[www.theword.net]

Twitter live feed  
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Oct 21, 2021 11:55 am



Reply to topic  [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma, etc 
Author Message
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 8611
Location: Corfu, Greece
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Well, we just need to try to find the origination of these data. If we can trace them and verify that they are in the PD, then it's OK to use. If they are in any dubious status, we should remove. Finding them in OLB or any other software is only an indication (a good enough for me of course), but on the other hand, Rubio mentioned that he got his data from elsewhere, correct?
Costas


Sat Oct 01, 2011 8:50 am
Profile WWW

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 327
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Quote:
Well, we just need to try to find the origination of these data. If we can trace them and verify that they are in the PD, then it's OK to use. If they are in any dubious status, we should remove. Finding them in OLB or any other software is only an indication (a good enough for me of course), but on the other hand, Rubio mentioned that he got his data from elsewhere, correct?
Costas


As noted in this thread where I have the modules I made (viewtopic.php?f=4&t=2256&p=12466&hilit=byz2005), the publisher which Robinson used to print the Greek text has the original data posted on http://www.byztxt.com/downloads.html. This is the data which I used to make the modules. On the copyright page there is the following paragraph:

"Anyone is permitted to copy and distribute this text or any portion of this text. It may be
incorporated in a larger work, and/or quoted from, stored in a database retrieval system,
photocopied, reprinted, or otherwise duplicated by anyone without prior notification,
permission, compensation to the holder, or any other restrictions. All rights to this text are
released to everyone and no one can reduce these rights at any time. Copyright is not
claimed nor asserted for the new and revised form of the Greek NT text of this edition, nor
for the original form of such as initially released into the public domain by the editors, first as
printed textual notes in 1979 and in continuous-text electronic form in 1986. Likewise, we
hereby release into the public domain the introduction and appendix which have been
especially prepared for this edition."

A pdf file of the complete text with this information as printed by the publisher can be downloaded from http://www.allthyheart.org/academy/bible-texts. Robinson himself can be contacted by email at mrobinson@sebts.edu.


Sat Oct 01, 2011 4:58 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 8611
Location: Corfu, Greece
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
It seems that the TVM data:
1. Were initially introduces by the author of OLB
2. They are copyrighted by him
3. They are really useless for such a module (what use do they have in a module that has morphology???)

If we all agree that 3 is really the case (please, i want to hear objection if there are any), let us remove them because of 1 and 2.
OK?
Costas


Sat Oct 01, 2011 7:49 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:08 pm
Posts: 327
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Quote:
It seems that the TVM data:
1. Were initially introduces by the author of OLB
2. They are copyrighted by him
3. They are really useless for such a module (what use do they have in a module that has morphology???)

If we all agree that 3 is really the case (please, i want to hear objection if there are any), let us remove them because of 1 and 2.
OK?
Costas


The coding which is in the text as it is published on the publisher's website was done by Robinson himself. You can find the information for the coding at http://www.byztxt.com/download/PARSINGS.TXT. I would imagine the best person to ask about the meaning of any extra codes in the text would be Robinson at mrobinson@sebts.edu.

THE ONLINE GREEK NEW TESTAMENT
DECLENSION CODES FOR NOUNS, ADJECTIVES, PREPOSITIONS,
CONJUNCTIONS AND PARTICLES

Derived, compared and corrected from
the Bagster "Analytical Greek Lexicon,"
with comparison made against
Perschbacher's "New Analytical Greek Lexicon"

Abbreviated in a form similar to that found in
Friberg's "Analytical Greek New Testament"

Maurice A. Robinson
29 July 2004

The codes which follow reflect an original abridgment and correction
of the data presented in "The Analytical Greek Lexicon" (London:
Samuel Bagster and Sons, 1859).

Comparison also has been made against the revised updating of that
lexicon by Wesley J. Perschbacher in his "The New Analytical Greek
Lexicon" (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1990). The Perschbacher revision
failed to adjust over 500 parsing or declensional errors in the
original Bagster edition; these now have been corrected.

The abbreviation system was developed independently. Its features are
similar to those in Timothy and Barbara Friberg "The Analytical Greek
New Testament" (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981), and can be used readily
by anyone familiar with the Bagster lexicon, Perschbacher, or
Friberg.

Many Greek New Testament non-verbal forms (nouns, adjectives,
conjunctions, prepositions, and particles) can be interpreted in more
than one way. The declensions presented reflect a normal
interpretation of those forms which actually occur in the Greek New
Testament. Every NT occurrence is covered, and the declensions
reflect the totality of Greek NT non-verbal forms.

The data presented are not claimed to be free from error; the editor
may be notified of any problem regarding the parsing, declension, or
Strong's number assigned to any word, at SEBTS, P. O. Box 1889, Wake
Forest, NC 27588.


Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:15 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 8611
Location: Corfu, Greece
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Robinson did the coding for the morphology.
The TVM codes are actually 'Strong' codes that map to non-existent strong codes that function as 'morphology codes'. These are completely unnecessary in such a module (and in general they are unnecessary) and since they are copyrighted they should be removed (they also add to the confusion and complexity and nothing more, they don't add any information).
So, my point here is this: do i overlook something? Is there ANY kind of info or function that i may overlook when i make this statement?
Costas


Sat Oct 01, 2011 9:57 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:13 pm
Posts: 717
Location: Brasília, Brazil
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Well, about the extra "Strong's" numbers: the evidence JG showed indeed seems to indicate that they represent tense/voice/mood. On the other hand, as Costas stated, why one anyone need to add those to a module that already have full morphology parsing? Additionally, they occur scarcely throughout the text, suggesting they may serve another purpose.

Rechecking the commentary about Strong's numbers in http://byztxt.com/download/PARSINGS.TXT I see a motive of greater concern:

Quote:
In some cases, new words exist within the Koine Greek text that had
not appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering
system had been based. In such cases, the new word is located
either under a relatively appropriate Strong's number, or has been
assigned a Strong's number that otherwise would no longer exist,
due to consolidation under the root lexical forms
. One case in
particular is that of "ekperissou" and "ekperisswv," neither of
which exist separately in the TR: these have been assigned the
(otherwise now vacant) Strong's number 4055, thus retaining a
single common root, and that in close relation to other words
containing some form of "periss-".

It's stating that Strong's are being recycled to accommodate new words. That's not good at all. How will we identify such cases?

Another relevant fact is this:
Quote:
The revision of the Strong's numbers within the Greek NT text is an
ongoing process. Ultimately all Strong's numbers in the Greek text
will agree with the Greek lexical root form.

_________________
Rúbio R. C. Terra
Brasília/DF - Brasil


Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:10 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:13 pm
Posts: 717
Location: Brasília, Brazil
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
csterg wrote:
P.S. By the way, I have been thinking that morphology codes could be well coded in a simple 'language' definition at the end of an .ont file instead of having a separate .dct with all the different combinations... what do you think? -this is a technical question of course-
Well, that's certainly possible and would solve cases like this of Byz2005++. But I also think the dictionary approach works very well. I don't see an immediate need of that, it's not yet worth the trouble.

_________________
Rúbio R. C. Terra
Brasília/DF - Brasil


Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:22 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 8611
Location: Corfu, Greece
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
RubioTerra wrote:
csterg wrote:
P.S. By the way, I have been thinking that morphology codes could be well coded in a simple 'language' definition at the end of an .ont file instead of having a separate .dct with all the different combinations... what do you think? -this is a technical question of course-
Well, that's certainly possible and would solve cases like this of Byz2005++. But I also think the dictionary approach works very well. I don't see an immediate need of that, it's not yet worth the trouble.

That has been my thought until now, as the current development shows; i just wanted to hear more...


Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:24 pm
Profile WWW
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 8611
Location: Corfu, Greece
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
RubioTerra wrote:
Well, about the extra "Strong's" numbers: the evidence JG showed indeed seems to indicate that they represent tense/voice/mood. On the other hand, as Costas stated, why one anyone need to add those to a module that already have full morphology parsing? Additionally, they occur scarcely throughout the text, suggesting they may serve another purpose.

Rechecking the commentary about Strong's numbers in http://byztxt.com/download/PARSINGS.TXT I see a motive of greater concern:

Quote:
In some cases, new words exist within the Koine Greek text that had
not appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering
system had been based. In such cases, the new word is located
either under a relatively appropriate Strong's number, or has been
assigned a Strong's number that otherwise would no longer exist,
due to consolidation under the root lexical forms
. One case in
particular is that of "ekperissou" and "ekperisswv," neither of
which exist separately in the TR: these have been assigned the
(otherwise now vacant) Strong's number 4055, thus retaining a
single common root, and that in close relation to other words
containing some form of "periss-".

It's stating that Strong's are being recycled to accommodate new words. That's not good at all. How will we identify such cases?

Another relevant fact is this:
Quote:
The revision of the Strong's numbers within the Greek NT text is an
ongoing process. Ultimately all Strong's numbers in the Greek text
will agree with the Greek lexical root form.


I conclude 2 things from these:
1. TVM codes are not needed and can be safely removed
2. Strong coding is not perfect (as with everything). This will continue to be like that. I don't have a proposal for fixing these recycled indexes,
Costas

To Conclude: I think that if the TVM codes are removed, the new Byz2005 can go in the official channel. All agree?


Mon Oct 03, 2011 2:27 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 7:34 pm
Posts: 4234
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Questons

What is the purpose of the <WG0> tags?

What is the explanation of the duplicate Strong's tags that are followed by two different morphology tags, example on line 80
<wt>Γῆ[color=#BF0000]<WG1093><WG1093><WTN-NSF l="γῆ"><WTN-VSF l="γῆ"> <wt>Ζαβουλὼν<WG2194><WTN-PRI l="Ζαβουλών"> <wt>καὶ<WG2532><WTCONJ l="καί"> <wt>γῆ<WG1093><WG1093><WTN-NSF l="γῆ"><WTN-VSF l="γῆ"> <wt>Νεφθαλείμ<WG3508><WTN-PRI l="Νεφθαλείμ"><RF><b>NA27/UBS4 variant:</b><CL><font color=blue>Νεφθαλείμ</font> | <font color=red>Νεφθαλίμ</font><Rf>, <wt>ὁδὸν<WG3598><WTN-ASF l="ὁδός"> <wt>θαλάσσης<WG2281><WTN-GSF l="θάλασσα">, <wt>πέραν<WG4008><WTADV l="πέραν"> <wt>τοῦ<WG3588><WTT-GSM l="ὁ"> <wt>Ἰορδάνου<WG2446><WTN-GSM l="Ἰορδάνης">, <wt>Γαλιλαία<WG1056><WG1056><WTN-NSF l="Γαλιλαία"><WTN-VSF l="Γαλιλαία"> <wt>τῶν<WG3588><WTT-GPN l="ὁ"> <wt>ἐθνῶν<WG1484><WTN-GPN l="ἔθνος">,[/color]

_________________
Jon
the
Word 5 Bible Software
OS for testing; Windows 10
Beta Download ------Beta Setup Guide------On-line Manual------Tech doc's and Utilities------Copyright Factsheet


Mon Oct 03, 2011 4:56 pm
Profile

Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2009 4:13 pm
Posts: 717
Location: Brasília, Brazil
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
JG wrote:
What is the purpose of the <WG0> tags?
Good question. They're on the original file. For instance, Mt 18:12:
Code:
18:12 ti 5101 {I-NSN} umin 4771 {P-2DP} dokei 1380 5719
{V-PAI-3S} ean 1437 {COND} genhtai 1096 5638 {V-2ADS-3S} tini
5100 {X-DSM} anyrwpw 444 {N-DSM} ekaton 1540 {A-NUI} probata 4263
{N-NPN} kai 2532 {CONJ} planhyh 4105 5686 {V-APS-3S} en 1520
{A-NSN} ex 1537 {PREP} autwn 846 {P-GPN} ouci 3780 {PRT-I} afeiv
863 5631 {V-2AAP-NSM} ta 3588 {T-APN} enenhkonta 0 1768 {A-NUI}
ennea 1767 {A-NUI} epi 1909 {PREP} ta 3588 {T-APN} orh 3735
{N-APN} poreuyeiv 4198 5679 {V-AOP-NSM} zhtei 2212 5719
{V-PAI-3S} to 3588 {T-ASN} planwmenon 4105 5746 {V-PPP-ASN}

JG wrote:
What is the explanation of the duplicate Strong's tags that are followed by two different morphology tags
Also a good question. Again, they're on the original source file:
Code:
4:15 gh 1093 {N-NSF} 1093 {N-VSF} zaboulwn 2194 {N-PRI} kai 2532
{CONJ} gh 1093 {N-NSF} 1093 {N-VSF} nefyaleim 3508 {N-PRI} odon 3598
{N-ASF} yalasshv 2281 {N-GSF} peran 4008 {ADV} tou 3588 {T-GSM}
iordanou 2446 {N-GSM} galilaia 1056 {N-NSF} 1056 {N-VSF} twn 3588
{T-GPN} eynwn 1484 {N-GPN}
All work I did was automated, except for some exceptions where I had to type the accented part of byzantine variants that are not included in the proper file ( John 8 ) or are represented differently (mostly in Revelation). So inconsistencies (?) of the original work are now surfacing.

_________________
Rúbio R. C. Terra
Brasília/DF - Brasil


Mon Oct 03, 2011 6:02 pm
Profile
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:09 pm
Posts: 8611
Location: Corfu, Greece
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
It's ok to find minor incosistencies i suppose


Mon Oct 03, 2011 10:07 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2011 4:54 am
Posts: 20
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
Dear Costas,

I asked brother Maurice Robinson about the parsed Byzantine text some months ago with respect to the outdated 2000 version in many "Bible modules", and he said that it would be great if the updated version is taken from his own website (http://koti.24.fi/jusalak/GreekNT/BP05FNL.ZIP). Many errors have since been corrected.

David


Sun Nov 27, 2011 5:25 am
Profile

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
JG wrote:
What is the explanation of the duplicate Strong's tags that are followed by two different morphology tags, example on line 80


(Line 80 = Matt 4:15)

This is a bit of a guess, but I noted Robinson's introduction to his prepared text that Mathetes shared on Declensions of non-verb words:

Quote:
Many Greek New Testament non-verbal forms (nouns, adjectives,
conjunctions, prepositions, and particles) can be interpreted in more
than one way. The declensions presented reflect a normal
interpretation of those forms which actually occur in the Greek New
Testament. Every NT occurrence is covered, and the declensions
reflect the totality of Greek NT non-verbal forms.
[/quote]

I don't know Greek, but my guess is Robinson is showing that in the case in question, (Matt 4:15) γῆ (G1093) ["land"] is a noun that can be declined in more than one way depending on how you interpret it. "γῆ" can be read as the "Vocative Case" where the verse stands alone - ie "The land of Zabulon and the land of Nephtalim." But in the context of the next couple of verses, it could be read in the "Nominative Case" - ie "The land of Zabulon and the land of Nephtalim (v15)...saw a great light (v16)". So both cases are given (N-VSF and N-NSF) respectively matched to two consequetive occurances of the Strong's number. (I'd say the same thing is happening with G1056)

Paul.

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Last edited by engellion on Mon Dec 19, 2011 11:14 am, edited 1 time in total.



Sun Dec 18, 2011 2:30 pm
Profile

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:51 am
Posts: 156
Post Re: Byzantine Textform 2005 NT with accents, parsing, lemma,
RubioTerra wrote:
JG wrote:
What is the purpose of the <WG0> tags?
Good question. They're on the original file. For instance, Mt 18:12:
Code:
18:12 ti 5101 {I-NSN} umin 4771 {P-2DP} dokei 1380 5719
{V-PAI-3S} ean 1437 {COND} genhtai 1096 5638 {V-2ADS-3S} tini
5100 {X-DSM} anyrwpw 444 {N-DSM} ekaton 1540 {A-NUI} probata 4263
{N-NPN} kai 2532 {CONJ} planhyh 4105 5686 {V-APS-3S} en 1520
{A-NSN} ex 1537 {PREP} autwn 846 {P-GPN} ouci 3780 {PRT-I} afeiv
863 5631 {V-2AAP-NSM} ta 3588 {T-APN} enenhkonta 0 1768 {A-NUI}
ennea 1767 {A-NUI} epi 1909 {PREP} ta 3588 {T-APN} orh 3735
{N-APN} poreuyeiv 4198 5679 {V-AOP-NSM} zhtei 2212 5719
{V-PAI-3S} to 3588 {T-ASN} planwmenon 4105 5746 {V-PPP-ASN}


I don't think these are accidental inconsistencies.

Looking at Robinson's notes on the prepared text, he states:

Quote:
In some cases, new words exist within the Koine Greek text that had
not appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering
system had been based. In such cases, the new word is located
either under a relatively appropriate Strong's number
, or has been
assigned a Strong's number that otherwise would no longer exist,
due to consolidation under the root lexical forms.


Words assigned the Strong's number "0" appear to be Byzantine specific word forms that do not appear in the TR and hence have no previously assigned Strong's number. However, Robinson has located the form of the word "under a relatively appropriate Strong's number".

Eg. In Matt 18:12 as given by Rubio from Robinson's original text, the following phrase occurs:

"ta 3588 {T-APN} enenhkonta 0 1768 {A-NUI} ennea 1767 {A-NUI}" [nintey and nine]

In the TR the phrase is:

" τα G3588 T-APN εννενηκονταεννεα G1768 A-NUI"

The Byzantine text splits "εννενηκονταεννεα" into "εννενηκοντα" and "εννεα" ["ninety" and "nine"]

Note, "εννενηκονταεννεα" (G1768) is defined in Mickelson's as

Quote:
G1768 ἐννενηκονταεννέα ennenekontaennea (en-nen-ay-kon-tah-en-neh'-ah) n.
1. ninety-nine
[from a (tenth) multiple of G1767 and G1767 itself]
KJV: ninety and nine
Root(s): G1767
[?]


But there is no Strong's number for "εννενηκοντα", so Robinson gives the word a "0" to indicate this, and then gives it a "relatively appropriate Strong's number" in this case "1768". In these cases you know that the Strong's definition is a "relative" one.

The same thing is happening at Acts 10:19 with "διενθυμουμένου".

The Byzantine module shows this as:

<wt>διενθυμουμένου<WG0><WG1760><WG5740><WTV-PNP-GSM l="ἐνθυμέομαι">

The TR drops the prefix "δι", and shows this as:

"ενθυμουμενου G1760 V-PNP-GSM"

As, "διενθυμουμένου" does not occur in that form in the TR, there is no Strong's number for it. Hence, Robinson gives it a "0" Strong's number. But the nearest "relatively appropriate Strong's number" is "1760". So he gives that number as well.

IMO, these are not markup mistakes, but intentional indicators from Robinson of what is happening when, as he noted, "new words exist within the Koine Greek text that had not appeared in the Textus Receptus upon which Strong's numbering system had been based". In all cases where <WG0> occurs, that particular form of the word is not in the original Strong's dictionary. But the Strong's number that immediately follows <WG0> is "a relatively appropriate Strong's number".

Not sure what this means for Mickelson's dictionary module, but I would leave all the <WG0> tags that Robinson has included.

Paul.

_________________
PaulC

Check out YouTube for theWord Bible Software Tutorial Series 1
A series of introductory video tutorials for theWord Bible Software


Sun Dec 18, 2011 11:50 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 70 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware for PTF.
[ Time : 0.738s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]