Verbum 9 Tip 9av: Guide section: Visualizations: OpenText, Cascadia, Perseus
Docx files for personal book: Verbum 9 part 1; Verbum 9 part 2; Verbum 9 part 3; Verbum 9 part 4; Verbum 9 part 5; Verbum 9 part 6; Verbum 9 part 7; How to use the Verbum Lectionary and Missal; Verbum 8 tips 1-30; Verbum 8 tips 31-49
Reading lists: Catholic Bible Interpretation
Please be generous with your additional details, corrections, suggestions, and other feedback. This is being built in a .docx file for a PBB which will be shared periodically.
Previous post: Tip 9au Next post: Tip 9aw
OpenText.org syntactic analysis
What is OpenText.org?[quote]
The OpenText.org project is a web-based initiative to develop annotated Greek texts and tools for their analysis. The project aims both to serve, and to collaborate with, the scholarly community. Texts are annotated with various levels of linguistic information, such as text-critical, grammatical, semantic and discourse features.
Beginning with the New Testament, the project aims to construct a representative corpus of Hellenistic Greek to facilitate linguistic and literary research of these important documents. These texts are then annotated through the addition of linguistic and literary features (including marking morphological, syntactical and discourse elements) following a comprehensive model currently under development. The resulting texts can be viewed and searched on this site. It is hoped that interested users will collaborate in the correction and enhancement of this annotation, and become involved in the annotation process themselves.
The key features of the project are:
- texts annotated at distinct linguistic levels
- the use of an XML encoding scheme to mark-up texts
- an 'open' and collaborative approach to encourage the annotation and use of texts
- an on-line tool kit to allow searching and analysis of texts[1]
- Porter, Stanley, Matthew Brook O’Donnell, Jeffrey T. Reed, and Randall Tan, OpenText.org. The OpenText.org Syntactically Analyzed Greek New Testament. Logos Bible Software, 2006.
- Porter, Stanley E., Matthew Brook O’Donnell, Jeffrey T. Reed, and Randall Tan, OpenText.org. The OpenText.org Syntactically Analyzed Greek New Testament: Clause Analysis; OpenText.org Clause Analysis. Logos Bible Software, 2006.
- Porter, Stanley, Matthew Brook O’Donnell, Jeffrey T. Reed, and Randall Tan, OpenText.org. The OpenText.org Syntactically Analyzed Greek New Testament Glossary. Logos Bible Software, 2006.
The clausal coding leans towards grammatical roles – subject, predicator, complement, adjunct, conjunction, addressee – making this an accessible analysis. While the Glossary does not show the abbreviations, the online documentation does:[quote]
OpenText.org Annotation Model
Introduction to the Annotation Model
(Nov. 2004)
The clause is recognized as the primary building block in the OpenText.org annotation model because it is the level at which propositions are made. The different types of annotations are thus built around the clause annotation, the word group annotation (which make up the clause components), and the relationship between clauses (including the distinction into distinct primary, secondary, and secondary embedded clause levels) as the base. Table 2 summarizes the major categories of tags for the clause and word group level annotations. The vertical axis of the table delineates the four basic clause level function slots. The horizontal axis of the table gives the three clauses levels. The information within the table refers to the word groups, which fit inside the clause function slots.
Table 2. Clause and Word Group Annotations
|
Clause Level |
Subject (S) |
Predicator (P) |
Complement (C) |
Adjunct (A) |
|
Primary |
Head Term-Modifiers |
Verbal Form |
Head Term-Modifiers |
Head Term-Modifiers |
|
Secondary Unembedded |
Head Term-Modifiers |
Verbal Form |
Head Term-Modifiers |
Head Term-Modifiers |
|
Secondary Embedded |
Head Term-Modifiers |
Verbal Form |
Head Term-Modifiers |
Head Term-Modifiers |
Clause Level Annotation
At the clause level, only four tags are used, excluding conjunctions between clauses (marked “conj”). To aid understanding, it is helpful to consider the clause functions in terms of function slots. All word groups fit into these function slots. There are only four function slots and they are:
- Subject (S)
- Predicator (P)
- Complement (C)
- Adjunct (A)
The tag subject (S) is used of a word group or the word groups of which something is predicated. (In traditional grammar the distinguishing term is “grammatical subject.”)
All verbal forms are tagged as predicators (P).
A complement (C) is a word group or the word groups that “complete” its predicator. Common complements are direct and indirect objects.
An adjunct (A) is a word group or the word groups that modify the predicator, providing an indication of the circumstances associated with the process. Common adjuncts are prepositional and adverbial phrases.
This annotation scheme reflects Halliday’s conception of the grammar of a clause (i.e., the transitivity system at the level of a clause). The subjects and complements in the clause level annotation correspond to the participants in a process; the predicators correspond to the processes; and the adjuncts typically correspond to the circumstances associated with the process, though some adjuncts are peripheral participants in a process.
Word Group Level Annotation Model
At the word group level, all words are basically either head terms or modifiers. The head term usually refers to the nominal that all the other words in the word group modify. Four types of modifiers are identified:
- specifiers (sp)
- definers (df)
- qualifiers (ql)
- relators (rl)
A specifier (sp) is a modifier that classifies or identifies the word it modifies. Common examples of specifiers are articles and prepositions.
A definer (df) is a modifier that attributes features or further defines the word it modifies. Common examples of definers are adjectives (both attributive and predicate structure) and appositional words or phrases.
A qualifier (ql) is a modifier that in some way limits or constrains the scope of the word it modifies. Common examples of qualifiers are words in the genitive and dative case.
A relator (rl) is a word specified by a preposition (i.e., the object of a preposition) that modifies another element within the word group.
Clause Levels
Clauses are divided into two levels: (1) primary clauses; and (2) secondary clauses. The primary and secondary distinction has to do with the two possible types of logical dependency, dependence (hypotaxis) or equality (parataxis). Primary clauses are connected to each other, while secondary clauses are connected to the primary clause to which it is dependent. The majority of primary clauses consist of clauses with a finite verb. Secondary clauses are typically distinguished by means of a subordinating conjunction. A second type of secondary clause, the embedded clause, involves the phenomenon of rank-shifting—a linguistic element is embedded to a level of grammar lower than the typical level at which it functions. The majority of secondary embedded clauses in Greek are participial and infinitival clauses.[2]
Note that the lines are keyed to a clause number; the verse number is a subscript within the text. As is usually each of the codes and symbols is explained in the tooltip popup. The normal gutter line with morphological data, Louw-Nida numbers, glosses … displays on mouse over. Remember that a portion of New Testament apocrypha and apostolic fathers is available on the web site.
The OpenText.org site provides an alternative style of presentation of the clause data[3]:
The OpenText.org presentation is available both online (HTML) and in PDF downloadable format. The site also provides a wordgroup view of the clauses. Documentation for the coding and the diagraming conventions are available here.
The Verbum visualization is again a tree diagram that is not always carried to the final node.
As on other tree diagrams, a mouse over highlights/colors the relevant track up and down the tree. For at look at alternative tree diagrams see Visualizing Non-Subordination and Multidominance in Tree Diagrams: Testing Five Syntax Tree Variants.
OpenText.org has a third diagram that capture field, tenor, or mode. Some of this coding brings OpenText closer to semantic roles.[quote]
3. Features analyzed at the clause level
a. Though not formally recognized in the current elements and attributes, it is helpful to divide the features analyzed at the clause level according to whether they belong to the field, tenor or mode of discourse.
3.1. Clause components, aspect, causality and presupposition (Field)
a. A clause usually has a number of different components, differentiated in functional terms. There are four components, subject, predicate, complement and adjunct. A clause can usually have only one subject and predicate, but any number of complements and adjuncts.
b. The predicate is made up of the word group containing the verbal element of the clause. Each predicate is marked with a number of semantic features based upon the formal morphological features of the verbal element marked at the word group level (see Word Group Annotation 3.3). The features marked on the predicate are: aspect (tense-forms except for future), causality (disambiguated voice forms), attitude (mood for finite forms), participation (person for finite forms), collection (number for finite and participle forms) and presupposition (for participle and infinitive forms). At the clause level ambiguity between middle and passive forms (in the present and perfect forms), marked at the word group level, must be resolved and the predicate assigned either Internal/Ergative or Passive causality.
c. The subject is made up of one or more word groups, with the head term(s) usually in the nominative case (and in concord with the finite verbal form if it is present). Cases where a number of word groups are joined by conjunctions, e.g. Pau'lo" kai; Timovqeo" kai; Pevtro", are marked as a single subject component. Subject components are marked with a role, which will usually be that of actor.
d. A complement is made up of one or more connected word groups that can be said to complete the action of the predicate. In traditional grammatical terms complements include direct and indirect objects. A number of related word groups, connected by conjunctions are marked as single complement, e.g. to;n Pevtron kai; to;n ?Iavkwbon kai; to;n ?Iwavnnhn. In other cases, however, a number of word groups may constitute individual complements, e.g. [cara;n pollh;n]C [e[scon]P kai; [paravklhsin]C. Complement components are with a role, which will frequently be that of patient.
e. An adjunct consists of one of more connected word groups functioning in an adverbial manner. Common adjuncts are prepositional phrases and adverb word groups. In clauses with a series of adverbial word groups joined by conjunctions, e.g. ejn uJmi'n kai; ejn hJmi'n kai; eij" Cristou', each word group is marked as an adjunct. Adjunct components marked with a circumstance with the values where, when, how and what.
f. Frequently a clause component will consist of an entire clause filling the slot of subject, complement or adjunct. Consider the clause, oJ pisteuvwn ejn qew'/ lalei' tw'/ law'/. This should first be analyzed as follows: {[oJ pisteuvwn ejn qew'/]S [lalei']P [tw'/ law'/]C}. However, the subject component of the clause is itself a clause, analyzed as: {[oJ pisteuvwn]P [ejn qew'/]A}.
g. Other examples of clauses nested within clause components are adverbial participle clauses functioning as clause adjuncts and infinitive phrases filling the subject or complement slot.
h. A clause will usually have a single finite verbal element as its predicate. It may have other non-finite verbal forms in other component slots (e.g. a participle phrase as an adjunct). These additional verbal elements are given their own clausal analysis as discussed above. There are occasions where a clause may appear to have a predicate component containing two finite verbs (connected by a conjunctive particle) that share the other clause components (subject, complements and/or adjuncts) e.g. Rom. 1.21 [ [diovti]conj [gnovnte" to;n qeo;n]A [oujc]A [wJ" qeo;n]A [ejdovxasan h] hujcarivsthsan]P ]. An alternative analysis of this clause would be two see it as a clause with two predicates, e.g. [ejdovxasan]P 
]conj hujcarivsthsan]P. However, the general criterion for determining the boundaries of a clause is one finite predicate per clause. This specification suggests that this be followed if possible, so that the example from Rom. 1.21 would be analyzed as two clauses, e.g. [ [diovti]conj [gnovnte" to;n qeo;n]A [oujc]A [wJ" qeo;n]A [ejdovxasan]CLAUSE1 [ ]conj hujcarivsthsan]P ]CLAUSE2.
i. Periphrastic constructions pose a challenge for annotation at the clause level. 'Periphrastic verbal constructions are formed by the grammatically appropriate combination of a form of the auxiliary verb eijmiv and a participle' (Porter 1994: 45). These two verbal elements, the auxiliary and the participle form, function as a single semantic unit and are thus annotated as a single group. This allows for all the semantic features annotated as attributes on the predicate component, such as aspect, causality and attitude to be included. The auxilary provides the semantics of attitude (eijmiv is vague with regard to aspect and causality [realized by tense-form and voice respectively]) and the participle form provides aspect and causality. As a guide in identifying paraphrastic constructions it should be noted that other elements such as subject or adjunct components related to the auxilary do not usually intervene between the auxilary and the participle (see examples in Porter 1994: 45-46).
3.2. Attitude and participation (Tenor)
a. Predicate clause components containing a finite verb form are marked with an indication of attitude (mood forms). Possible values for attitude are: assert (indicative forms), direct (imperative), project (subjunctive) and contingent (optative).
b. The <part> element
3.3. Clause boundaries, prime and subsequent, and conjunctions (Mode)
a. The boundaries of each clause are ascertained on the basis of the criteria outlined in the definition of a clause (see Definitions). A clause will have at most one verbal element, though it need not have one.
b. As discussed in section 3.1, an entire clause may be nested within a component element of another clause, e.g. C1[ C2[oJ pisteuvwn ejn qew'/] lalei' tw'/ law'/] and C1[ei[ pw" h[dh pote eujodwqhvsomai ejn tw'/ qelvmati tou' qeou' C2[ejlqei'n pro;" uJma'"] ].
c. Each clause is marked with a unique identifier allowing reference from other elements and documents.
d. The first word group within a clause is marked as the prime of the clause and the remainder of the clause as the subsequent (other models use the terms theme and rheme for similar categories). At the clause level the prime is usually thematized material or the 'topic' of the clause, while the subsequent provides additional material expanding the prime.
e. Conjunctions marked at the clause level of discourse are those that join two elements (usually word groups) within the clause. For example, the kaiv in the clause cara;n ga;r pollh;n e[scon kai; paravklhsin ejpi; th'/ ajgavph/ sou, joins the word groups cara;n pollh;n and paravklhsin. This conjunction is marked as a clause level conjunction. In contrast, the gavr in the same clause functions to join the clause to a previous clause, it is, therefore, marked as a conjunction at the paragraph level (see Paragraph Level Annotation).
For some inspiration on moving from clause to theme, see Visualizing texts: a tool for generating thematic-progression diagrams.
Cascadia
Reading: Microsoft Word - Leiden2012-GreekDatabases.odt (wordpress.com)
Quoting Randall Tan and Andi Wu in the blog post “taking Greek Syntax Beyond the New Testament” by Jayson D. Bradley:[quote]
The Cascadia Syntax Graphs of the New Testament is derived from a new dynamic Treebank project developed by the Asia Bible Society. The Greek Syntactic Treebank Project is built on the basis of a computer-readable Greek grammar, with the syntactic trees (graphs) directly generated by a parser. Manual checking and corrections are stored as data in a knowledge base to guide the parser. The syntax trees (graphs) are dynamically generated form the latest version of the grammar and knowledge base, which enables continual organic improvement and growth as the grammar and knowledge base are maintained and updated.[4]
Resources:- Bauserman, Charles R., Matt Nerdahl, and Jimmy Parks. Cascadia Syntax Graphs of the Septuagint Deuterocanon and Apocrypha. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2015.
- Wu, Andi, and Randall Tan. Cascadia Syntax Graphs of the New Testament. Lexham Press, 2009.
- Wu, Andi, and Randall Tan. Cascadia Syntax Graphs of the New Testament: SBL Edition. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2010.
- Wu, Andi, and Randall K. Tan. Cascadia Syntax Graphs of the New Testament: Glossary. Lexham Press, 2009.
The tree diagrams here a carried down to the terminal node i.e., they are syntactically complete. What level of elements and what supplemental material is shown is controlled by the options under the interlinear icon.
The content shown in tree format – again this is not a complete sentence.
Perseus (web site link)
Since planning began in 1985, the Perseus Digital Library Project has explored what happens when libraries move online. Two decades later, as new forms of publication emerge and millions of books become digital, this question is more pressing than ever. Perseus is a practical experiment in which we explore possibilities and challenges of digital collections in a networked world. For the mission of Perseus and its current research, see here.
Perseus maintains a web site that showcases collections and services developed as a part of our research efforts over the years. The code for the digital library system and many of the collections that we have developed are now available. For more information, please go here.
Our flagship collection, under development since 1987, covers the history, literature and culture of the Greco-Roman world. We are applying what we have learned from Classics to other subjects within the humanities and beyond. We have studied many problems over the past two decades, but our current research centers on personalization: organizing what you see to meet your needs.[5]
Choosing a Latin example, Perseus appears in the Context Menu as a link to dictionary, morphology, and statistics on a word.
Choosing the Perseus Web Lookup option takes on to the Latin Word Study Tool (tufts.edu).
Two lexicons are offered by Perseus. Selecting the first brings you to:
Choosing to see the word frequency statistics offers:
Note the same tools are available for Greek and Arabic. Materials are available in a variety of languages. The tools available vary by collection.
Text Creation Partnership
[quote]The Text Creation Partnership (TCP) is a not-for-profit organization based in the library of the University of Michigan since 2000. Its purpose is to produce large-scale full-text electronic resources (especially in the humanities) on behalf of both member institutions (particularly academic libraries) and scholarly publishers, under an arrangement calculated to serve the needs of both, and in so doing to demonstrate the value of a business model that sees corporate and non-profit information-providers as potentially amicable collaborators rather than as antagonistic vendors and customers respectively.
No, Text Creation Partnership has not instantly become a syntactic information provider. But it seems appropriate to remind you of the website along side the other content providing site (Perseus). The Text Creation Partnership site adds no additional tools to the arsenal.
[1] OpenText.org accessed 7/27/2021 2:28 PM
[2] OpenText.org accessed 7/27/2021 2:49 PM
[3] Clause (opentext.org) accessed 7/27/2021 3:00 PM
[4] Taking Greek Syntax Beyond the New Testament (logos.com) accessed 7/27/2021 6:06 PM
[5] About the Perseus Digital Library (tufts.edu) accessed 7/27/2021 8:49 PM
Text Creation Partnership - Wikipedia accessed 7/27/2021 9:42 PM
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."