Sorry, no offense meant. It was someone else who'd mentioned it in post #78. It's too bad this forum doesn't allow for polls (does it?), which would allow voting rather than multiple posting to make it clear how much a resource is desired.
Printable View
Sorry, no offense meant. It was someone else who'd mentioned it in post #78. It's too bad this forum doesn't allow for polls (does it?), which would allow voting rather than multiple posting to make it clear how much a resource is desired.
I thing to consider: A root search-feature.
It is possible in Accordance, and I would like to use a feature like this from time to time. Like, when searching on everything that has to do with disciples and discipleship in Matthew - then you have to know that at least three words are in play (mathetes, manthano, matheteuo). A root search would in principal help you clarify certain topics better.
On the other hand, such a feature must be based on manual tagging and thus after all introduce a number of editorial decisions.
What do you think? Have you ever missed a root-search function?
Morten
Yeah... See my blog post.Quote:
Originally Posted by MortenJensen
Thanks, then we are two of us. Should not be that difficult to implement, I guess.
I liked your post on LN-domains. The problem with these searches, though, is that they tend to be to wide-ranged. Try searching for mathethes in Matt, and you will get a whole lot other stuff as well.
Morten
I can see the usefulness of this, but I can see pitfalls as well, even if it were easy to implement. I fear it would tempt early-stage students in particular (and maybe some more experienced people as well) into the etymological fallacy. For instance, the fact that both παραθήκη and διαθήκη come from the root found in τίθημι is almost meaningless, since both the root and Greek prepositions are so wide-ranging in the derivatives that they can form. Yet given a powerful enough root search feature, I guarantee you that inside of a week you'd have people preaching sermons in which the "good deposit" of 2 Tim. 1:14 was getting linked to a theology of covenant on no viable linguistic grounds whatsoever.
Maybe a root-search feature ought to come with a warning label and a reference to James Barr's The Semantics of Biblical Language!
You could say that about ALL BIBLE SOFTWARE TOOLS IN GENERAL!!! :) Uncle Ben's advice to Spidey applies to any such tool: "With great power comes great responsibility."Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidR
Yes, absolutely. That's the advantage of studying languages and exegesis in a seminary or other educational context. The wonderful ability to learn these things independently that's available today has the downside of providing less context and less mentoring for the learner.Quote:
Originally Posted by jdarlack
It would be helpful, at times, but couldn't you do the same thing by using the Graphical Search Engine? It would take a little longer, as you would have to set up the search parameters yourself, but it could easily be done.Quote:
Originally Posted by MortenJensen
I don't think so. How will you do that?
Morten
Granted, this thread is getting long in the tooth, but what the heck!
This isn't already possible to do in BibleWorks 9.0, is it? If so, I haven't been paying attention.
It would be nice to have the ability to create (via, say, the VDC) an English interlinear to say the BGM or BNM in the Interlinear Mode (4 rows in columns), editable on the fly.
Please spare us the pedantic lectures on how interlinears stifle language learning. We lesser mortals sometimes need such crutches.
P.s.: I apologize for mentioning NETS (The New English Translation of the Septuagint) so often in this thread.;) It would make a nice BibleWorks 10.0 module, though. Emptor decernit.