Benjamin Denckla Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 This thread over in the Technical Support forum poses some questions that may be relevant here in the Original Languages Forum: To me, perhaps the most important questions it poses are: What is Oak Tree's current policy with regard to corrections to these texts? For instance, with regard to BHS-T, is it Oak Tree's policy to only take a correction only if it causes BHS-T to more closely match the paper BHS? What has been Oak Tree's past policy with regard to corrections to these texts? For instance, with regard to BHS-T, where it differs from the paper BHS in a way that seems like a correction, where did these corrections come from? (A difference seems like a correction if it causes BHS-T to more closely match the LC manuscript and/or one or more authoritative transcriptions of the LC.) An example is the removal of the dagesh from the shin in השמה in Lev. 26:34. Is Oak Tree interested in having a UXLC module, which IMO is a better diplomatic edition of the LC than any it currently has? Is Oak Tree interested in having a MAM module, which is a general-purpose Hebrew Bible? As far as I know Oak Tree has no general-purpose Hebrew Bibles, since as far as I know all of its Hebrew Bibles are diplomatic editions of the LC. (In my opinion any diplomatic edition of the LC is not a general-purpose edition, despite the fact that diplomatic editions of the LC (all derived from BHS) have been used (perhaps misused) as general-purpose editions widely and for decades.) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nathan Parker Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 Thanks for these questions! Let me see what I can find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nathan Parker Posted February 13, 2023 Share Posted February 13, 2023 We’re looking into MAM, but we don’t have an ETA on it yet. I’m trying to get clarification on our policies for the other questions. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accordance Enthusiast Posted February 15, 2023 Share Posted February 15, 2023 I remember that, I think it was @Mark Allison, who asked that we should still report mistakes even though the mistakes are in the printed BHS. If it was not him, it was some Accordance staff member at that time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accordance Enthusiast Posted February 15, 2023 Share Posted February 15, 2023 Here is the thread: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.c3123c857d1029f98e39c9394adc358d.png)
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now