PDA

View Full Version : Page Numbers for HALOT entries



hadarot
09-06-2004, 03:17 AM
Hi,
In the BDB database, each entry lists the page on which it is found in the print version of the lexicon. But these page numbers are not present in the HALOT database. Are they going to be incorporated in the future? Is there a way to find the page numbers besides finding a copy of the print vresion and checking there?

jdarlack
09-06-2004, 12:11 PM
I believe that this question was asked before on the old Topica email list. If my memory serves me correctly, the folks at BW placed HALOT's section (entry) numbers at the beginning of the AIW. So that, for instance, the entry for tyvar is at Hal8618 (entry/section 8618). This was done because in the opinion of some the entry numbers were a more accurate way of citing the lexicon than page numbers.

Joe Fleener
09-06-2004, 09:26 PM
This is consistent with the recommended procedure followed by most style manuals. The SBL Handbook of Style and Turabian both require a writer to reference the written source rather than electronic source when available.



There are several editions of HALOT the page numbers are different for each, but the entry numbers are the same. Therefore no matter what paper edition you may go to check, you will find it by referencing the entry number.



Even with all these great electronic tools, there is still a need for a library! :)

Gontroppo
09-07-2004, 01:18 AM
"Despite all the great electronic resources..."
Trust Conan the librarian to say that!
David McKay
PS: I have to agree, but!

Mark Eddy
09-07-2004, 01:57 AM
This is consistent with the recommended procedure followed by most style manuals. The SBL Handbook of Style and Turabian both require a writer to reference the written source rather than electronic source when available.


There are several editions of HALOT the page numbers are different for each, but the entry numbers are the same. Therefore no matter what paper edition you may go to check, you will find it by referencing the entry number.
When did this entry numbering system start?
I have a printed copy of "A Bilingual [German/English] Dictionary of the Hebrew and Aramaic Old Testament" version of Koehler & Baumgartner's HALOT, published by Brill in 1998, and it doesn't have any entry numbers.

In Christ,
Mark Eddy

Joe Fleener
09-07-2004, 07:21 AM
Mark,



You are absolutely correct. I was making an assumption without checking my own source to verify my statement. I apologize.



I have the five volume Brill edition (Vol. 1 from 1994, Vol. 5 from 2000) and they do not contain entry numbers either.



The copyright information for the edition within BW states:



The Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon

of the Old Testament

by

Ludwig Koehler And Walter Baumgartner

Subsequently Revised By

Walter Baumgartner And Johann Jakob Stamm

With Assistance From

Benedikt Hartmann Ÿ Ze'ev Ben-Hayyim

Eduard Yechezkel Kutscher Ÿ Philippe Reymond

Translated And Edited

Under The Supervision Of

M.E.J. Richardson



BRILL



The Hebrew & Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, CD-ROM Edition

© 1994-2000 Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. All rights reserved



ISBN 90 04 11151 4 (individual user version)

ISBN 90 04 11731 8 (institutional, 1-5 users)

ISBN 90 04 11872 1 (6-10 users)

ISBN 90 04 11874 8 (10-25 users)



This tells me that the electronic edition contained within BW is a “version” of the CD-ROM edition produced by Brill. This being the case, the entry numbers are probably something that Brill came up with for their CD. I do not have a copy of this CD version.




This all proves (along with my blunder in not checking the printed source) that when referencing a source we should not rely completely on the electronic editions. :o (Lesson learned!)

jdarlack
09-09-2004, 07:08 AM
Harumph! I should have LOOKED at the print source myself.

It's amazing how my foggy memory can come up with "supposed facts" to answer a question and make me look smart at first only to make me look presumptuous in the end.

I hope I don't preach/teach like this!:o

~Humbled Jim

(I just looked at the original Brill Electronic edition put out by Logos. They don't have page numbers OR entry numbers! I wonder if the entry numbers were an invention of the BibleWorks team?)

hadarot
09-11-2004, 05:52 AM
In any case, I would love to see the BW incoporate page numbers from the most "standard" edition of HALOT. This would make using the database almost self-sufficient, without need of the print edition to make citations.

SkipB
09-18-2004, 01:12 PM
OK, I hate to be the old stick in the mud, but I insist my students check their work done with electronic sources against print. The process of digitizing material originally released in printed form is not uniform. Most electronic databases are well checked, but errors are always possible. For now I think it is part of the student's job to be able to use both media in a complementary fashion. The pastoral exegete may not have the time or access to sources to be able to do this, but in an academic setting, I think it is important. I've been encouraging students to use electronic tools in a careful, thoughtful way since the late 80's. But I've always argued that the tools were just that a tool to expedite communication and in the scholastic world, print is the standard arena of communication so our work must always reference the standard. Things are changing and I am excited about where they will go, but for now don't sell the books. Of course that is just my opinion.;)

rriffle822
09-18-2004, 04:17 PM
I respect your opinion and understand from where it is coming, but that said there can also be publishing errors in a printed book also.

I guess we could still say that electronic media is still a copy of the original, but more and more this copy is becoming an exact copy depending on how it was reproduced electronically. I would think it is to the stage now where there should be a standard for siting an electronic source even if there is a printed source of the same material.

While it isn't always the case, people do not always have access to the "original book" and it is a great boon to have the book available on disk or online. Why should a student/scholar be limited in the use of the book for producing a paper or book just because of that fact.

I love my library and have a large investment in reference books, but I would have loved to have had electronic versions available when I was in school it would have been a great economic benefit at that time. I cannot imagne myself investing in "reference material" again if I can purchase it in an electronic format.

Ron

Mark Eddy
09-19-2004, 06:22 PM
This may be shortchanging the reference a bit, but I believe that when citing from dictionaries, lexicons, and encyclopedias is it proper to give the title of the reference book, followed by "s.v." (latin abbreviation for "under the word") followed the the name of the entry (in a lexicon the entry for the word in question) in quotations marks, followed by the author's name. Ordinarily a volume number and/or a page number would follow. But since works of this sort are in alphabetical order, a reader could find the reference in these works simply by looking up the word. Any reader of your research who knows the original languages (at least the order of their alphabet letters) could find the reference, even without the page number. It would be up to the professors of each institution to decide if such a short-cut would be acceptable for some kinds of papers. Those of us in the field wouldn't miss the page numbers at the end of the reference, as long as we know our ABCs. Just another thought.

Mark Eddy

SkipB
09-20-2004, 08:13 AM
The style manuals are not uniform in thier suggestions here. If you check the style guides published by different seminaries and colleges in their online library materials, there are a lot of good suggestions. Most do not like "S.V." for lexicons.

1 If the electronic form is used and not checked against the printed version, that should be explicitly stated in the citation as well as listing the access program.
For example
"See." (blepw, 24:7). Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains. Ed. Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida. 2nd ed. New York: United Bible Societies, 1989. BibleWorks. CD-ROM. Vers. 6.0. BibleWorks, 2003.

2 It is always good to cite all your tools, the first footnote to a biblical text may contain a notice that BibleWorks (or some other program) was used to obtain biblical citations. I may be different than most in wanting to see this but I think it will become more common