• This reference would have been far more valuable and distinguished had the authors, taking a cue from Louw/Nida, grouped the words by semantic domain rather than alphabetically; isn't the market already saturated enough with alphabetical lexicons?
    1. I completely agree.  This would be a fantastic language-learning tool for Hebrew if the entries were ordered by Louw/Nida numbers.
    2. Use the search feature by putting in a LN range number on the search line. Then every single lexeme in that range will come up contiguously, or cut and paste each semantic entry into a Word, et al, format to see all the entries in one place. LN Greek wanted to make each entry from general to specific. In LN greek that feature was weaker than should have been. Hence my judgment was let a student create his own comparison of features. See Swanson in the UNISA uni library for my masters thesis comparing BDAG and LN lexicons.