Jump to content

Tagged Version of the ESV


BrianBowman
 Share

Recommended Posts

The English Standard Version (ESV) is an excellent target for Greek and Hebrew text tagging as it is quickly becoming the "standard" in Reformed churches. I would be willing to contribute time toward such an effort.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian, can you please clarify what you mean by giving an example or two of what kind of Hebrew and Greek tagging you have in mind? Are you referring to the footnotes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The same tagging found in the KJVS and NAS95S Accordance Texts yielding the basic Hebrew or Greek word (usually a root) with Strongs (other lexcion source?) linking. With these two texts (and I understand the tagged NIV as well) the basic original language word and the Strongs reference number appear in the instant details box when the cursor encouters a translated English word.

 

Is this what you are asking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The English Standard Version (ESV) is an excellent target for Greek and Hebrew text tagging as it is quickly becoming the "standard" in Reformed churches.  I would be willing to contribute time toward such an effort.

I agree and would not only buy, I'd help. The ESV has become my primary translation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, thanks. I've never used Strong's numbers, but from what little I understand, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strong's_concordance, the concept could be applied to the ESV, though one hopes that more accurate and up-to-date resources could be used in linking, given the ESV's own aim for accuracy. I also imagine the ESV committee would have final say on the desirability of this type of tagging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you check out the Normal Flash demo on the main site (www.accordancebible.com), it will show you an overview of the main features, plus an example of what it can do with the Strong's Numbers tagged texts, which include NAS95S, NIV-G/K, and KJVS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Oh please, please, please add the ESV "tagged" with the Strong's Numbers from the Greek and Hebrew... that would be about THE best addition to the Accordance Library that I could think of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people would agree with you, but is there a text of the ESV with Strong's numbers available? It is a lot of work to add the numbers to the etext. Are you offering to do that work for the greater good?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people would agree with you, but is there a text of the ESV with Strong's numbers available? It is a lot of work to add the numbers to the etext. Are you offering to do that work for the greater good?

 

... well I'd be willing to start with the book of Jude

:) In other words, if several of us could work together, yes

Edited by BrianBowman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people would agree with you, but is there a text of the ESV with Strong's numbers available? It is a lot of work to add the numbers to the etext. Are you offering to do that work for the greater good?

 

 

A tagged ESV is already in the works. I believe Logos is funding the project. It will appear in print as a "reverse interlinear" with the English text on the first line and the Greek line below along with Strong's numbers. The prepub press is already out. The NT is not expected to be out until 2006.

 

See the link for Crossway's announcement. http://www.gnpcb.org/product/158134628X

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I'm a seminary student studying Greek and would be more than willing to put some effort toward this cause. The ESV is my primary translation and it would benefit many fellow students and pastors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I would pay for ESV again to have a tagged version. Perhaps you could check with crossway to see if there is a way to get in on the fun, rather than allowing it to be a logos exclusive. Methinks that exclusives for either platform (logos or accordance) is bad for users...

 

Joel

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

A tagged ESV is what I check the site for regularly. Hopefully it will be available soon?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
what makes the ESV so special?

Thx,

Steve

Ah, how here's a can of very delicious worms!

 

The ESV, while following in the KJV family tradition is a highly accurate and faithful translation that was part of the explosion of translations released in the late 90s-early 00s. It is a great study Bible as it tries to stay as close as possible in English to the original languages; for example it maintains the original text genders. It is written in a standard North American English, avoiding colloquialisms and such that can get dated quickly. All in all, for me it is a great contemporary English translation that tries to be true to its text.

 

The only downside is that it is not greatly readable. I would balk at choosing the ESV for congregational reading because the translation is stilted in places as it tries to retain original language word order and uses word meanings that may not be the easiest in English. For public worship and personal study translations that flow for the ear are best, I believe.

 

So when I reach for an English Bible to study from I always use the ESV first, but in my devotions and public readings I find it may not be the best (at those times I reach for the NLT-se).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only downside is that it is not greatly readable.

 

I completely agree and wish more people would acknowledge this. My wife and I are reading the ESV this year and I am often disappointed by the horrible English (especially in the OT).

 

Peace,

 

Jeremy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tagged, yes.

Strong's, no.

But I cannot think of an alternative to Strong's numbers, except for the Goodricke & Kohlenberger's system.

Any alternatives?

 

~A!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any alternatives?

 

How about direct tagging information - just like in the original language texts?

 

So you hover over the word party in Galatians 2.12 and in the instant details box you read αἵρεσις, party, sect. Sounds great, except that that word isn't in Galatians 2.12 - it was inserted by the translators to make proper English. So I guess it gets linked as a phrase: "the circumcision party".

 

I don't know if this is feasible - the KJV tagging doesn't work like this, obviously.... what I mean is that when you hover on a word that isn't in the original text, there is no translation, so the reader is left to wonder where it comes from and what it is attached to, if anything. Perhaps this is too difficult a project...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

You just had to bump, didn't you? :) It makes it harder then not to chime in on the "can of worms" that was opened. Do correct any of my misconceptions, but regarding the stated merits of the ESV, the concept is that there should be a one for one word to word correspondence between English word and Greek/Hebrew words, and that these Greek/Hebrew words should be translated with the same English word whenever possible. Any translator outside of theology would gasp at this adherence.

 

The benefit articulated seems to make it a half step between reading a translation and reading the original language--but that's not a translation, though it may be a useful tool. I'd suggest reading the original language or reading a good translation. Phrases such as "it keeps the original gender of words" imply that grammatical gender in Greek for instance equates with gender in English and that is just not the case.

 

Many, even most, words in a translation could have an underlying Greek/Hebrew form tagged in, but placing such a restriction on a translation sure does stymie the translation. I've not seen the NIV Greek/Hebrew so don't know how they address this situation. It may be done brilliantly.

 

Just giving voice to one worm in the can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joe,

 

Actually I agree with you. I have no illusions that the ESV is a word-for-word translation (or any other text for that matter), nor the belief that Greek or Hebrew words are translated the same way all the time. In fact, it is precisely because of these things that I want it.

 

Consider the following question: How is the word aner translated in the ESV as compared to the NIV or KJV? Anyone who is interested in inclusive language translation questions would greatly benefit from this type of key number text. Of course it can be done now with Accordance but it is a highly manual process. Or how does the ESV's "literal" translation really look when considered across the broader text? A text with key numbers can be used to both prove or disprove the "literal-ness" of a translation. Both of these questions can only be answered by comparing the original language with the word or words that the translators decided to use. And that information can come most easily with a key number text.

 

Jeremy

Edited by jarcher
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
You just had to bump, didn't you? :) It makes it harder then not to chime in on the "can of worms" that was opened. Do correct any of my misconceptions, but regarding the stated merits of the ESV, the concept is that there should be a one for one word to word correspondence between English word and Greek/Hebrew words, and that these Greek/Hebrew words should be translated with the same English word whenever possible. Any translator outside of theology would gasp at this adherence.

 

The benefit articulated seems to make it a half step between reading a translation and reading the original language--but that's not a translation, though it may be a useful tool. I'd suggest reading the original language or reading a good translation. Phrases such as "it keeps the original gender of words" imply that grammatical gender in Greek for instance equates with gender in English and that is just not the case.

 

Many, even most, words in a translation could have an underlying Greek/Hebrew form tagged in, but placing such a restriction on a translation sure does stymie the translation. I've not seen the NIV Greek/Hebrew so don't know how they address this situation. It may be done brilliantly.

 

Just giving voice to one worm in the can.

 

It sounds like you have misconceptions about how those merits are actually implemented in practice. ESV seeks to be as faithful to the original text as possible, and I think they do a very good job (with some exceptions) on the whole. The problem is that in their effort to change as little of the text as possible they can come up with some very awkward english readings.

 

I like the ESV and I use it as my daily bible. I like to study from it and work from it. To be honest though, when I preach or write I do often find myself wanting a bible with better English.

 

Joel

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...