Skip to main content

Comments

10 comments

  • Randall Cue

    That should have been enhanced G/K numbers, sorry.

    1
  • Fabian

    Accordance has the feature for both. 

    TR based Bibles = Enhanced Strong's numbers

    NA based Bibles = Enhanced G/K numbers

    2
  • dick roberts

    G/K numbering system I believe is unique to only the NIV versions. It was first introduced by Goodrick and Kohlenberger based on their NIV-based Greek-English Concordance to the New Testament. A number of reference works also use the  G/K nimbers along with Strongs. NASB and ESV use Strong's numbering, but they are not based on TR

    0
  • Randall Cue

    I don't believe that's the case. Only the NIV 2011 is available with enhanced G/K numbers.

    0
  • Steven S

    Hi Randall Cue. Of note, the Mounce NT also offers enhanced G/K numbers and phrase tagging.

    0
  • jlm

    Accordance supports both, but the Text has to have the data. I don't think Accordance would have the resources to do G/K tagging of a Bible on their own, so whether a Text has G/K tagging (or enhanced G/K tagging) will depend on what the publisher makes available. Is there a Bible for which you would like to see G/K tagging and whose publisher can provide that data?

    0
  • Randall Cue

    Thanks Steven. I missed that one. I would like to see the ESV by Crossway have the enhanced G/K tagging with phrase tagging.

    1
  • Randall Cue

    "I don't think Accordance would have the resources to do G/K tagging of a Bible on their own"

    That's sad.

    0
  • jlm

    "I don't think Accordance would have the resources to do G/K tagging of a Bible on their own"

    That's sad.

    Well, I understand they did do their own Strong's tagging of the ESV before Crossway made Strong's number data available, so it's not out of the question, but it's traditionally a labor-intensive process to identify the correct tag for each word. Accordance has to decide between spending their module development resources on that and spending them on producing or improving other products. If the others are less labor-intensive because no one has to go through them word-by-word, it would take a lot of demand for the G/K phrase tagging to make it a good business decision to develop it. Accordance has always had more modules requested than it can develop, so it has to make business decisions about what to choose.

    Now, what could change that calculus is if an AI (LLM) could be used to do the tagging. It's plausible that an LLM, given (a) a verse from an English text with Strong's numbers, (b) possible correspondences between the Strong's numbers and G/K numbers, and (c) a Greek text of that verse, could do a good job of producing phrase tagging. “Which word matches which” is something LLMs are good at. It would take time to develop such a tool, and I don't know if Accordance has anyone capable of doing it, but once it existed, they could use it on many translations. There are risks and complications to this: it keeps a developer busy while users are impatient to receive long-promised features; the tool might not work well enough to be viable; some users would consider AI tagging to be junk and wouldn't even try it; the input and output format for the AI tool would probably have to be different from Accordance's internal file formats, so conversion scripts would have to be developed.

    0
  • Tim

    I understand that Accordance doesn't have much control over this, but I too would love to see more versions having the extended tagging that the NIV & Mounce do

    2

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Powered by Zendesk