[sword-devel] How about the OT's standard versification at Sword ?

Wed Apr 20 00:55:35 MST 2005

I've sent an answer to Mr Little but, not unexpectedly, he didn't reply. Well, he is strongly defending his own view of the purpose of the SWORD Project, even if everyone else seems to have a different opinion.

I am impressed by the fact that Mr Little wants to rebuild the Romanian Orthodox Bible (ROB) module, a daunting task for someone who doesn't understand the Romanian language. I am rather alarmed about what the result might be. But, apart from language problems, the main difficulty remains that of numbering. We have already discussed Psalm 9 and 10 (in the KJV; Psalm 9 only in the Septuagint and Vulgate), the point at which the numbering of the Psalms divides between versions. Not only that, but the verse numbering differs from the start, since the Septuagint and Vulgate number the introductory description of Psalm 9 as a separate verse, and the KJV does not. Anything other than strictly parallel texts, adhering to the same system of versification, would be extremely hard to use for anyone who had an imperfect understanding of some of the languages he or she was dealing with. Remember that not only whole psalms, but many of their individual verses, begin and end in different places.

I hear that Mr Little has begun work on transforming the Vulgate (Clementine version) into the new style. I don't think it will be an improvement. Indeed, it is likely to be as wrong as the Estonian module, already on the SWORD official site, which defectively repeats the same verse from Exodus to Job.

I submitted the Romanian Orthodox Bible (ROB) module in November 2004, but it was refused by Mr Little, because "the SWORD actual policy is to not admit any changes of versification" ! As if The SWORD Project were conceived for the Byzantine Orthodox versification, not for the KJV's one. In fact, Mr Little seems to deny that KJV versification is used, although the index of books, chapters and verses in The SWORD Project (as in e-Sword, BiblePro, Online Bible and Theophilos) reproduces the KJV's versification exactly !  Moreover, all these biblical programs are delivered by their creators with a KJV or ASV module built-in. In fact, the SWORD's own module generator vpl2mod.exe is also designed for the KJV standard. That's why I asserted that this is an international standard -- of course for electronic versions of the various Bibles, not for the printed ones. I really don’t see how Mr Little can deny that the KJV standard is the basis for the entire SWORD project; this just flies in
 the face of the evidence.

I have changed the versification scheme of the Romanian Orthodox Bible (more precisely that of the Book of Psalms), to make it fit the KJV's verse numbering. The fact that the KJV's versification system is the standard of The SWORD Project is beyond my control. But I have always compared the Romanian text with the KJV and ASV texts, to make sure they were the same, and this was the hardest part of my work. In some Psalms, I had to paste two verses together, or make two verses from a single one.

This was necessary because the Romanian Old Testament is a translation of the Septuagint (a non-Masoretic version of the OT). The Byzantine Bible was translated into Romanian for the first time in 1688, and has much the same structure as the Septuagint. The Orthodox Bible authorized from 1936 to 1994 is in fact a revision of the Byzantine one of 1688 (the so-called "Bible from Bucharest" of the voivode Serban Cantacuzino). In the Romanian version, there are chapters longer or shorter with a number of verses, so the only way to make them fit the KJV's versification scheme is to compare the texts and modify the versification where necessary.

I mention that I haven't altered the Romanian text at all, not even a single word: in fact the texts are the same, only the versification differs. For example, when a Psalm in the Romanian version has two or three verses fewer than the KJV, you must first compare the texts, then split the Romanian verses at the exact places where the verses in the KJV begin or end, and match all verse numbers to the KJV. Inversely, when a Psalm in the Romanian version has more verses than the KJV, you should paste together certain verses in the Romanian text, according to the KJV's versification. I have already mentioned the problem with the numbering of Pss 9 and 10; but it is not as simple as that, because later the opposite happens at Psalm 147, so that both texts become parallel again until 150 (The Orthodox and Vulgate Psalm 151 is missing from the Hebrew and KJV texts.) It is unfortunate that the divergences happened at the beginning and end of the book, so that almost all the Psalms have
 different numbers.

That's why I find it hard to believe that a Romanian Orthodox module for SWORD could be built in keeping the original Romanian versification... How would for instance Mr. Little handle the Psalm 18, which is 54 verses long, instead of 50 in KJV ?  And would be this Psalm 18, as in all the current modules, or 17 like in the original Bible ?

But Mr. Little hasn't refused only me, he also refused a Polish module creator, Mr Wojciech, (who made the Biblia Gdanska and other Polish modules), Mr Artemis State (with D. Cornilescu's complete Romanian version: the one on the CrossWire site is defective at I Peter 2-5 and it's in an old orthography) and I presume others too.

In an earlier communication, Mr. Little wrote: "I would prefer that we simply be given links to source material so that someone from CrossWire can work on the modules themselves. I believe it is less likely that they will editorialize as they do markup & conversion." So we -- the creators of the other modules -- should give up making SWORD modules, and write HTMs instead ? It's a pity that the people at CrossWire don't accept the contributions of learned and meticulous volunteers, who fully understand their texts, only to give themselves the same work, starting from zero and without understanding the texts. It seems discriminatory, to say the least. And I am still worrying about what will happen to the Romanian Orthodox Bible in the hands of someone who has no idea of the Romanian language at all.

The most troublesome part of this is that all the SWORD contributors who have laboured long and hard to make modules of Septuagint-based texts no longer have a clear idea what to do. The fact that The SWORD Project already has so many well made modules is a testimony to their energy and effort. Taking the versification out of their skilled hands and transferring it to an unproven central system of limited linguistic skill seems a shabby reward for their work, and a recipe for confusion in the future.

In the service of the Lord,

Catalin N. Ravaru

--------------------------------------

C. N. R. <biblology at yahoo.com> wrote:

Chris Little wrote, about the use of KJV versification:

< < I don't know where you got that idea, but it is entirely wrong. It's really difficult to argue that the purpose behind Sword was comparative reading when you consider that parallel Bibles have only been supported since roughly the time when the 1.5.6 frontends came out. > >

And since that time, all users have thought of Sword as a system whose main (and considerable) advantage was that it provided comparative reading.

< < Furthermore, the KJV versification is ABSOLUTELY NOT the standard--international or otherwise. > > 

But it is the system used in the index that accesses all the modules. And in modules where the numbering differs from that of the KJV, it is the KJV numbering is given first, and the version's original numbering is given afterwards in brackets. Since both the LXX and the Vulgate have a single Psalm 9 where the KJV has Pss 9 and 10, this double numbering has to be sustained throughout the remaining 141 psalms.

OK, this system is not the neatest that could be imagined, and it would be very nice to have an index that led you to the same verse in each version and gave you that version's native numbering. But the present system is the only one available, and it is easy to understand and use; and since you are actually using it yourselves, I can't understand why you seem to be so
against it.

When someone does write this useful facility for accessing alternative verses, all the affected modules are going to have to be altered anyway. If I am spared, I will be happy to provide a version of my own module with the original numbering, and I am sure you will not lack willing help with the other versions. Until then, there is no point in doing so, because it won't work as a Sword module.

Chris Little also wrote:

< < I would prefer that we simply be given links to source material so that someone from CrossWire can work on the modules themselves. I believe it is less likely that they will editorialize as they do markup & conversion. > >

Oh, please. What kind of people do you think we are ?

I think I speak for all suppliers of modules with non-KJV versification when I say that we are now thoroughly confused and don't know what to do.

In the service of the Lord,
Catalin N. Ravaru

---------------------------------------

Chris Little <chrislit at crosswire.org> wrote:

C. N. R. wrote: < < Dear SWORD users, In spite of Mr Chris Little's opinions, the SWORD program was conceived to make possible the comparative reading of several Bible versions, and the standard is the King James Version. > >

I don't know where you got that idea, but it is entirely wrong. It's really difficult to argue that the purpose behind Sword was comparative reading when you consider that parallel Bibles have only been supported since roughly the time when the 1.5.6 frontends came out. Furthermore, the KJV versification is ABSOLUTELY NOT the standard--international or otherwise.

Catholic and Orthodox traditions vary GREATLY from the KJV versification. ALL original language texts (Hebrew, Greek, Latin, & anything else you might consider original language) differ SIGNIFICANTLY from the KJV versification. NO modern commercial Bibles use the KJV versification, to my knowledge (NKJV might be an exception for obvious reasons, but I doubt that even). Even genetic descentants of the KJV like the NASB and NRSV use different versification standards. So "standardizing" on the KJV versification is utterly arbitrary and even if one WERE to set a specific versification as "standard" (which I think would be a profoundly bad idea) the KJV versification is demonstrably inferior to virtually any other versification in use.

< < How could comparative or parallel reading be possible -- let alone the use of commentaries -- if we do not adjust the versification of foreign Bibles to make it compatible with that of the KJV ?  What I've done with the Romanian Orthodox Bible, more exactly with the Book of Psalms, has already been done with other versions of the Bible, such as the LXX which is at this moment on the SWORD site. How would Mr Chris Little handle the Romanian (and Septuagint, and Vulgate) Psalm no 9, which in KJV is in fact two Psalms (no. 9 and 10) ?  Would he paste together the Psalm 10 and the "last valid verse" of the Psalm 9 ?  In fact this new rule, "we don't accept alterations of versification", makes comparative reading impossible, which is the main feature of The SWORD Project program ! > >

I've addressed this previously. Apparently I need to repeat myself. We use the best source texts we can get. We will happily accept improvements to existing modules. We will not accept altered versions of texts, however--especially when the unaltered versions are readily available.

You took publicly available copies of the Biblia Gdanska and modified the versification to be more like that of the KJV. Ask yourself: If the KJV is the international standard, WHY is this Bible posted in some other versification? The answer is clear: because its own versification is the versification with which its users are familiar. "Comparative reading" is a nice feature, but is secondary to a Bible actually being useful to its user community.

This kind of activity is why I do not like to accept any content converted by users. I would prefer that we simply be given links to source material so that someone from CrossWire can work on the modules themselves. I believe it is less likely that they will editorialize as they do markup & conversion.

--Chris

---------------------------------------

C. N. R. <biblology at yahoo.com> wrote:

Dear SWORD users, 

In spite of Mr Chris Little's opinions, the SWORD program was conceived to make possible the comparative reading of several Bible versions, and the standard is the King James Version. How could comparative or parallel reading be possible -- let alone the use of commentaries -- if we do not adjust the versification of foreign Bibles to make it compatible with that of the KJV ? What I've done with the Romanian Orthodox Bible, more exactly with the Book of Psalms, has already been done with other versions of the Bible, such as the LXX which is at this moment on the SWORD site. How would Mr Chris Little handle the Romanian (and Septuagint, and Vulgate) Psalm no 9, which in KJV is in fact two Psalms (no. 9 and 10) ?  Would he paste together the Psalm 10 and the "last valid verse" of the Psalm 9 ?  In fact this new rule, "we don't accept alterations of versification", makes comparative reading impossible, which is the main feature of The SWORD Project program ! 

In the service of the Lord, 

Catalin N. Ravaru

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20050420/01a1e6bf/attachment-0001.html