New Testament Greek Linguistic Databases

File this under “Rant.”

We have a good dozen different Greek morphology databases/annotation. We have (currently) two New Testament Greek Syntax databases.

Of all of them, only one cites its sources and provides extended analysis and description of why it says what it says.

1

That’s right.

How in the world is that acceptable???

I’ve talked about this before. I’ll admit that I haven’t tried to contact everyone, but I’ve tried a couple — I’ve tried to contact GRAMCORD twice. Nothing.

But that’s not the point. If this work in Greek morphology and syntax is supposed to be scholarly, where was peer review? Where was the analysis? Where was the argumentation? I shouldn’t need to ask about it after the fact. This documentation should have been available when the database was created. If you were doing papyriology and provided the editio precepts for a newly discovered papyrus, could you get away with just saying, “Okay guys, here it is. This is my reconstruction. This is my translation.” And not defend or argue a single point?

This is unacceptable and inadequate for scholarship.

And yet,

we have accepted it.

We have treated it as adequate.

What other field can you produce a massive project, give it to the world as significant and valuable for scholarly use…

…and NOT CITED A SINGLE SOURCE FOR THE ENTIRE THING???

Do you think it’s acceptable to go and do such a project present a couple of papers on it at a academic conference or two and assume that’s enough? All of you have been put on report. I want documentation. I want defense of your analysis. I want at least bibliography.

Would your thesis or dissertation have been approved had you not cited anything?

UPDATE: We’re now at 2, surprisingly as of checking my e-mail this morning: PROIEL has completed the Gospels and is currently working on the rest of the NT. There is limited documentation (112 page pdf). I say “limited,” because again, there are no sources, no bibliography, no references. This is a step in the right direction, but continues to be inadequate. Again, if this 112 page document were a dissertation, it wouldn’t be approved. Even still, it’s slightly embarrassing that I should write such a post the night before a new database is announced. Well, I’m happy for it and hope more will document their work in a similar manner (except with a bibliography and references).

Advertisements