Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- concordance [2024/09/25 21:45] – [Incorrect Grouping] ken
+++ concordance [Unknown date] (current) – external edit (Unknown date) 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 45: / Line 45: @@
 ===Incorrect Grouping===
 One of the greatest accomplishments of Strong's Concordance was to assign an ID code to each word. In this regard, it is centuries ahead of its time and it set up the Lexicon with a computer-friendly data structure.
-The idea was to give a single ID to each semantically unique "word". That is to say that if a word is spelled the same but has two obvious meanings, each meaning would get an ID. Conversely, if a particalt semantic value was represented by two different spellings, each spelling would get an ID.
+The idea was to give a single ID to each semantically unique "word". That is to say that if a word is spelled the same but has two obvious meanings, each meaning would get an ID. Conversely, if a particular semantic value was represented by two different spellings, each spelling would get an ID.
-There are many many many cases where this process has failed miserably.
+There are many many many cases where this process has failed miserably. This has only recently become apparent, due to the fact that we now have databases containing both English and Hebrew versions of these ancient texts, and are able to perform comparative data analysis on the two languages side by side, along with the ID numbers.
 There are some cases where a single ID has been applied to two or more words which are spelled vastly different and do not even share a root word. FIXME give a couple examples
@@ Line 53: / Line 53: @@
 There are MANY cases where multiple IDs have been assigned to a single word, even though the various instances appear to have the same semantic meaning. This particular issue is caused in large part by the fact that Strong's is indexing English words without regard for the original Hebrew. Note that this is the stated intention of the concordance. A concordance is not intended to be a semantically correct dictionary of the original language. It is merely recording each instance of the translated text with all the inherent subjective interpretation embedded by the translators.
-FIXME show a few of the more interesting examples.
+FIXME show a few of the more mundane examples.
+There are also cases where both of these problems apply - FIXME Start with [[heleq]]