PDA

View Full Version : Jenni & Westerman



Adelphos
04-06-2005, 05:03 PM
For anyone who is familiar with Jenni & Westerman's "Theological Lexicon Of The Old Testament," I would be interested to know your opinion of it, along with the current conventional wisdom regarding its usefulness, if there be such.

I find one of its strengths to be its sourcing of a number of other lexicons, like BDB, TWOT, and so forth. This is a handy feature in this set, as it tells you the exact page number.

Just curious as to what others think of it as a whole.

Scott
http://www.lamblion.net

Ben Spackman
04-06-2005, 06:49 PM
I haven't seen any of it other than the 25 page sample chapter. (pdf format (http://www.hendrickson.com/pdf/chapters/1565631331-ch01.pdf))

I'm impressed with what I've seen, and would hope to see it in BW eventually.

Adelphos
04-06-2005, 11:51 PM
I'm impressed with what I've seen, and would hope to see it in BW eventually.

I'm pretty impressed with it myself. I have consulted it frequently, and while there are, as in most productions, things which I would take dire issue with, it is, for the most part, a very nice piece of work because it lays out a lot of information and at least appears to try to be objective in the presentation of that information. In most cases, anyway.

I would say that Jenni & Westerman is to the OT -- in a way -- what the TDNT is to the NT, although TDNT obviously presents a lot more data. Jenni & Westerman is also similar to TWOT in its presentation.

As you can see from your pdf, they have compiled a great deal of data, and they also give you the exact whereabouts of the word in several other lexicons so you can jump right in and make comparisons, which is useful if you are using books instead of an electronic edition.

Of course, I would love to see this particular work in BW, but I must admit, I only use the electronic editions for quick references and searches, and for copying and pasting, and so forth. When I'm really investigating a matter, I resort to the print editions, but an electronic version in BW would still be an excellent addition to the nice corpus that already exist.

However, I would like to suggest that all future additions regarding commentaries, lexicons, and dictionaries be formatted and linked such as is done with BDAG and HALOT.

This is an almost mandatory requirement at this stage of the game in Bible Software Development, as almost all of these types of tools are being deployed in this manner in the current biblical programs that are coming out.

After reading some of the comments in the other threads, it sounds like BW7 will have a lot of surprises. Mabye this will be one of them.

Scott
http://www.lamblion.net

MBushell
04-07-2005, 08:52 AM
Hi guys,

Just to whet your appetite a bit, we are looking at a number of new modules for 7.0. We have over a dozen major item in the works. Westerman is not on the list for 7 simply because there is a limit to what we can do and still get the product out in a reasonable amount of time. In fact the new module and documentation are the major things holding up the release. In answer to your suggestion, yes all resources will have Scripture hyperlinks and be integrated into the Lexical/Grammatical Help dialog, including the old references like TWOT, etc. We will also have Unicode support, a completely new editor that is really, really nice, and a LOT of new surprises that we can't talk about because they would be copied in a heartbeat. We think this will be a really nice release.

Your next question is time frame. All I can say is that it will NOT be ready for a Fall release. We are waiting on too many important databases to be finished by then. It is possible by the end of the year, but early to middle of next year is much more likely. People who buy 6.0 within 90 days of the release can get 7.0 for just the cost of shipping and handling, and any price difference between 6 and 7 (there may be a small price increase - the first ever). Outside the 90 day window upgrades will, as always, be very reasonable. We need to be clear about all this because the delays in the release could hurt 6.0 sales and there is really no reason for that. We have to pay bills between now and the release and chatter about the relase could really hurt us if it causes people to wait for months for 7.0 to come out. So remember that we have the most generous upgrade policies in the business - because we value and appreciate loyal customers. 6.0 is still the best thing out there.

One more tidbit. We are finally doing the big Liddell-Scott. The work is in progress but it is big job and it won't be released until a few months after the 7.0 release. We want to do a very good job on this one. LSJ is not going to be superceded for a very long time, if ever.

Please pray for us. There is a huge amount of work involved in pulling all this together and this is by far our most ambitious release.

God bless,
Mike Bushell
BibleWorks,LLC

Adelphos
04-07-2005, 06:37 PM
Just to whet your appetite a bit, we are looking at a number of new modules for 7.0.

Thanks for the heads-up, Mike. Without you epanding on this or telling us anything further -- as I don't want you to take a chance on hurting the release just to relieve our curiosity -- I would however like to suggest that you also take a look at the Keil & Delitszh Commentary, as it is already in electronic format.

As I said before, I realize that commentaries aren't a huge issue with BW, as BW has many more pressing issues regarding the original languages and whatnot, nevertheless, K&D would be a very nice addition if it's not too much trouble to incorporate.

If you aren't aware of the electronic editon of K&D, it can be found at e-Sword --

http://www.e-sword.net/downloads.html

Just a(nother) suggestion ;)

Scott
http://www.lamblion.net

Adelphos
04-07-2005, 08:28 PM
We will also have Unicode support, a completely new editor that is really, really nice...

One more quick item... please, please, please make sure that the new editor is completely backward compatible with the current editor, as many of us, myself included, have literally years of notes within BW by now. My BW Note files are quite indispensible, and I'm sure others feel the same way, as we've been putting these notes together for, what? ten years or more?

So please make this a must-do, if you haven't already.

Scott
http://www.lamblion.net

Mark Eddy
04-07-2005, 11:56 PM
For anyone who is familiar with Jenni & Westerman's "Theological Lexicon Of The Old Testament," I would be interested to know your opinion of it, along with the current conventional wisdom regarding its usefulness, if there be such.

Just curious as to what others think of it as a whole.

I have a copy of Jenni & Westerman TLOT (got it cheap at CBD). Over a decade ago I found the German edition to be useful when I was doing some research in a seminary library. It contains considerably more information than TWOT and it is complete, unlike TDOT, which still has a couple volumes to go (at least in the English translation). Although I haven't found Westerman's commentaries to be very helpful, TLOT does seem to provide mostly factual information.

I tend to use HALOT a lot more, if all I want is the latest options for translating a word. For doing word studies TLOT is useful, if the word you're studying is included. It seems to cover more words than TDOT, but it is more objective in its coverage, and doesn't get into the extra-biblical cognates as much. Of course the great thing about BibleWorks is that I can do my own word studies now, instead of relying on the opinion of TWOT, TDOT, or TLOT. If you need a second or third opinion, or you don't want to read all of TDOT, TLOT is basically trustworthy and helpful.

In Christ,
Mark Eddy

Adelphos
04-08-2005, 03:10 AM
I tend to use HALOT a lot more, if all I want is the latest options for translating a word.

I must admit, I find HALOT to be the least useful of my Hebrew lexicons. Go figure.


Of course the great thing about BibleWorks is that I can do my own word studies now, instead of relying on the opinion of TWOT, TDOT, or TLOT.

There's the rub. I don't think we really understand the word until we can understand the context in which it's employed, and then the definition has to be obtained, IMO, by educated intuition before we really understand it, so in this regard BW -- even if it didn't have a single lexicon -- would probably be more helpful in the long run than all the lexicons combined.

At least, I've never really understood a word merely from a lexical defintion. The lexicons are merely a guide, and as I'm sure you know, sometimes they can even be misleading. In essence, the word or phrase has to become a part of me first, as it were, before I really grasp it. I think this is basically true with everyone, and if one really uses BW to target a word or phrase in this manner -- i.e., through repeated uses in various contexts -- the exercise can end up becomming an immense exercise of joy.

Scott
http://www.lamblion.net (http://www.lamblion.net/)

vr8ce
04-09-2005, 01:05 AM
Thanks for the heads-up, Mike. Without you epanding on this or telling us anything further -- as I don't want you to take a chance on hurting the release just to relieve our curiosity -- I would however like to suggest that you also take a look at the Keil & Delitszh Commentary, as it is already in electronic format.
Yes, I would like to second, third and fourth this. I consider K&D, like Robertson's Word Pictures, which is already in BW, more of a word study than pure commentary (both have commentary, but as a non-scholar I find them very helpful for original language studies). I have a printed copy of both, but I would dearly love to have K&D accessible within BW.

I have K&D in an Access database if it would help, but unfortunately I don't have the mappings for the Hebrew characters to the printed characters.

Vince

jakemccarty
04-09-2005, 11:25 AM
Unfortunately, I would have to disagree about K & D. I like the original language format of Bibleworks and I hope that they continue to implement grammars and more advanced Hebrew and ANE tools, which Bibleworks is missing (KAI, Bauer-Leander, Juoun, Bergstrasser, CAT, Hoftijzer and Jongeling, a link to WSRP). I think that if I had to choose between a commentary and the fundamental reference works, I would chose the latter.

Adelphos
04-09-2005, 11:54 AM
Unfortunately, I would have to disagree about K & D. I like the original language format of Bibleworks and I hope that they continue to implement grammars and more advanced Hebrew and ANE tools, which Bibleworks is missing (KAI, Bauer-Leander, Juoun, Bergstrasser, CAT, Hoftijzer and Jongeling, a link to WSRP). I think that if I had to choose between a commentary and the fundamental reference works, I would chose the latter.

I don't think anyone is saying that BW should sacrifice the original language material for a commentary. Rather, some/many of the materials you mention may not be available to BW yet, whereas the K&D probably is. In this case, why exclude the commentary if it's available and if it's not too much trouble to implement?

If it comes down to a choice, then of course we understand that BW would stick to the original language tools, and rightly so.

However, a choice is not necessarily mandatory, other than the consideration of how much material can fit on one or two CDs, or however many CDs BW wants to send out with the new release.

In short, if the commentary doesn't get in the way of more pressing material, like some of the tools you've mentioned, and if it's not too much trouble to incorporate into the program, then it would be a nice addition. At least for some of BW's users.

I think that's all we're saying.

Scott
http://www.lamblion.net

MBD
04-22-2005, 09:09 AM
Well one of my needs may not be achievable. I started out with Logos and have purchased a considerable amount of software for Logos: ABD, HAL dictionary, maps, context of scripture, etc. I find Logos cumbersome to use and almost always use Bibleworks 6 now. It would be so great if I could access these books via Bibleworks. I have no plans on buying still another version of HAL.

Also, as a Roman Catholic biblical scholar, I do not use the vast number of evangelical commentaries used by Logos, so I appreciate a software tool like Bibleworks which has a strong commitment to original language tools. One tool that would be so helpful would be a link to the masorah in the Leningrad text. So I could click on a circulus and get the masoretic notation as well as a list of the relevant passages alluded to. Or even a link between the text and the photographs of L. So I could look at a passage in both electronic form and a photograph of the relevcant page in L. (Or even in Qumran..wow!)

vr8ce
04-22-2005, 09:59 AM
I don't think anyone is saying that BW should sacrifice the original language material for a commentary. Rather, some/many of the materials you mention may not be available to BW yet, whereas the K&D probably is.
Correct. BW isn't Logos, and I definitely don't want it to be. However, just as Robertson's is more of a "original language commentary", i.e. it ties in more with BW's mission as an original language tool, so does K&D. And K&D is public domain (I believe), so it's definitely available (I have an Access database of it, if it would be helpful to Mike).

Vince

Ben Spackman
04-22-2005, 11:44 AM
MBD: I'm in the same boat you are, and asked for the saem kind of utility. Something of the kind, allowing you to pass references to the other program, is in the works for BW 7. See http://bibleworks.com/forums/showthread.php?t=694