parsing all gramical forms of a word?
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but is there a way to get a list of all the grammatical forms of a Greek word in Logos?
In particular I would like to have all the forms, including those not found in the NT.
If not, are there any other resources (preferably online) where I can get this info?
thanks!
Comments
-
Well, any 1st year Greek grammar will have charts of the various ways that a representative word changes in its various forms.
Friberg's Analytical Lexicon of the Greek New Testament (you might have depending on your base package) will list a lemma and all the various forms of that word. I seem to remember it having forms that didn't show up in the NT, but its emphasis is on NT words.
Prov. 15:23
0 -
Friberg is locked for my package (original languages). I do have several grammars. Mounce for example lists tense stems for words occurring more than 50 times, but not for every word in the NT (let alone tenses not occurring in the NT). Wallace has nothing on this.
Online the best thing I have found is the Unbound Bible Greek Lexical Parser: but this only list the forms that occur in the NT, and does not have accents. Again, I'm looking for all the words in the NT.and every tense even those not occurring in the NT.
Really though, I was assuming this must be possible to do in Logos (it clearly knows all the forms, I just need it to spit them out for me).
0 -
shark tacos said:
I was assuming this must be possible to do in Logos (it clearly knows all the forms, I just need it to spit them out for me).
Logos uses tags rather than parsing on the fly - otherwise there would be irresolvable ambiguity. The Greek New Testament Insert may be close to what you want. May I ask how you intend to use the information? That might help us point you the correct direction.
shark tacos said:Again, I'm looking for all the words in the NT.and every tense even those not occurring in the NT
You only refer to verbs here (tense) - are you looking for both conjugations and declinations? How do you want to treat varients i.e. words with prefixes?
Orthodox Bishop Alfeyev: "To be a theologian means to have experience of a personal encounter with God through prayer and worship."; Orthodox proverb: "We know where the Church is, we do not know where it is not."
0 -
Hi MJ,
You asked what I wanted to do with this. I'd like to be
able to say
"gee, what is the subjunctive present 1st person plural form of λέγω (to
say)?" and then go look that up.I'd also like to be able to see every grammatical form of a word at a glanceI'm thinking that I want an analytical lexicon like Kevin suggested. It looks like Logos
has 2: Friberg and Lexham. Any thoughts on which would be better? Could
someone with either of these post a screen shot please?
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
-->0 -
p.s. I said tenses (verbs) but I really want all words.
0 -
Here's a screengrab. Lexham on the left and Friberg on the right
Lexham has more usage examples (referrences) but it looks like it limits itself to just the forms in the NT. Friberg apparently has more forms (because it includes all variants? I haven't closely read the introduction but my skimming of it seemed to indicate this).
If you are looking for as many forms as possible it looks like Friberg has a slight edge.
Prov. 15:23
0 -
Thanks very much for posting this Kevin!
From the screenshots it looks like Lexham actually has more forms of that
word. If I'm reading it right, the Friberg shows the complete entry
for that word (it begins a new entry at the bottom of the page for the noun προσκυνητης),
while the Lexham goes off the page (implying there are more words if
you scroll down). There are 25 forms of προσκυνεω in
the NT out of a total of 92 possible forms,
so there are 67 forms of προσκυνεω not found in the
NT.Lexham shows 17 words, Friberg shows 14
(not incl the lemma). In the
illustration you can see that there are 10 words (shown with the red
arrows) listed in both Friberg and Lexham. Lexham has 7 words (yellow
highlight top left) that are not shown in Friberg, and Friberg has 4
words not shown in Lexham (yellow highlight bottom right). If we add those up 10+7+4=21
there are 4 words
that neither Friberg or Lexham are showing found in the NT. One is
προσκυνουμεν
VPAI1P (or: pres act ind 1pl) and the other 3 are participles
(προσκυνουντες,
προσκυνουντας, προσκυνουσα)I would think that both Friberg and Lexham would at least show all
the forms in the NT (24), am I right that if you scroll down in
Lexham there are 8 more words off screen (for a total of 25 = all
forms in the NT)? Or are there 75 more
words off screen (for a total of 92 = all
forms)Any idea why Friberg only shows 14 out of 25 NT words?
Looking a bit closer I see that in Friberg where it begins the entry for the noun προσκυνητης it actually lists the missing word προσκυνουμεν which is a verb. Now I'm really confused! Now I'm thinking maybe the Friberg entry is continued off screen. Would it be possible for you to post the rest of the off screen entry for Friberg and Lexham so I can see how the listing continues for both? I really appreciate it.
0 -
The NT words not showing in Friberg are:
1.
All aorist
active indicative forms
(προσεκυνησεν
and προσεκυνησαν)2.
All imperfect
active indicative
forms
(προσεκυνουν
and
προσεκυνει)3.
All present
active indicative
forms (προσκυνει,
προσκυνουμεν, προσκυνειτε)
Maybe these are in the noun entry with προσκυνουμεν?4.
All the participles
(προσκυνουντες,
προσκυνουντας, προσκυνουσα)5. The present infintive προσκυνειν
(but oddly it does list the aorist
infinitive
προσκυνησαι)0 -
Perhaps Friberg omitted forms it considered too regular to warrant inclusion? Or perhaps, this entry suffers from errors. I don't know what to think because There are some serious errors in the Friberg side. I don't know if they are a problem with the print resource or the conversion to Logos book. In the picture below note the red boxes, they indicate entries under the wrong article. Friberg, however, did have a form from the TR that does not appear in the NA27. This makes sense because with the Lexham label (put out by Logos) the listing of words was probably generated automatically from their databases.
I take from this exercise that the Lexaham Analytical lexicon is more reliable but the Friberg may have more of the obscure forms. I will be driving past a seminary library today. I think I might stop in to take a look at the print edition to see where the error lies.
If I had to recommend one right now, it would be the Lexham edition. However, check your upgrade page for what level introduces these lexicons. I got both in base packages.
Prov. 15:23
0 -
After holding the print edition in my hands I understand much better. The indentation of the Logos edition implies that all forms of a lemma are under its bold entry. They are not. The forms are listed alphabetically. There is no indentation in the print edition. I was able to find all 7 unaccounted forms from the picture above in Friberg. Here's three of them before προσκυνεω.
So, I swing back to giving Friberg the edge in which lexicon to use.
Friberg will have more forms, but if you want to have the information
arranged by Lemma, go Lexham. I'm going to start a new thread suggesting
that the formatting of this book be fixed to reflect the print edition.Prov. 15:23
0 -
Am I understanding you correctly that
1) Friberg does not organize words by the lemma, but alphabetically? That sounds pretty crazy.
2) Logos has randomly inserted lemma headings that are completely wrong?
Sounds like a big mess!
I'd tend to go with Lexham at this point just because of the correct organization, but it sounds like really neither are what I need since I do not just want every form of words in the NT (which I can get for free already online) but rather all forms of every single word in the BDAG.
0 -
shark tacos said:
1) Friberg does not organize words by the
lemma, but alphabetically? That sounds pretty crazy.It's
actually the traditional way to organize an analytical lexicon. Imagine
you are sitting at your desk in a pre-computer era and translating. You
come a cross a word that you don't know what the meaning is because in the processes of letter change the lemma is obscured or the ending is changed in ways that you don't recognize. A lexicon like Friberg in this case can be a life saver because you can look up the spelling, see what the lemma is and then, if necessary, also look up the lemma to find out the meaning.shark tacos said:2) Logos has randomly inserted lemma headings that are completely wrong?
It's not that the lemma headings are wrong. The bold words are indeed lemmas. In the print edition the non-lemmas are justified with the lemmas. By indenting non-lemmas it makes them visually subordinate to the lemmas above them. In other lexicons the indention indicates that the information is part of the information on the lemma. In using a convention from another type of lexicon it implies a fault in Friberg that isn't there. Friberg is most useful in print; you can duplicate it's functions in Logos best through a search of the Morphologically tagged texts for any unfamiliar Greek form.
Prov. 15:23
0 -
shark tacos said:
Sorry if this is a dumb question, but is there a way to get a list of all the grammatical forms of a Greek word in Logos?
In particular I would like to have all the forms, including those not found in the NT.
If not, are there any other resources (preferably online) where I can get this info?
thanks!
Without a resource like Fridberg you could do a search for the word in the Bible and get search results like this:
TIP: for a quick way to reduce the list once you've set up the Case, Gender, number, result sort order right click on a header bar (E.G. Accusative 153 results) and select "Summary view)
(And while I'm at it, isn't the last word in the search an indication of a bug? Shouldn't it be aligned with the rest of the Greek words?)
0
