User:Dmsmith/KJV 2.6

From CrossWire Bible Society

Jump to: navigation, search

This page is for recommended changes to the KJV module version 2.6



1 Cor 15:27 The comma at "him, it is" should not be italicized. There should be a comma between "excepted which". --Dmsmith 11:19, 16 February 2014 (MST)

Done --Dmsmith 17:54, 18 February 2014 (MST)

Words of Christ

The Old Scofield only highlights Words of Christ (WoC) as they come directly from his mouth. Not what others say he said. Not translation of what he said, such as translation from Aramaic. In 2.6, there are 3 error in markup (maybe more, but these are known). Red is what should be WoC, black is currently red, but shouldn't be:

Mat 8:26 And he saith unto them, Why are ye fearful, O ye of little faith? Then he arose, and rebuked the winds and the sea; and there was a great calm.

Mat 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,

Act 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

Done--Dmsmith 06:56, 19 February 2014 (MST)

Added words

Added words & punctuation

Split all transChange elements that contain punctuation marks, so that the punctuation and following space is normal text. 1 Cor 15:27 is one example of many such occurrences.

--Dmsmith 18:38, 18 February 2014 (MST)

Added words & Strong's

Review and correct each instance in which a w element for Strong's & Morph is found within a transChange element. The markup probably belongs to the preceding word. The following are the instances and word(s) that precede that are not contained by a <w> element.

Gen 14.10	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H0875">was full of</w></transChange>
Exod 15.12	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H02098">which</w></transChange>
Exod 15.16	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H02098">which</w></transChange>
Exod 34.19	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H02142" morph="strongMorph:TH8735">that is male</w></transChange>
Num 1.16	These <transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H07148">were</w></transChange>
Num 3.19	These <transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H01992">are</w></transChange>
Num 10.28	Thus <transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H0428">were</w></transChange>
Num 13.3	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H01992">were</w></transChange>
Num 14.28	unto them, <transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H03808">As truly as</w></transChange>
Num 20.13	This <transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H01992">is</w></transChange>
1Sam 30.27	To <transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H0834">them</w></transChange>
2Kgs 19.31	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H06635" morph="strongMorph:TH8675">of hosts</w></transChange>
2Chr.10.16	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H07200" morph="strongMorph:TH8804">saw</w></transChange>
Ezra 2.65	and <transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H0428">there were</w></transChange>
Ps.17.6		unto me <transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H08085" morph="strongMorph:TH8798">and hear</w></transChange>
Ps 39.3		<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H0227">then</w></transChange>
Jer 6.14	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H01323" morph="strongMorph:TH8676">of the daughter</w></transChange>
Jer 28.9	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H0227">then</w></transChange>
Jer.51.53	<transChange type="added"><w lemma="strong:H0227">yet</w></transChange>
I'll need some help determining how these should be changed, if at all. It may be that the KJV uses italics for a purpose other than "added" words. --Dmsmith 19:33, 18 February 2014 (MST)
Italics is presentational formating. The transChange element is semantic. David Haslam 05:19, 19 February 2014 (MST)
The 1611 and 1769 editions of the KJV didn't have an eText with semantic markup. Any semantic markup we have deduces the intention of the authors/printers from the orthographic representation. --Dmsmith 07:00, 19 February 2014 (MST)

Added words & the Divine Name

We found one instance of the Divine Name element within a transChange element. This is probably inappropriate.

The one example is in 2 Chronicles 17:4. It is rendered in italics and small caps. So accordingly it is an added word representing the tetragrammaton. It is represented properly in OSIS. --Dmsmith 17:49, 18 February 2014 (MST)

Tagging the Divine Name

This much more complicated than we thought. Observations:

  1. The divine name is also tagged within some study notes (even twice within the same note a few times).
  2. More than one Strong's number is involved.
  3. Five instances are in the NT where the Greek word κυριος is tagged.
  4. There is one instance where two Strong's numbers are joined to the divine name.
  5. In many places, there are some English words between the Strong's tag and the divine name tag.
  6. There are places where the divine name is tagged, even though it is within a transChange element (see previous subsection).
  7. The three hyphenated forms of the divine name (Jehovah–jireh, Jehovah–nissi, Jehovah–shalom) are not tagged in the main text, only in the study notes.
  8. The other two hyphenated forms of the divine name (Jehovah–shammah, Jehovah–tsidkenu) occur only in the study notes, where the English word (Lord) is tagged.

Divine Name tagging in the KJV follows the "small caps" orthographic representation of Lord, God, Yah.
As such, it is found in added words and notes not being associated with Strong's Numbers.
The Strong's Numbers tagged are H3068, H3069, H3072 and H3050. The first is the tetragrammaton. The second and third are variations of it. The last is Yah.
In the NT, the orthographic representation of Lord as the divine name are backed by Greek, not Hebrew.
The instance of two Strong's Numbers being associated with divine name needs to be reviewed. The leading word is "face", often translated "before" or "presence".
Jer.26.19 <w morph="strongMorph:TH8762" lemma="strong:H02470">and besought</w> <w lemma="strong:H06440 strong:H03068">the <divineName>Lord</divineName></w>
Here the leading word is left untranslated.

Cross references?

Sadly lacking from our KJV module are any scripture cross-references. Many printed editions of the AV contain such references. We should explore how the module might be enhanced by obtaining the data from a suitable electronic source.

[1] is of interest in this context, but see the foot of [2] which describes the sources of the data.

Reference text policy

It may be sensible to review whether we chose the most suitable published text as our reference standard. The most widely accepted one is the Cambridge University Press - Concord Reference Bible.

Need two things: an e-text and permission for the text. (I think the "crown" claims copyright.) --Dmsmith 19:36, 18 February 2014 (MST)
Crown Copyright applies to the Authorised Version per se, not just to those printed by CUP, who are merely one of the licensed printers for all the works that come under Royal Letters Patent. Refer to our Copyright page David Haslam 05:08, 19 February 2014 (MST)

Hebrew words

Following the addition of Greek words in the NT from the TR in version 2.6, is it planned to do likewise for Hebrew (& Aramaic) words in the OT from the MT ?

It would be wonderful. However, the tagging of Strong's numbers provided a map to the TR in the src="x y" attribute, where that gave the position of the word in the TR. So, the addition of the Greek was trivial. We have nothing like that for the MT. It won't be trivial. Also, the Strong's tagging in the OT is not comprehensive. In any given verse only some of the words from the MT are tagged. In the NT all the TR words were present in the tagging, even if empty (i.e. untranslated.)
We are more likely to update the morphology of the OT first for those that have some kind of morphology today.
--Dmsmith 09:31, 25 February 2014 (MST)

See also


Personal tools