really should be on topic if this one is.

I think you'd have to at least narrow it down to a book to make it manageable as an overview of how waw is handled in various contexts (I got as far as Gen 1:2 before finding one that's not και), though.

The "how does one find" part bears some resemblance to this kind of thing.

This one seems a little like trivial pursuit though (who cares?) and I'm sure it's very common in the "freer" translations, so probably not a good question.

@Susan Making comparisons like you just did is a great way to get close votes on the older question ;)

@curiousdannii I dunno, sometimes I think we're overly picky. Stuff like that is clearly within the area of expertise available here, and to the extent that it's interesting (which remains to be seen on the waw question) I think we should let them be even if they don't conform to an expected question type.

@Susan That question should probably be tightened to ask how many words in the Septuagint were used to translate for Sabbath.

@curiousdannii Oh, I thought that's what it said. I guess not. You're right, could be used is silly (for our purposes), but were used is basically the same as asking about the LXX since there isn't a lot of other koine Greek translation of ancient Hebrew floating around. Of course the LXX isn't really a monolithic thing either (did you ever hear Peter Williams's lecture on why he doesn't believe in the LXX?), but I think it's routinely considered like that.

@Susan I was actually trying to figure out how you could do this in Logos 6, mostly just to see if it was possible. You can certainly see how the hebrew (waw) is translated in the LXX, but I'm not sure where you could find out instances where it was ignored without going verse by verse.

@L0ckz0r It's possible in Accordance (using Emanuel Tov's aligned MT-LXX) to search for places where it's not translated by particular words.... so if we eliminate και and δε most of them could be considered correct hits for the OP, although quite often it's not "ignoring" so much as translating the syntax into (good) Greek which entails eliminating coordinating conjunctions in favor of dependent clauses. (I'm sure you realize this.)

To me it makes sense to divide waw into [waw + noun], [wayyiqtol], and [waw + [other verb]]. So starting with wayyiqtol and eliminating και, my results start with Gen 6:2 (וַיִּרְא֤וּ > ἰδόντες δὲ and וַיִּקְח֤וּ > ἔλαβον).

It's interesting that this sort of flexibility starts only there. (Have a look at all the και's in Gen 1! 1:2 translates the disjunctive as δὲ, but the wayyiqtol's are all και.) There's probably some interesting insights about translation philosophy that could be gleaned if one did this right, but the corpus would need to be much smaller to even begin to approach it comprehensively.

I like this sort of thing (if you couldn't tell), but that question wasn't well written and I can't think how to revise it appropriately without knowing what's motivating the OP.

@Dɑvïd Your JSFiddle is really amazing! I'm using it in one Google Chrome Extension.

@PaulVargas @Dɑvïd @JonEricson So is there any way to get this idea (the last one using CSS) implemented on the site itself, rather than through browser extensions?

Even though we are still in Beta?

@ScottS Maybe. It would help if multiple sites could use the change. Unfortunately, the two most likely sites already have designs. But I could ask a designer and see what they think.

@ScottS Well, for now, you can try the Google Chrome Extension. :D +@Dɑvïd

@PaulVargas I could, but it will not load. I get "Manifest file is missing or unreadable" when trying to load it.

@ScottS Same happens if you drag the file on one chrome://extensions/ tab?

@PaulVargas Yes, that was what I did with my second attempt to get it to go.

@ScottS Humm... I have the Google Chrome's version: 53.0.2785.116 m. :/

@PaulVargas Mine is 53.0.2785.116 m (64-bit), so maybe a 32 vs. 64 bit difference?