Need help with search commands

I am trying to search for all occurrences of לִפְנֵי־יְהוָה in BHS. However, when I search for that (and I tried adding scare quotes on either side), I get 209 results of לִפְנֵי יְהוָה - no maqqeph. Now, someone might say that results with the maqqeph are being included in results without the maqqeph, but I know this isn't true because the search results do not include Judg. 20:23 which has לִפְנֵי־יְהוָה but do include 20:26 which has (2x) לִפְנֵי יְהוָה.

Anyone know how to find results with a maqqeph? There very well be an easy solution to this of which I am ignorant.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Francis

From the help file:

Todd Phillips

I am trying to search for all occurrences of לִפְנֵי־יְהוָה in BHS. However, when I search for that (and I tried adding scare quotes on either side), I get 209 results of לִפְנֵי יְהוָה - no maqqeph. Now, someone might say that results with the maqqeph are being included in results without the maqqeph, but I know this isn't true because the search results do not include Judg. 20:23 which has לִפְנֵי־יְהוָה but do include 20:26 which has (2x) לִפְנֵי יְהוָה.

Anyone know how to find results with a maqqeph? There very well be an easy solution to this of which I am ignorant.

Jordan, when I search for the same thing, I get 224 hits in 212 verses, which includes results with and without the maqqeph--including Judges 20:23:

I don't know why it would be different from your results. What version of Logos are you using? Could you post a screenshot of your search?

Fr Devin Roza

Anyone know how to find results with a maqqeph? There very well be an easy solution to this of which I am ignorant.

As you can see from the help file, you can't search directly for a maqqeph.

But you could do this:

[match exact] לִפְנֵֽי־ WITHIN 4 CHARS <Lemma = sesb/he/יְהוָה>

Does that seem to give you the results you're looking for?

EDIT: cf. below for a corrected version of this search and here for an even better solution.

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861506#Comment_861506

I don't know why it would be different from your results. What version of Logos are you using? Could you post a screenshot of your search?

There are numerous BHS versions in Logos. The SESB 2.0 version gives 209 hits for that same search, and doesn't return Judg. 20:23, even if you select the text from Judg 20:23... looks like a bug of some sort to me.

The method I suggested works the same in all the different versions as best I can tell, however (obviously adapting the lemma search to the different tagging of each version).

Francis

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861507#Comment_861507

[match exact] לִפְנֵֽי־ WITHIN 4 CHARS <Lemma = sesb/he/יְהוָה>

[Y]

I get the same results within 2 CHARS. Why are you using 4?

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861512#Comment_861512

There are numerous BHS versions in Logos. The SESB 2.0 version gives 209 hits for that same search, and doesn't return Judg. 20:23, even if you select the text from Judg 20:23... looks like a bug of some sort to me.

I figured it was a resource version issue. I thought a screenshot would tell us. I don't have SESB.

Agree it's a bug. The help file says "maqqef and space are treated as equivalent", but it sounds like the 209-result search is returning all the verses without a maqqef even though it is in the search term, so that is still true. Perhaps the maqqef is encoded differently in SESB-produced resources than it is in Logos-produced resources. Does the original search return any results with a maqqef in the SESB?

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861513#Comment_861513

Oops... I noticed that some verses were being missed.

I think this version is complete (this is for the BHS SESB version, replace the <Lemma=> section of the search for other Hebrew Bibles):

[match exact] לִפְנֵֽי, לִֽפְנֵי, לִפְנֵי, לִֽפְֽנֵי WITHIN 4 CHARS <Lemma = sesb/he/יְהוָה>

It returns 8 verses: Ex 28:29; Le 16:1, 18; Nu 17:3; Jdg 20:23; 2 Ch 14:12; Ps 95:6; 98:9

Basically what is happening here is that when the maqqef is present, the vowels are unique, so I'm simply searching for versions of the vowels that can correspond to the maqqef... but the only way I put together that list was lining up the verses like Todd did and just copying and pasting the possible versions of liphne.

Ideally we could just search for the maqqef! But we can't.

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861513#Comment_861513

I get the same results within 2 CHARS. Why are you using 4?

Because it's the OOTB recommended way of searching for two lemmas following one another - it's the default Verbum creates for you when you ask it to automatically construct a query for one word following another using this method:

Creates this query:

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861514#Comment_861514

it sounds like the 209-result search is returning all the verses without a maqqef even though it is in the search term, so that is still true. Perhaps the maqqef is encoded differently in SESB-produced resources than it is in Logos-produced resources. Does the original search return any results with a maqqef in the SESB?

Good call - none of the 8 verses with maqqef are returned. In addition, there are 6 other verses that are not returned, each with rather unique markers of some sort (none with maqqef). Definitely a resource issue.

I actually stopped using the SESB 2.0 edition precisely because of running into issues like these.

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861519#Comment_861519

Oh my, I figured out how to do this in a way that really works! Not an ideal solution, but it does work perfectly as regards results.

Move to Genesis 1:1, and type Ctrl-F. Then search for לִפְנֵי־יְהוָ֖ה. Cycle through the hits. It will find all 8 hits, and only those 8 hits where לִפְנֵי־יְהוָ֖ה appears with a maqqef, regardless of the specific vowel forms that לִפְנֵי־יְהוָ֖ה takes.

Jordan Litchfield

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861519#Comment_861519

What do you use if you don't use the SESB 2.0 edition? I thought that was the standard BHS critical edition...

Jordan Litchfield

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861549#Comment_861549

Thanks for the suggestions everyone. I still have a lot to learn when it comes to searching. I guess I was just hoping that if I had a maqqef it would look for the maqqef. [:)]

I've already pre-ordered the Verbum Advanced Search videos, so hopefully I'll get to expand my skills soon (if it's coming soon).

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861549#Comment_861549

What do you use if you don't use the SESB 2.0 edition? I thought that was the standard BHS critical edition...

Currently I use the BHS SESB 2.0 when I quote the Old Testament and need to use a critical edition, and to see the critical apparatus. But that's about it.

For day to day work, I use the LHB. It's very very close to the BHS (if anyone knows if there is an actual list of differences, please post!), and as the official version of the Old Testament from Faithlife, you avoid issues like the ones we saw here, and have a better chance of having any issues you may find promptly fixed.

I've also had significantly better luck with the other two versions of BHS - WIVU and Westminster - than with BHS SESB (as this search also illustrates, where I think it works correctly in those versions). I haven't used them enough to know if I'd end up leaving them for LHB like I did with the SESB if I did use them habitually.

I use the LHB for searches, but sometimes for an important search I'll consult one or more of the others, especially the Westminister data and/or WIVU tagging. As well, occasionally there is a search you can do in one of them you can't do in LHB (and vice-versa), as some have tags that aren't in the others. Westminister is the same tagging used in both Bibleworks and Accordance. Although I do see that Westminister came out with v4.20 in January of 2016, and while Accordance has updated already, Faithlife is still on 4.18. Looks like Bibleworks is on 4.16.

I love how in Verbum I have access to 6 different morph databases (including the new Hebrew transcripta one) for morph tagging of the OT. I don't think any other software offers that. Usually they agree, but not always!

I've already pre-ordered the Verbum Advanced Search videos, so hopefully I'll get to expand my skills soon (if it's coming soon).

Hope you enjoy them! I sure hope they come soon too!

Jordan Litchfield

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861586#Comment_861586

I've also had significantly better luck with the other two versions of BHS - WIVU and Westminster - than with BHS SESB (as this search also illustrates, where I think it works correctly in those versions). I haven't used them enough to know if I'd end up leaving them for LHB like I did with the SESB if I did use them habitually.

Thanks, maybe I'll start using the LHB some more again. Pardon my ignorance, but what is the WIVU?

Gary Mendenhall

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861608#Comment_861608

I believe it is this:

Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia: with Werkgroep Informatica, Vrije Universiteit Morphology; Bible. O.T. Hebrew. Werkgroep Informatica, Vrije Universiteit.

(2006). Logos Bible Software.

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861725#Comment_861725

Here is WIVU: https://www.logos.com/product/27271/biblia-hebraica-stuttgartensia-with-werkgroep-informatica-vrije-universiteit-morphology. The product description includes a description of the very few ways it differs from the SESB.

Jordan Litchfield

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861742#Comment_861742

Thanks everyone!

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861512#Comment_861512

The SESB 2.0 version gives 209 hits for that same search, and doesn't return Judg. 20:23, even if you select the text from Judg 20:23... looks like a bug of some sort to me.

This is probably the same as this bug reported here: https://community.logos.com/forums/t/105471.aspx

We have an open case in our bug tracker for this issue.

Jordan Litchfield

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/861821#Comment_861821

Okay, so that report was filed in June 2015! Do bugs really take that long to fix?! That wouldn't be too promising for some other bugs I've reported in the past...