Visualizations
I was wondering what the purpose of cascadia, open text, and lexham sentence analysis and how are they similar/different. To my simple mind they appear similar but just use different labels. Can you help?
Comments
-
anyone?
0 -
They are all very different databases. Here are my thoughts on each
Cascadia - The easiest to understand if you've had the traditional language classes. It utilizes head term tagging
that makes it the easiest to use of the databases. What this means is
that I can search for a sentence and specify what the main verb will be a
lot easier than I can with OpenText.OpenText - Requires that you
learn a different vocabulary. Also, it takes a very sequential take on
clauses, they are separate entities whereas Cascadia allows you to see (and search for) the relationships of dependent and independent clauses.Lexham
Sentence - It just identifies the phrases and clauses, how words
function within those boundaries are not tagged. One type of search you
could not do in this database that you can do in the others is to identify when a particular noun is the subject of a particular verb. You could come close by identifying where that noun is in the nominative in the same clause/phrase as the verb but the relationship could be something else.The easiest way to learn is to read the threads on syntax searching and then create searches in all the databases to see which questions are easiest to answer with which database. Personally, I find Cascadia the one I turn to when I want to do a syntax search.
Prov. 15:23
0 -
These wiki pages also have links to forum threads
Prov. 15:23
0 -
Hi Bruce
Bruce Junkermann said:I was wondering what the purpose of cascadia, open text, and lexham sentence analysis and how are they similar/different. To my simple mind they appear similar but just use different labels. Can you help?
There are similarities; of course all three analyses are analyzing the same text.
The Lexham Syntactic Greek New Testament approaches more from the perspective of sentence diagramming, identifying the sorts of structures one uses in that method. It is completely created by hand, and is a reflection of how the named editor views the text that is being analyzed.
The OpenText.org material uses terminology developed by that group, based on the school of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) as applied to koine Greek by Stanley Porter and Jeffrey T. Reed. Reed has a book (Discourse Analysis of Philippians) which, in its introduction, gives a thorough description of the terminology and method. Porter (and Matthew Brook O'Donnell) have an eternally forthcoming Introduction to Discourse Analysis book that, if I understand correctly, will also get into some of this material. This analysis is as well done manually (by hand).
The Cascadia analysis is an application of head-driven phrase structure grammar. It uses standard labels (clause, verb phrase, noun phrase, adjective, etc.) to describe relationships between textual elements. Unlike the other two, it has a "grammar" that is specified in terms that a syntactic "parser" can understand, and the parser applies the grammar to the text. This parsed text was then analyzed by a person, and refined, reformed, corrected and enhanced. These corrections/enhancements then re-inform the parser so that the parser can do a better job the next time. So this is an iterative, computer-driven but human-edited analysis.
Earlier this month I presented a paper in Leiden about syntactic analyses of the Greek New Testament. I have a copy of the PDF on my personal web site: http://supakoo.com/rick/papers/ , it is the first paper listed for 2012 on "Greek Linguistic Databases". Head to about page 15, and you'll see a section on "Descriptions of Syntactic Analyses of the Greek New Testament Available in Logos Bible Software" which might help answer further questions.
Hope it helps.
Rick Brannan
Data Wrangler, Faithlife
My books in print0 -
Thanks guys! Really helpful. Appreciate your time!
0 -
Rick, your paper looks fascinating. Looking forward to reading the whole thing tonight when I get home. Thank you!
0
