Do I Need the Brill's/Should I have them?

[Lawrence]

@ReformedDoc

 

Brill lists more forms as primary entries than BDAG. For example:

Brill: ἐκαθιζον impf. ind. act., see καθίζω.

BDAG: not found, even under καθίζω.

 

So if you know the lexical root, BDAG is good. If you don't, Brill is a lot more helpful.

However, with Accordance, double/triple-click, mouse-overs and ctrl-mouse-overs get you to the BDAG entries quickly.

 

BDAG and Brill also use different expressions to define words, so you might get some additional insight from looking up both, particularly if you hit a cryptic entry in your default lexicon.

[Tim Planche]

15 minutes ago, Kristin said:

If you don't mind, could you post a screenshot of what Brill (and LSJ if you have it) says for the entry of τεχνῖτις ?

here they are

 

BrillDAG first

 

and now the LSJ - this is a subsection of τεχνι̅́της

 

the choice what is an entry does very between lexica - I find this often happens with where adverbs are classified

p.s. also can see that τεχνι̅́της is in BDAG - but it does not include τεχνι̅́τiς

 

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

The sale price is pretty good. I use Brill DAG as a supplement to BDAG and LSJ. According to Daily Dose of Greek, it looks like an updated version of LSJ. 

 

Any chance I've had to grab Brill stuff on sale, I've done it. Their stuff is top-notch and high-end. 

[Donald Cobb]

11 hours ago, Nathan Parker said:

The sale price is pretty good. I use Brill DAG as a supplement to BDAG and LSJ. According to Daily Dose of Greek, it looks like an updated version of LSJ. 

 

Any chance I've had to grab Brill stuff on sale, I've done it. Their stuff is top-notch and high-end. 

 

Is there a compelling reason to use LSJ (which, in its basic edition is now over a century old) over or beside BrillDAG? My feeling is that the latter more or less replaces the former. I'd be interested in anyone's feedback. I use BrillDag pretty much constantly, and systematically with anything outside of BDAG's or LEH's (for the LXX) scope.

[Lawrence]

7 hours ago, Donald Cobb said:

 

Is there a compelling reason to use LSJ (which, in its basic edition is now over a century old) over or beside BrillDAG? My feeling is that the latter more or less replaces the former. I'd be interested in anyone's feedback. I use BrillDag pretty much constantly, and systematically with anything outside of BDAG's or LEH's (for the LXX) scope.

 

When one way of phrasing things still leaves me scratching my head, the different phrasing of another resource can be helpful.

[darrylmy]

7 hours ago, Donald Cobb said:

 

Is there a compelling reason to use LSJ (which, in its basic edition is now over a century old) over or beside BrillDAG? My feeling is that the latter more or less replaces the former. I'd be interested in anyone's feedback. I use BrillDag pretty much constantly, and systematically with anything outside of BDAG's or LEH's (for the LXX) scope.

 

Here are some summary quotations from different reviews, but I would especially encourage you to read Lee's review article in Novum Testamentum if you have access and are interested in the details:

 

From the late Dr. James Aitken:

 

Quote

The simple answer is that every lexicon has its benefits and its short­ comings, and any new lexicon should be used in conjunction with its predecessors. In this case, one can see the influence of LSJ on some of the entries, with the same glosses and the same number of definitions, and therefore comparison between the two is helpful. At the same time, GE does incorporate evidence from new discoveries, provi­ ding examples from papyri and inscriptions for lexemes that were poorly attested in the time of LSJ. This gives more attestations for some LXX and NT words, but also more evidence for morphological formations in koine that can be compared to new words in biblical Greek. Not only is the appearance of this English translation very welcome, but the reasonable price, given the size of the volume, is a reason for celebration.

 

From a student of Dr. Aitken, Dr. William Ross:

 

Quote

Montanari and his colleagues deserve sincere admiration for their industry and scholarly expertise. Yet, although on occasion GE offers some insight not available in comparable lexicons, its degree of derivation from LSJ and the dearth of genuinely new analysis or data mean that Greek lexicography has been largely reduplicated rather than advanced.

 

From (lexicographer) Dr. John A. L. Lee:

 

Quote

(a) Is GE a “better” lexicon than LSJ? No. (b) Is it a competitor to LSJ? Yes; but only because it is a major lexicon aimed at covering the same territory, (c) Is it the equal of LSJ? No. (d) Can it replace LSJ? No. (e) Will it serve the purposes of the ordinary student beyond elementary level? Yes, up to a point, (f) Can it serve the purposes of scholars? Again, up to a point, (g) Does it apply an improved method of defining meaning? No. (h) Is it better at lexical analysis than LSJ? No. (i) Does it offer generally better coverage of meanings and attestation than LSJ? No. (j) Does it actually provide better coverage of post-Classical Greek, as it claims to do? No, very seldom, (k) Does it omit information that LSJ offers? Yes, often. (1) Is its presentation easier to follow than LSJ’s? To a slight extent only, (m) Is its numbering system easy to follow? No. (n) What does it offer that LSJ does not? Limited additions to the attestation of words and some meanings, (o) Is it basically a translation of its predecessor G? Yes. (p) Is Gi basically a revision of a predecessor? Yes. ... Lexicons like GE are now a holding operation. Rather than continue to produce new lexicons based on old ones, the next generation of Greek lexicographers must rethink how to gather and present their material. Gathering of data by electronic means is now the only option; and a reappraisal of the meanings is essential.

 

[Tim Planche]

3 hours ago, Donald Cobb said:

 

Is there a compelling reason to use LSJ (which, in its basic edition is now over a century old) over or beside BrillDAG? My feeling is that the latter more or less replaces the former. I'd be interested in anyone's feedback. I use BrillDag pretty much constantly, and systematically with anything outside of BDAG's or LEH's (for the LXX) scope.

Hi Donald

In terms of the feedback I am like you and I use BrillDAG pretty much all the time as the first port of call - I will often look up in a second lexicon and then it depends on what I am reading.

I suppose it depends on the reason I looking up and the word I am looking at as to what I do next. I may also look it up in LSJ and sometimes BDAG - If I want to see the Hebrew equivalents and the development of a word and usage change over time then I will look at TDNT. 

If I really want to understand a word (and then the word is not too frequently used) then Lexica may not be enough and i will be using research to find the usage in all the texts in accordance or even going to papyri or perseus to see how the word is used in context. 

As the above rabbit hole is quite time-consuming and I am trying to read fluently and quickly  - without spending too much time looking up in a lexicon. (As a simple gloss is rarely enough)  I find the BrillDAG the most efficient first place  for a quick look up.

[Donald Cobb]

Thanks all for your commentaries! Thank you @darrylmy in particular for reproducing the reviews. They are helpful.

[Misulejoha]

@Kristin I dont's have Brill but here's the entry you were inquiring about from LSJ.

 

[Misulejoha]

1 minute ago, Misulejoha said:

@Kristin I dont's have Brill but here's the entry you were inquiring about from LSJ.

 

 

@Kristin, my bad.  I didn't see the post past yours where Tim Planche responded back to you.  Just trying to help.

[ReformedDoc]

@Lawrence@Tim Planche@darrylmy@Nathan Parker

 

I went ahead bought the Brill & a few others things, before anyone ask me about why the Mounce it's because I have his Greek dictionary & not this one so now I have both.😁

The Use of the Septuagint in New Testament Research (McLay)
Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words
Handbook of New Testament Exegesis, A (Blomberg)
Textual Guide to the Greek New Testament
Discovering the Septuagint: A Guided Reader (Jobes)
NA28 Guide: A User’s Guide to NA28
Hebrew Masoretic and Septuagint Parallel (2nd Edition)
Prepositions and Theology in the Greek New Testament
The Brill Dictionary of Ancient Greek, 3rd ed.

Edited June 12, 2023 by ReformedDoc

[ukfraser]

Nothing wrong with mounce. I actually like having this as its in my dictionary section as opposed to usually having to go to greek lexicon section. 

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

@ReformedDoc You'll like Brill, and Mounce is useful too.

[Lawrence]

@ReformedDoc

Dare I say (in an Aussie accent) ... that's brill mate, you have mounce of good stuff now!

[ReformedDoc]

12 hours ago, ukfraser said:

Nothing wrong with mounce. I actually like having this as its in my dictionary section as opposed to usually having to go to greek lexicon section. 

Exactly where mine is under the ISBE Revised.

[Dr. Nathan Parker]

ISBE Revised is good too. Love that one!