On Greek text crit

[ISalzman]

ISalzman,

Did you read my post?
From your response I gather you are answering someone else's question or you misunderstood my post.
If read you my post and misunderstood it that is my fault.
So, now I will try to be clearer:

my original point on this thread was about the web site in question's explanation of BibleWorks being misleading( esp to people who do not know the jargon) and what I was saying in post before this one is that they have fixed some of their wording and that now it is clearer. I was encouraged by that.

Which sentence is clearer?
(a)Bible works can only search on the word level
(b)Bible works can only search on morphological features on word level

If, you did not know anything about grammatical tagged databases and search engine you might assume that sentence "a" meant that BW can only search on individual words, or would you automatically know well enough to believe that they meant was that BibleWorks can not search on syntactical features?

Now, the web site in question appears to have clearer headings and clearer sentences(this is the point).

None both the first sentence and the next paragraph are both clearer(esp the paragraph):

"BibleWorks does only allow to search for words or morphological features."

"BibleWorks only allows to search the Hebrew Bible text on morphological features on word level. In contrast, the XXXX database in XXX also allows to build complex queries on phrase, clause and sentence level in order to find special syntactic structures."

There is more that they have corrected, but these examples should suffice.

Hey Brian, all I intended to say was that I understood their point to mean that BW did not enable syntactical searches at the clause or sentence level. Perhaps my understanding was erroneous, but that's what I took it to mean.

[bkMitchell]

Hey Brian, all I intended to say was that I understood their point to mean that BW did not enable syntactical searches at the clause or sentence level. Perhaps my understanding was erroneous, but that's what I took it to mean.

ISalzman Your understanding is right, of course this is what they intended.
As, we both agree I want to make clear I am not disputing your understanding that we both share.

However, I was addressing a concern of a different nature.
One, that I may not have communicated well enough.

I would like to make it clear that:
I was never addressing the 'exegetical software enthusiast' niche made up of those (like you and me) who understand the "jargon" and "terms" used in software advertisements rather my concern was about a different crowed made up of laymen, people just beginning language study, and first time buyers. These are people whom may be mislead by the passages in discussion. Of, course you, I, and others on these forums understand the said intent, but we must keep in mind that we are in a niche group and in the minority.

[ISalzman]

Sorry for my misunderstandings, BK.

[bkMitchell]

Sorry for my misunderstandings, BK.

No, I am sorry I did not communicate more clearly

I will take more time to compose posts in the future.
(maybe I will even avoid my own spelling mistakes and typos, too)

[ISalzman]

All's well that ends well. Thank the Lord for shalom bayit.

[bkMitchell]

All's well that ends well. Thank the Lord for shalom bayit.

Yes, I agree brother. Amen and Amen.

Well, I think SESB'S WIVU database is a great tool and having the BHS apparatus in electronic format is fantastic. I hope, Bibleworks will be able to implement something in terms of an OT/Tanach/Hebrew Bible syntactical database. (Now, Logos/Libronix and Accordance9 have syntactical databases.) It would also be nice to have more transcriptions of the Tanakh to compliment the WTT and WTM.

I am excited though that NOBTS CNTTS apparatus will soon be made available for purchase for Bibleworks users. And some new electronic transcriptions of Greek NT text will be made free of charge to Bibleworks 8 users.

[ISalzman]

Yes, I agree bother. Amen and Amen.

Thanks Brian. But I sure hope I'm not that much of a bother!

Well, I think SESB'S WIVU database is a great tool and having the BHS apparatus in electronic format is fantastic. I hope, Bibleworks will be able to implement something in terms of an OT/Tanach/Hebrew Bible syntactical database. (Now, Logos/Libronix and Accordance9 have syntactical databases.) It would also be nice to have more transcriptions of the Tanakh to compliment the WTT and WTM.

I am excited though that NOBTS CNTTS apparatus will soon be made available for purchase for Bibleworks users. And some new electronic transcriptions of Greek NT text will be made free of charge to Bibleworks 8 users.

All good stuff. Is the WIVU Database the one done by Eep Talstra?

[bkMitchell]

Thanks Brian. But I sure hope I'm not that much of a bother!

All good stuff. Is the WIVU Database the one done by Eep Talstra?

No, you're not a bother at all, brother.
My apologizes and I have fixed the former post.

AND Yes, the WIVU database is the one done by Eep Talstra and his team.
It is also online but you have to have a license to use it:
http://wivu.dans.knaw.nl/


Now, I am still waiting to see if BibleWorks can or will obtain "The Westminster Hebrew Syntax" either for their base package or for sale. According, the Westminster website it(the website information) was copyright in 2010 so this information must be somewhat recent. And, it is said to be "nearly ready for distribution".

I guess if Bibleworks were to obtain it, that would mean one of the following:

(1) It would be bundled with BibleWorks9 (whenever that is developed and released)
(2) It would be available as a download
(3) or It would be a available as a for purchase module

I am not sure I am ready for a new edition of Bibleworks just, yet as there is much about the current Bibleworks8 I still want to learn.
However, I am sure I would upgrade if it were to be released. Paper Bibles are easier on my eyes, but I really enjoy using Bibleworks.

[ISalzman]

Thanks Brian. I've appreciated the work of Eep Talstra. And, yes, it would be great if BW were able to secure the Westminster Syntactical Database. I'm ready for BW 9.

[bkMitchell]

Thanks Brian...And, yes, it would be great if BW were able to secure the Westminster Syntactical Database. I'm ready for BW 9.

Yeah, me too!
It's always exciting to see what innovations they have been working, on.
Well, I guess well just have to wait to find-out what they are going to do next.