as they didn't touch these things for more than half an hour and I had strong interest since earlier on by different reasons - I take full-time-Hebrew in August-September 2015 but if the RC uni allows me to I'll start in their complete RC canon classes a little late.

I would use any level of tagging made for the Apocrypha/Deuterocanon specifically whether in Hebrew or Greek or both and pay for it if there are any upgrades offered, it would motivate me to keep on taking language classes. Languages will be the biggest area I tackle and I will never learn to read or apply Hermeneutics like a pro due to having started out too late in life, but any progress will prevent me from embarassing myself when authoring a book in the future as I can't see how any reliable, accurate, well-researched or insightful conclusions can be reached if ignoring some of these books.

So what I suggest is that You do: Ben Sira (I would love it in Hebrew to the extent there are manuscript finds and for all the other parts in Greek), 1 Mc, 4 Ezra - that way You would cover some of the least controversial books that many denominations are curious about even if few base or in the case of 1 Mc can easily base any doctrine on those - and it could bring the project down to a realistic level of effort corresponding to some demand. I would suggest You either find a niché in the way You would be tagging these three OT books or at least offer the 2015 Göttingen for them with or without apparatus. Remember: whatever kind of tagging there would be I think it would be appreciated as long as it would be tailored to the extent and languages of these books.
Just my ¢2:

 


The real question is exactly how many people would really use it, just as you have asked.

 

While everyone agrees it might be nice, Key Numbers are used most often by those without knowledge of biblical languages (or very limited knowledge). Those people's main interest is usually in the core biblical texts (OT, NT), not these other texts. Scholars tend to be interested in a wider range of texts, but the same training that has convinced them of the value of these texts has usually included courses in biblical languages.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...