SILEX Revision Notes
Strong's Concordance was first published in 1890. While it remains an invaluable reference, advances in linguistics, archaeology, and textual studies over the past 130 years have revealed areas where its glosses can be improved. These revision notes document where the Scattered Israelites Lexicon (SILEX) corrects or clarifies Strong's entries based on modern Biblical scholarship.
μυέω G3453 (myéō)
The revised gloss corrects the original Strong's claim of a definite derivation from the base of μυστήριον, clarifying that the exact etymology is uncertain and only possibly linked to μυστήριον via mimetic roots. The definition is also refined, but the primary correction is etymological.
μυκάομαι G3455 (mykáomai)
The original gloss asserts a presumed derivative meaning 'to moo,' while the revised gloss explicitly states the etymology is uncertain and only possibly related to onomatopoeic roots. The revised gloss corrects the strong etymological assertion of the original.
μυκτηρίζω G3456 (myktērízō)
The revised gloss corrects the etymology, clarifying that the root connection to 'snout' or 'lowing' is debated and ties it to 'nose, nostril' and the act of sneering, not necessarily to an animalistic base as in the original. This corrects both the lexical base and sense origin described by Strong's.
μύλος G3458 (mýlos)
The SIBI gloss corrects the original's claim that μύλος is ultimately derived from the base of μόλις (and connected with the idea of hardship), stating instead that the origin of the term is uncertain and is not directly derived from μόλις. It notes that there is no direct implication of 'hardship' in the etymology.
μύριοι G3463 (mýrioi)
The revised gloss corrects the original's implication that μύριοι is a plural of a primary word with a clear root, clarifying instead that the ultimate root of μύριος is uncertain. It also avoids asserting 'an apparently primary word,' reflecting modern uncertainty about the word's etymology.
μυωπάζω G3467 (myōpázō)
The revised gloss corrects the original etymology, noting that the term is derived from 'μυώψ' (nearsighted person) and not from the roots of 'μυστήριον' or 'ὀπτάνομαι' as Strong's claimed.
μώλωψ G3468 (mṓlōps)
The revised gloss rejects Strong's proposed derivations from μόλις or ὀπτάνομαι, noting that modern scholarship considers the origin uncertain and possibly pre-Greek. This corrects Strong's etymological speculation.
μῶμος G3470 (mōmos)
The revised gloss corrects the original's etymological claim by highlighting that the connection to μέμφομαι is uncertain, rather than definite as the original suggests.
μωρός G3474 (mōrós)
The revised gloss corrects the original Strong's etymology, indicating that μωρός is not derived from μυστήριον and that its origin is uncertain. The original suggested a connection to μυστήριον, which the revised gloss explicitly rejects.
Μωσεύς G3475 (Mōseús)
The revised gloss clarifies that the ultimate derivation of the name 'Moses' (מֹשֶׁה) is uncertain, while the original gloss simply states 'of Hebrew origin' without qualification. The revised gloss also notes possible Egyptian connections, highlighting the lack of scholarly consensus, thus correcting the implicit certainty of the original.
Ναγγαί G3477 (Nangaí)
The revised gloss clarifies that while a Hebrew origin is probable and there may be a relation to נֹגַהּ (nogah), the precise derivation of the name is uncertain, correcting the stronger implication in the original that the derivation might be simply Nogach.
Ναΐν G3484 (Naḯn)
The revised gloss corrects the original's claim that the name is 'probably of Hebrew origin' by clarifying that the etymology is uncertain, suggesting only a possible relation to the Hebrew root נָאָה rather than a probable one.
ναός G3485 (naós)
The original gloss claims derivation from a primary verb 'to dwell', whereas the revised gloss clarifies that this verb ('naō') is no longer extant in the New Testament period and the connection is indirect. The revised gloss corrects the impression that this verb is actively attested or clear in the period of the sources.
Νάρκισσος G3488 (Nárkissos)
The original gloss asserts that the name comes from a term meaning 'stupefaction' as a 'narcotic', while the revised gloss clarifies that the connection is only indirect (through the flower's name), and that 'stupefaction' is not a direct meaning of the personal name. The modern gloss corrects the etymological oversimplification in Strong's.
ἀνακράζω G349 (anakrázō)
The original gloss suggests the compound means 'to scream up (aloud)', linking ἀνά strictly with direction ('up'), while the revised gloss clarifies the prefix ἀνά intensifies the action and does not necessarily mean physical direction, correcting a common etymological misunderstanding.
ναῦς G3491 (naûs)
The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology by indicating that the origin of 'ναῦς' is uncertain, whereas the original proposed a derivation ('from or to float'), which is not attested in modern scholarship.
Ναχώρ G3493 (Nachṓr)
The revised gloss points out that the precise linguistic meaning and etymology of 'Nahor' are uncertain, whereas the original simply asserts it is of Hebrew origin without noting this uncertainty.
νεκρός G3498 (nekrós)
The original gloss claims νεκρός is from an 'apparently primary' root and associates it with 'a corpse,' while the revised gloss states the etymology is of uncertain origin, removing the implication of a definite root and direct derivation from a noun meaning 'corpse.'
νεύω G3506 (neúō)
The revised gloss corrects the original's implication that νεύω is 'apparently a primary verb' with uncertain or obscure root by explicitly stating that the etymology is uncertain, clarifying there is no clear connection to other Greek roots. The definition and usage are consistent, but the revised gloss nuances the etymological claim.
Νεφθαλείμ G3508 (Nephthaleím)
The revised gloss corrects the original by noting that the etymology of 'Naphtali' is uncertain, whereas the original simply states it is of Hebrew origin without comment on the uncertainty or possible derivation from 'to wrestle.'
νέφος G3509 (néphos)
The SIBI gloss corrects the original's implication that νέφος is a primary word by clarifying that its etymology is uncertain and it lacks a clear Greek derivation, removing the presumption of its root status.
νήθω G3514 (nḗthō)
The SIBI gloss corrects Strong's by stating that the etymology is probably uncertain or pre-Greek, contradicting Strong's implication of derivation from a similar root.
Νηρεύς G3517 (Nēreús)
The revised gloss corrects the original's claim that the name Nereus is from a derivative of the base of ναῦς, meaning 'wet.' The revised gloss states that the etymology is uncertain and the connection to ναῦς is unlikely, clarifying that the term's origin is not firmly established in Biblical usage.
ἀνακύπτω G352 (anakýptō)
The revised gloss corrects the etymology: Strong's says ἀνά is used 'in the sense of reversal,' while the revised gloss notes ἀνά means 'up, again,' shifting the nuance from reversal to upward movement.
νῆσος G3520 (nēsos)
The original claims the word derives from the base of ναῦς, whereas the revised gloss says the derivation is uncertain and the connection to ναῦς is only possible, not definitive.
Νινευΐ G3535 (Nineuḯ)
The revised gloss corrects the original's implication that the name is simply of Hebrew origin, clarifying that the ultimate etymology is uncertain and possibly Akkadian, and that 'Hebrew origin' only refers to the form borrowed into Greek. The revised gloss thus corrects and broadens the understanding of the name's origin.
νίπτω G3538 (níptō)
The original gloss simply cross-references λούω, incorrectly suggesting νίπτω is synonymous or related, while the revised gloss explicitly distinguishes νίπτω from λούω and notes their etymological and semantic distinctiveness.
ἀναλίσκω G355 (analískō)
The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology by noting that while the word is formed with ἀνά and a verb possibly related to λίσκω, the precise verbal root is uncertain. The original gloss incorrectly assumes a certain alternate of αἱρέομαι as the root, which the revised gloss amends with more accurate, current linguistic knowledge.
νόμος G3551 (nómos)
The revised gloss clarifies and corrects the original's vague etymology by identifying a likely connection to the verb νέμω ('to allot, distribute'), whereas the original ambiguously references an unspecified primary root. This correction eliminates confusion and aligns with current lexical scholarship.
νοῦς G3563 (noûs)
The original gloss states that νοῦς is 'probably from the base of γινώσκω', whereas the revised gloss acknowledges that the precise etymology is uncertain. The revised gloss only notes a likely connection with γινώσκω without expressing as much certainty, clarifying the original's more definitive claim.
Νυμφᾶς G3564 (Nymphâs)
The original gloss confidently derives the name as a contraction of 'bride' and 'gift', while the revised gloss expressly cautions that this etymology is uncertain and not established in modern scholarship.
νύμφη G3565 (nýmphē)
The Strong's gloss asserts a primary but obsolete Greek verb as the root, whereas the revised gloss notes the precise Greek root is unattested or uncertain. This corrects Strong's confidence in a specific Greek derivation.
ξένος G3581 (xénos)
The revised gloss corrects the original's implication that ξένος is an 'apparently primary word' by stating that its root is of uncertain origin, which removes any claim to being a primary, underived word. This is an etymological correction.
ξέστης G3582 (xéstēs)
The revised gloss corrects the original's strong assertion of derivation from a Greek root meaning 'to smooth'—the revised gloss notes that the Greek etymology is uncertain and that it may be a loan from Latin 'sextarius.' The revised gloss also clarifies that the vessel is not a cooking pot but primarily a measuring or pouring vessel, correcting the definition and possible anachronism in the original.
ξηρός G3584 (xērós)
The SIBI gloss corrects Strong's asserted derivation from 'the base of ξέστης (through the idea of scorching),' stating that the etymology is uncertain and such connections are not strongly supported.
ξύλον G3586 (xýlon)
The revised gloss corrects the original by stating that the precise derivation is uncertain, whereas the original specifies a derivation from another form of the base of ξέστης. The revised gloss points to an ultimately PIE root but notes uncertainty, disagreeing with the specificity of the Strong's etymology.
ξυράω G3587 (xyráō)
The REVISED gloss corrects the ORIGINAL by noting that the etymological origin is uncertain and that the connection to 'razor' and the precise derivation from ξύλον (wood) is not definitive, whereas the ORIGINAL presents the razor derivation as established.
ὄγκος G3591 (ónkos)
The revised gloss corrects the original's claim that the word is 'probably from the same as ἀγκάλη,' stating instead that the precise etymology is uncertain and the connection to ἀγκάλη is not definitively established.
ὁδός G3598 (hodós)
The revised gloss corrects the original's implicit claim that the word is 'apparently a primary word' by stating explicitly that its root is uncertain and there is no clear derivation. This challenges the original's assumption of transparently native status and clear etymology.
ὀδούς G3599 (odoús)
The original gloss claims a derivation from the base of ἐσθίω ('to eat'), whereas the revised gloss explicitly states that this etymological connection is not linguistically established and considers the precise etymology uncertain. The revised gloss corrects the original's implied etymology.
ὀδύνη G3601 (odýnē)
The revised gloss corrects the original's assertion that ὀδύνη is straightforwardly derived from δύνω, stating instead that the root is uncertain and only possibly related. This addresses a material etymological disagreement.
ὀδυρμός G3602 (odyrmós)
The revised gloss notes that the connection to δύνω is uncertain and only possible, whereas the original states it as a derivative, correcting a potentially incorrect or oversimplified etymological claim in the original.
ὄζω G3605 (ózō)
The original gloss claims ὄζω is a primary verb in a 'strengthened form,' whereas the revised gloss notes the root and derivation are uncertain. This corrects the original's etymological assertion.
ὅθεν G3606 (hóthen)
The revised gloss notes uncertainty regarding the precise etymology and suggests a possible connection to ἐν, not just a simple combination of ὅς and a 'directive enclitic.' This corrects the overly confident etymological claim in the original gloss.
ὀθόνιον G3608 (othónion)
The revised gloss corrects the original's claim of a presumed derivative by stating that the precise derivation is uncertain. It notes the word is a diminutive or related form of ὀθόνη, not strictly a derivative, updating the etymological information.
οἰκοδομή G3619 (oikodomḗ)
The revised gloss corrects the original's etymology: Strong's describes οἰκοδομή as a compound of οἶκος and the base of δῶμα, while the revised gloss identifies δέμω ('to build') as the correct second root, noting δῶμα as a related form rather than the base. This is a correction of the original's etymological understanding.
οἰκουρός G3626 (oikourós)
The original Strong's gloss speculates an etymological connection to a root meaning 'guard' or 'be ware', which the revised gloss omits, simply deriving from 'house' and a 'keeper/attendant' component. The revised avoids speculative etymology.
οἰκτείρω G3627 (oikteírō)
The original gloss asserts a specific etymology ('from [pity]'), while the revised gloss states that the root is uncertain, correcting the original's assumption about its derivation.
οἶνος G3631 (oînos)
The SIBI gloss corrects the original Strong's by clarifying that the etymology is uncertain and a direct borrowing from Hebrew is not definitively established, whereas Strong's implies a direct link to Hebrew יַיִן. Additionally, the SIBI gloss narrows the definition to specifically fermented grape beverage, avoiding conflation with unfermented juice, but this is not a major disagreement.
οἴομαι G3633 (oíomai)
The revised gloss clarifies that the connection to οἷος proposed by the original is unfounded or unclear, and that the true etymology is uncertain. This corrects Strong's mistaken or oversimplified etymological claim.