PDA

View Full Version : Hebrew Concordance for LXX?



John Parsons
01-13-2010, 06:21 AM
Hi everyone.

I am trying to find an easy way to search for all instances of how a Hebrew lemma is translated into the Greek LXX. For example, suppose I want to find out how many occurrences of חֶסֶד are rendered using ἔλεος, and so on.

Does anyone have any suggestions for me?

Thanks so much!

יְהִי־חַסְדְּךָ יהוה עָלֵינוּ כַּאֲשֶׁר יִחַלְנוּ לָךְ׃

Michael Hanel
01-13-2010, 08:15 AM
Have you tried using the Tov-Polak Parallel Hebrew-LXX database?

John Parsons
01-13-2010, 08:32 AM
I have looked at it, but I have no idea how to generate a list of corresponding Greek word(s) for a Hebrew lemma
in the LXX. Is that possible using this tool?

I would like to see all the infections of the lemma, not just an individual word, however.

Thanks for responding to my question!

Michael Hanel
01-13-2010, 08:35 AM
I have looked at it, but I have no idea how to generate a list of corresponding Greek word(s) for a Hebrew lemma
in the LXX. Is that possible using this tool?

Thanks for responding to my question!

If you open up the Tov-Polak database, do you see the icon which will have a Greek and Hebrew letter? It should open up a Search for Hebrew-LXX equivalents box and you can type in either a Greek or Hebrew word there.

John Parsons
01-13-2010, 08:38 AM
Thanks Michael. I think you've done it again! Todah!

ISalzman
01-13-2010, 10:54 AM
If you open up the Tov-Polak database, do you see the icon which will have a Greek and Hebrew letter? It should open up a Search for Hebrew-LXX equivalents box and you can type in either a Greek or Hebrew word there.

Hey Michael, thanks for providing the good tip. I figured I'd try your suggestion. One thing I'm curious about is this: When I clicked on the icon with the Greek and Hebrew letters, which, in fact, brought up the search window you referenced, for some reason, the search limit defaulted to

"Gen 1:1 - Jda 21:25"

Any reason that would be so? I would want my search limit to include the entire Hebrew Bible as well as the entire LXX. Suggestions?

Michael Hanel
01-13-2010, 11:58 AM
Hey Michael, thanks for providing the good tip. I figured I'd try your suggestion. One thing I'm curious about is this: When I clicked on the icon with the Greek and Hebrew letters, which, in fact, brought up the search window you referenced, for some reason, the search limit defaulted to

"Gen 1:1 - Jda 21:25"

Any reason that would be so? I would want my search limit to include the entire Hebrew Bible as well as the entire LXX. Suggestions?

I do believe that is the entirety of the Tov-Polak database. But it would not include anything for which there is no Hebrew. So not all of the LXX is included as there are some parts of the LXX which are not in the Hebrew MT. So it's doing exactly what it says it does, but that's not QUITE what you said because there cannot be a parallel for a part which the Hebrew MT does not have. Make sense?

MGVH
01-13-2010, 12:01 PM
... It has something to do with the book orders in the MT as compared to LXX and to the English Bibles...

I'm pretty sure that Gen 1:1 - Jda 21:25 is supposed to cover all books where there are Hebrew and Greek counterparts.

ISalzman
01-13-2010, 12:34 PM
... It has something to do with the book orders in the MT as compared to LXX and to the English Bibles...

I'm pretty sure that Gen 1:1 - Jda 21:25 is supposed to cover all books where there are Hebrew and Greek counterparts.


Okay. Thanks. Strange book order to be sure; Jda stands for Judges a. Maybe the Tov-Polak database is a work in progress that is not complete. Sort of like J.B. Lightfoot's Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica. Lightfoot died before he completed the Corinthian epistles. So, in effect, it's really only a commentary on Matthew - 1 Corinthians; NOT the entire New Testament. And I'm sorry to say, he likely won't get any further in his commentary. By contrast, I believe Emanuel Tov is still alive.

Michael Hanel
01-13-2010, 12:40 PM
Okay. Thanks. Strange book order to be sure; Jda stands for Judges a. Maybe the Tov-Polak database is a work in progress that is not complete. Sort of like J.B. Lightfoot's Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica. Lightfoot died before he completed the Corinthian epistles. So, in effect, it's really only a commentary on Matthew - 1 Corinthians; NOT the entire New Testament. And I'm sorry to say, he likely won't get any further in his commentary. By contrast, I believe Emanuel Tov is still alive.

Nope, Tov-Polak is a completed work. If you click F1 on the database it tells you what is included (see under List of Biblical Book Abbreviations Used in the Alignment)

ISalzman
01-13-2010, 12:58 PM
Nope, Tov-Polak is a completed work. If you click F1 on the database it tells you what is included (see under List of Biblical Book Abbreviations Used in the Alignment)

I'm seeing something different. Here's what mine shows:

I. The Structure of the Parallel Alignment

The books included in the Parallel Alignment are, in the following order:

Gen
ge
Genesis
Exo
ex
Exodus
Lev
le
Leviticus
Num
nu
Numbers
Deu
de
Deuteronomy
Jos
js
Joshua (main text;in some chapters: B text)
Jdg
Jda
jj
j
Judges (B text; A text: Jda, j)
Judges (A text)
Rut
ru
Ruth
1Sa
s
1 Samuel
2Sa
ss
2 Samuel
1Ki
k
1 Kings
2Ki
kk
2 Kings
1Ch
c
1 Chronicles
2Ch
cc
2 Chronicles
Ezr
e
Ezra
Neh
ne
Nehemiah
Est
es
Esther
Job
jb
Job
Psa
p
Psalms
Pro
pr
Proverbs
Ecc
qo
Ecclesiastes (Qoheleth)
Sol
ca
Songs (Canticles)
Isa
is
Isaiah
Jer
je
Jeremiah
Lam
la
Lamentations
Eze
ez
Ezekiel
Dan
d
Daniel
Hos
ho
Hosea
Joe
jl
Joel
Amo
am
Amos
Oba
ob
Obadiah
Jon
jo
Jonah
Mic
mi
Micha
Nah
na
Nahum
Hab
ha
Habakkuk
Zep
ze
Zephaniah
Hag
hg
Haggai
Zec
za
Zachariah
Mal
ma
Malachi
1Es
ee
First Esdras
Sir
Sip
si
Sirach
Prologue Sirach
Bar
ba
Baruch
Dat
dd
Daniel-Theodotion
Jsa
ja
Joshua A text

The default search range is Gen 1:1 - Jda 21:25. Jda is Judges (A Text) and is near the beginning of the LXX book order. Something is awry here.

Michael Hanel
01-13-2010, 01:38 PM
I'm seeing something different. Here's what mine shows:



Right, but that lists books included, not their order. Your best bet for the definitive answer will be if BW staff wants to give their answer, but otherwise, you just have to believe me ;-)

ISalzman
01-13-2010, 02:11 PM
Right, but that lists books included, not their order. Your best bet for the definitive answer will be if BW staff wants to give their answer, but otherwise, you just have to believe me ;-)

Hey Michael, it's not a "you vs. BibleWorks staff" thing. You're both fully competent. Yes, Jsa is the last book in the canonical order of the LXX. However, when you open the Tov-Polak database and click on the icon with the Hebrew and Greek letters, it shows a default search limit of Gen 1:1 - Jda 21:25. Jda stands for Judges (Text A) and comes fairly early in the canonical order, NOT at the end (like Jsa). So, in effect, the search range is NOT the full canon of the LXX.

Michael Hanel
01-13-2010, 02:19 PM
Hey Michael, it's not a "you vs. BibleWorks staff" thing. You're both fully competent. Yes, Jsa is the last book in the canonical order of the LXX. However, when you open the Tov-Polak database and click on the icon with the Hebrew and Greek letters, it shows a default search limit of Gen 1:1 - Jda 21:25. Jda stands for Judges (Text A) and comes fairly early in the canonical order, NOT at the end (like Jsa). So, in effect, the search range is NOT the full canon of the LXX.

Right well I'm saying try a search out and I think you'll find it does include everything. If not, color me wrong. :) What I'm telling you is a BW person will better be able to tell you why it lists the search limit like that more authoritatively than I can.

ISalzman
01-13-2010, 02:27 PM
Right well I'm saying try a search out and I think you'll find it does include everything. If not, color me wrong. :) What I'm telling you is a BW person will better be able to tell you why it lists the search limit like that more authoritatively than I can.

Okay, I hear you. From your lips to the BW people's ears ...

ISalzman
01-13-2010, 02:47 PM
Right well I'm saying try a search out and I think you'll find it does include everything. If not, color me wrong. :) What I'm telling you is a BW person will better be able to tell you why it lists the search limit like that more authoritatively than I can.

Okay, I just tried a search out. It would be a very difficult thing to ascertain whether the search is extended to the entire LXX canon that has a MT equivalent. The search doesn't list the references, for one.

But there's another more disconcerting thing to me about this search feature. I tried the Hebrew verb bha. The third Greek lemma in the list is pathr. That cannot be. It so happens that the Hebrew word for father is found in the context in Gen 37:4. "Father" (in this case, Jacob the Patriarch) is the subject of the verb bha. But pathr is not the LXX equivalent of the Hebrew verb bha. For some reason, the database is picking up words in the context but not the actual equivalent terms themselves. In this case, I'd have to say that the Tov-Polak Aligned Database is somewhat "out of alignment."

Dale A. Brueggemann
01-13-2010, 03:16 PM
I tried the Hebrew verb bha. The third Greek lemma in the list is pathr. That cannot be. It so happens that the Hebrew word for father is found in the context in Gen 37:4. "Father" (in this case, Jacob the Patriarch) is the subject of the verb bha. But pathr is not the LXX equivalent of the Hebrew verb bha.

But you're ignoring the technical abbreviations incorporated. The link between the Hebrew and the Greek linked with the signs ^=, and the = is "Introducing the Hebrew retroversion (in column b) of a Greek text that may be thought to reflect a Hebrew source text different from MT. In such cases the retroversion is considered a plausible reconstruction of that variant in the source text. Often marked as doubtful by a question mark."

ISalzman
01-13-2010, 03:35 PM
But you're ignoring the technical abbreviations incorporated. The link between the Hebrew and the Greek linked with the signs ^=, and the = is "Introducing the Hebrew retroversion (in column b) of a Greek text that may be thought to reflect a Hebrew source text different from MT. In such cases the retroversion is considered a plausible reconstruction of that variant in the source text. Often marked as doubtful by a question mark."

But you're ignoring the fact that the LXX renders 'ahav there (i.e., in Gen 37:4) with the Greek term φιλεῖ. The problem is that the Tov-Polak database doesn't compensate for differences in word order between the Hebrew and Greek texts. It is standard that languages will differ in word order; that is to be expected. In Hebrew, the literal way that one would refer to the residence of the Obamas would be "the house white." But if you're claiming to align the two texts and enable readers to find the equivalents, then your database should be able to overcome things like different word orders. At any rate, thankfully, I've studied both languages (Hebrew and Greek) and am not reliant on sub par tools and resources. I don't mean to sound immodest here. But this is a shortcoming of the Tov-Polak database in my opinion.

Dale A. Brueggemann
01-13-2010, 04:13 PM
Tov-Polak database doesn't compensate for differences in word order between the Hebrew and Greek texts.

Of course it does; that's why the alignment is one word at a time rather than phrase at a time or some attempt at an interlinear.

I would imagine Professor Tov of Hebrew University and one of the world's leading authorities on LXX studies would grasp the idea that Hebrew word order and Hebrew word order differ ;o)

ISalzman
01-13-2010, 04:27 PM
Of course it does; that's why the alignment is one word at a time rather than phrase at a time or some attempt at an interlinear.

I would imagine Professor Tov of Hebrew University and one of the world's leading authorities on LXX studies would grasp the idea that Hebrew word order and Hebrew word order differ ;o)

Yes, well apparently in his work of alignment, he saw that "'ahav" and "pater" were equivalents. If only he had looked a few words further, he would have noticed the word philei, which is the Greek equivalent to "'ahav" there. If only he had asked me! I would have set him straight. ;)

Mark Eddy
01-14-2010, 12:01 AM
Gentlemen,
In the Tov-Polak module when you search on a Hebrew lemma in the "Search for Hebrew - LXX equivalents" window, what is displayed in the Greek column is all the BLM Greek lemmas which are part of any phrase which seems to translate every WTT Hebrew word (including preixes and suffixes) which has the Hebrew lemma bha as part of it. Then you, the user must look to see which words most likely translate the given Hebrew lemma. The results are given in increasing order of occurance, so when you scroll down the list you see at the bottom 166 occurance of agapaw (and 10 of filew). If you click on that line, the main Tov-Polak window will display al 166 verses in which both bha and agapaw occur. You will see the references for all these verses, and then if you wish to explore the verses further, you may click on a verse reference. There are some anomalies yet, as you have discovered. When the word order is different, and the Hebrew column has two words (e.g. when the Greek reverses the order), BW currently reads only one of the Hebrew words. Thus there seem to be some strange corresponding words in Greek. Also in cases where more than one Greek verse covers a given Hebrew verse, BW currently does not allow both verses to display at the top right box in the Tov-Polak window. So the user does still have to check out the verses with "strange" correspondences, to see if there is another word in the context which better fits as the translation of the Hebrew word in question. In short, at this point you cannot conclude that there are only 166 times in the LXX where agapaw translates bha. But if you make suggestions to the programmers for how to deal with these word order changes (which Tov has already marked--so he did not make a mistake about Gen. 37:4, it is a display problem with BW), the programmers might be able to find a way to deal with this sort of this. It never hurts to ask.
Mark Eddy

ISalzman
01-14-2010, 09:25 AM
Thanks Mark.

I don't mean to impugn the tool glibly. I think, conceptually, it has great potential. No New Testament word studies should ever disregard how NT Greek words were used in the LXX and, specifically, what Hebrew words and concepts they translated. I believe the NT authors were more in tune with how the Greek words they penned were used in the LXX than they were with how the Greek words were used elsewhere in the ancient Greek world and culture. But I think, as we've discovered, there are yet glitches in the software.

I actually have the Tov Parallel Aligned Database on another bible software platform and it seems to have less ambiguity there. (I could be wrong, but what little I looked at it, it seems to have less quirks there. No criticism of BW intended.)

By the way, I just ran the search on bha again. Do you know what the superscripted numbers to the right of the verse references represent? Thanks for your help.

Mark Eddy
01-14-2010, 08:22 PM
The superscripted numbers to the right of the verse reference are the position of the word in the sentence. This refers to the actual WTT word, not the lemma. For example in Gen. 1:1 the word number 2 is arb, although the first word tyvarB contains two lemmas.

Mark Eddy

ISalzman
01-14-2010, 08:46 PM
The superscripted numbers to the right of the verse reference are the position of the word in the sentence. This refers to the actual WTT word, not the lemma. For example in Gen. 1:1 the word number 2 is arb, although the first word tyvarB contains two lemmas.

Mark Eddy

Very interesting. Phrases are also assigned a position in the sentence. For example, in position 5 in Gen 1:1 are the words וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ. You'll notice that in the latter case, we are actually dealing with - count 'em - 4 lemmas.

John Parsons
01-19-2010, 06:34 PM
So the upshot is there is not an adequate tool that will provide me with a concordance of the various Greek words used to translate any given Hebrew lemma. :(

bkMitchell
01-20-2010, 06:11 PM
Hi everyone.
I am trying to find an easy way to search for all instances of how a Hebrew lemma is translated into the Greek LXX. For example, suppose I want to find out how many occurrences of חֶסֶד are rendered using ἔλεος, and so on.
Does anyone have any suggestions for me?
Thanks so much!
יְהִי־חַסְדְּךָ יהוה עָלֵינוּ כַּאֲשֶׁר יִחַלְנוּ לָךְ׃

This sounds like a job for the ASE or what many now call the GSE.
1. Open the GSE
2a. Create a Merge Box
2b. Click on and open the Merge Box select the, AND in the how to merge option then as your version select (LXT)
3a. Now, open two Word Boxes
3b. In the first box select LXT as the version and enter ἔλεος
3c.In the Second Box select WTT as the version and enter חֶסֶד
4. Now, click on the select word connect mode icon and draw lines from each of the word boxes to the Merge Box
5. Click on the Green go icon
6. Enjoy looking at the results in the browse and search result windows.

I got 63 verses and 75 hits

MGVH
01-20-2010, 07:15 PM
Actually, I think you want to use the WTM and the BLM (so you get the lemmas and not just the morphological form).
I get 224 hits in 202 verses.
BUT
note that this only tells you if those words are in the same verse. The first hit, Gen 19.19, has both words, but it is חֵן that is translated with ελεος while חַסְדְּךָ is translated with τὴν δικαιοσύνην σου.
That's where Tov-Polak can sort those kind of mistakes out, but Tov-Polak misses some of the compound form instances like Deut 7.12 where הסד is mapped to the definite article.

bkMitchell
01-20-2010, 08:46 PM
Actually, I think you want to use the WTM and the BLM (so you get the lemmas and not just the morphological form).
I get 224 hits in 202 verses...

I think you're right, and the 202 verses is kind of interesting to me. I'll tell you why in just a second.


...Tov-Polak misses some of the compound form instances like Deut 7.12 where הסד is mapped to the definite article.

Okay, when I used The Tov-Polak module's Search of Hebrew-LXX Equivalents and typed in both ἔλεος and הסד at the same time. I received 202 hits and one of those hits is Deut 7. 12. So, the verse is there I guess we just have prune the results.

Thanks again Mark, I think this is coming very close to what John Parsons was trying to do.

MBushell
01-21-2010, 10:17 AM
You have to understand what the Tov database is and what it is not. The database produced by Tov-Polak is simply an alignment of the Hebrew and Greek Texts. It synchs Hebrew words with Greek phrases by placing the two texts in parallel coumns.

BibleWorks attempst to extract Hebrew-Greek equivalents by comparing these word-phrase pairs and looing at the part of speech labels. There are a number of reasons why this cannot work perfectly: (1) often a single Hebrew word synchs with a long Greek phrase and (2) in hundreds of cases the equivalence is just a guess because the correspondence is tenuous. Remember that we don't have the original Hebrew text behind the LXX. Basically what BibleWorks gives you is a good starting point at building an equivalence list. That is the best that can be done because there is not a one to one equivalence between Hebrew words and Greek words.

Joshua Luna
01-21-2010, 11:34 AM
You have to understand what the Tov database is and what it is not. The database produced by Tov-Polak is simply an alignment of the Hebrew and Greek Texts. It synchs Hebrew words with Greek phrases by placing the two texts in parallel coumns.

BibleWorks attempst to extract Hebrew-Greek equivalents by comparing these word-phrase pairs and looing at the part of speech labels. There are a number of reasons why this cannot work perfectly: (1) often a single Hebrew word synchs with a long Greek phrase and (2) in hundreds of cases the equivalence is just a guess because the correspondence is tenuous. Remember that we don't have the original Hebrew text behind the LXX. Basically what BibleWorks gives you is a good starting point at building an equivalence list. That is the best that can be done because there is not a one to one equivalence between Hebrew words and Greek words.

Good explanation Mike.

To add to Mike's observations the LXX as we have it reflects many different hands that demonstrate varying degrees of formality and ability in working with the text. Putting aside issues of formality and Good Greek some books of the LXX are simply very uneven and poor in terms of quality--and some books (like Jeremiah and some Ester texts) are significantly divergent that the concept of a traditional concordance, while appealing at a surface level, doesn't align with the circumstance of the text.

An unnuanced concordance could present more problems (especially in regards to assumptions and a lack of appreciation for the complexities surrounding the LXX) that solutions.

On the other hand the standard Lexicons and Wordbooks should offer a great starting point in conjunction with the BW tools to accelerate a survey of important words/phrases. Anyhow, due to the complexity of the issue, any resource is going to have to make some difficult decisions that anyone tredging the same path would want to review directly. (Reviewing Dodd and Morris on their survey of the words related to atonement, justification, and propitiation was an eye opener in regards to how qualified scholars with the same sources can come to quite different conclusions from the text texts in regards to word usage and Hebrew/Greek relationships.)

John Parsons
01-26-2010, 02:17 AM
Thanks everyone. I've learned a lot listening to each of you. At any rate, I *can* do a Hebrew lemma search using BibleWorks 8 and then determine the Koine Greek word(s) used to express each instance. Tedious but doable.

Thanks again for the discussion.