Forms of a word

Christian Alexander

I am looking to find a way to find all root forms of a word. I am studying Love in Hebrew and Greek. How can I do this?

MJ. Smith

I don't understand. A word generally has a single root. Are you maybe looking for stem forms?

DMB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1269614#Comment_1269614

I don't understand. A word generally has a single root. Are you maybe looking for stem forms?

I'm not a linguistic root-ifcator, but some right clicks give you a lemma, and several roots.  Which would be my advice to Christian (with more advice advisable!).

Christian Alexander

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1269614#Comment_1269614

Could be MJ. Love (5368) (phileo from phílos = loved, dear, friend) means to be a friend to another, to be fond of (have a liking for) an individual or an object, to have or show affection for. The related word philoi refers to friends, confidants, dear ones. I am trying to determine the difference between agapao and phileo in its root form. How can I find this in the Gospel of John? 

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1269755#Comment_1269755

[quote]

φίλος [subst., adj.] ‘friend, friendly, dear’ (Il.), ‘related, own’, also reflexive possessive ‘suus (tuus, meus)’, of relatives, body-parts, clothing, etc., plur. ‘kinsmen, relatives’ (Il., epic poet.). «?»

•VAR Grades of comparison: a. φιλίων (τ 351 = ω 268), -ιστος (S. Aj. 842 [interpolated?], ascertained as a PN); b. φίλτερος (epic poet., late prose), -τατος (also Att. prose; Dor. φίντ-); c. φιλαίτερος, -τατος (X., Call., Theoc., etc.) after παλαίτερος, -τατος etc.; d. φιλώτερος (X., Call.); e. μᾶλλον φίλος (A., S., Thphr.), μάλιστα φ. (X.).

•DIAL Myc. pi-ra-me-no /phīlamenos/?

•COMP As a first member e.g. φιλόφρων ‘well-disposed, friendly-minded’ (Pi., IA), φιλομμειδής ‘with a friendly smile’ (epic Γ 324+); early on in epic tradition, it was reinterpreted as a verbal element, e.g. φιλόξεινος (or -ξενος) ‘to whom the guest is dear’ > ‘loving the guest, hospitable’ (since Od.); in univerbations, e.g. φιλοθύτης [m.] (to φιλεῖ θύειν) ‘loving the sacrifice, friend of the sacrifice’ (Ar. etc.). As a second member, e.g. πολύφιλος ‘with many friends’ (Pi., Lys., Arist.), often considered verbal, with transition to the s-stems, e.g. θεοφιλής ‘loved by the gods, dear to the gods’ (IA); προσφιλής ‘friendly, beloved, affectionate’ (IA).

•DER 1. φιλότης, -ητος [f.] ‘friendship, hospitality, love’ (Il., epic poet.), -οτήσιος, Dor. -οτάσιος ‘belonging to φιλότης’ (epic poet. since λ 246); also -οττάριον address to a girl (Ar. Ec. 891), perhaps the hypocoristic gemination after νηττάριον? 2. φιλία, Ion. -ίη [f.] ‘friendship, affection, love’ (Thgn., Emp., IA); independent of φίλιος. Adjectives: 3. φίλ-ιος ‘friendly’ (Pi., ΙΑ), -(ι)ωτικός (Theol. Ar.). 4. -ικός ‘id.’ (Pl., X., Arist., etc.). 5. -ιακός ‘id.’ (Plot.), -ιακόν [n.] name of an association (inscr. Corycos). Verbs: 6. φιλέω (Il.) ‘to be a friend, treat friendly or affectionately, to love, entertain, care’, post-Hom. also ‘to kiss’ (especially with κατα-), with inf. ‘to like to do, use to do’, sometimes with prefix, especially κατα-. Forms: Aeol. φίλ-ημμι (Sapph.), -ήμεναι (X 265), aor. -ῆσαι (Il.), erroneous -ᾶσαι (Theoc.), pass. -ήθην (Β 668 [3pl. -ηθεν], Att.), med.ipv. φῖλαι, (ἐ)φίλατο, φίλωνται etc. (epic since Il.), fut. -ήσω, -ήσομαι (Od.), perf. πεφίλημαι, -ηκα (Pi., etc.).

7. From φιλία (φίλιος): φιλιάζω [v.] ‘to become friends’ (LXX, Hell. pap. etc.), whence -ιαστής (H.); -ιόομαι, -ιόω ‘to make friends’ (late), -ίωσις (sch.), -ιωτής = διαλλακτής (Suid.); -ιαίνομαι ‘id.’ (late). From φιλέω: φιλήτωρ [f.] ‘lover’ A. (Ag. 1446), ‘loving, with love’ (Nonn.); -ητής [m.] ‘lover’ (AP), -ητικός ‘inclined to love or kiss’ (Arist., etc.), -ημα (Hyperdorism -ᾱμα Mosch.) [n.] ‘kiss’ (A. Fr. 135 = 228 M., E., X., etc.), -ημάτιον PN (Luc.), ἀντιφίλησις [f.] ‘returning love’ (Arist.), φιλημοσύνη [f.] ‘friendliness’ (Thgn.), to φιλήμων (EM, further only PN).

Also φίλτρον [n.] ‘love potion’ (poet. since Pi., also late prose), -τρὶς λίθος ‘love-bringing stone’ (Dam.); φίλητρα [n.pl.] (AP 11, 218; text and meaning uncertain); φεῖλος (for -ῖ-) [n.] = φιλία (epigr. Caria, ca. Ip). Numerous PNs, among others with *φιλτο-, e.g. Φιλτό-ξενος, Φιλτ-άδης. Literature: Landfester 1966. Kakridis 1963.

•ETYM For the epic aorist forms (ἐ-)φίλατο, etc., analogical origin to φιλέω is well possible (cf. δοκέω beside ἔδοξα); there is no need to assume a present *φίλλω. The element φιλτο-, which occurs only in PNs, may have arisen analogically to φιλο-: Φιλτό-ξενος to Φιλό-ξενος like e.g. Φαντ-αγόρας beside Φαν-αγόρας, Φαντ-ίας beside Φαν-ίας. φίλτρον seems to have joined the numerous instrument nouns in -τρον; the causative meaning ‘stimulating love’ is clear.

The original meaning of φίλος was ‘own, accompanying’ rather than ‘beloved’. The etymology is unknown; the connection with a Celto-Germanic adjective for ‘fitting, good, etc.’ (Ir. bil, W Bil- in PNs, OHG bil-līh, etc.) must be abandoned. Lyd. bilis ‘his, her’ looks formally similar, but must be explained within Anatolian (from the pronoun bi- ‘he’). Some have argued that φίλος represents an l-derivative of reflexive σφι, Lac. φιν (see Landfester op. cit.: 34ff. with a review of all earlier etymologies); in that case, the original meaning would be ‘one’s own’.

[ grammatical information

adj. adjective

] grammatical information

Il. Iliad

plur. plural

Il. Iliad

poet. Poeta, poetica

« the origin of the word

? No good etymology exists, or the etymology is unknown.

» the origin of the word

• Inflectional forms and phonological variants.

VAR Inflectional forms and phonological variants.

S. Sophocles

PN personal name

poet. Poeta, poetica

Att. Attic

Dor. Doric

c. century

X. Xenophon

Call. Callimachus

Theoc. Theocritus

X. Xenophon

Call. Callimachus

A. Aeschylus

S. Sophocles

Thphr. Theophrastus

X. Xenophon

• dialectal

DIAL dialectal

Myc. Mycenaean

• Compounds (only the most common or etymologically relevant compounds are given).

COMP Compounds (only the most common or etymologically relevant compounds are given).

e.g. for example

Pi. Pindarus

IA Ionic-Attic

e.g. for example

> becomes by regular phonological development

Od. Odyssey

e.g. for example

m. masculine

Ar. Aristophanes

e.g. for example

Pi. Pindarus

Lys. Lysias

Arist. Aristoteles

e.g. for example

IA Ionic-Attic

IA Ionic-Attic

• Derivatives.

DER Derivatives.

f. feminine

Il. Iliad

poet. Poeta, poetica

Dor. Doric

poet. Poeta, poetica

Ar. Aristophanes

Ion. Ionic

f. feminine

Thgn. Theognis

IA Ionic-Attic

Pi. Pindarus

id. idem

Pl. Plato

X. Xenophon

Arist. Aristoteles

id. idem

n. neuter

inscr. inscription(s)

Il. Iliad

post-Hom. post-Homeric

Aeol. Aeolic

X Xenophon

aor. aorist

Il. Iliad

Theoc. Theocritus

pass. passive

pl. plural

Att. Attic

med. middle

ipv. Imperative

Il. Iliad

fut. future

Od. Odyssey

perf. perfect

Pi. Pindarus

v. verb

H. Hesychius

id. idem

f. feminine

m. masculine

Arist. Aristoteles

Mosch. Moschus

n. neuter

A. Aeschylus

E. Euripides

X. Xenophon

PN personal name

f. feminine

Arist. Aristoteles

f. feminine

Thgn. Theognis

EM Etymologicum Magnum

PN personal name

n. neuter

poet. Poeta, poetica

Pi. Pindarus

Dam. Damascius

n. neuter

pl. plural

n. neuter

PNs personal name

* a reconstructed item of a proto-stage

e.g. for example

• Etymological discussion.

ETYM Etymological discussion.

cf. compare

* a reconstructed item of a proto-stage

PNs personal name

e.g. for example

Ir. Irish

W Welsh

PNs personal name

OHG Old High German

Lyd. Lydian

Lac. Laconian

Robert Beekes, Etymological Dictionary of Greek, ed. Alexander Lubotsky, Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010), 1573–1574.

[quote]

ἀγαπάω [v.] ‘to receive with friendship; to like, love’ (Il). «IE?»

•VAR Also ἀγαπάζω (Il). Retrograde ἀγάπη ‘(Christian) love’ (late, especially LXX and NT).

•ETYM Pinault RPh. 65 (1991 [1993]): 199–216 assumes it derives from *ἀγα-πᾱ- ‘to protect greatly’, referring to similar expressions in Sanskrit; cf. ►ἐμπάζομαι. The Christian use may have been influenced by Hebr, ’ahābā ‘love’; see Ruijgh Lingua 25 (1970): 306.

[ grammatical information

v. verb

] grammatical information

Il Iliad

« the origin of the word

IE An Indo-European etymology exists for the entry concerned, but it is not entirely convincing.

? An Indo-European etymology exists for the entry concerned, but it is not entirely convincing.

» the origin of the word

• Inflectional forms and phonological variants.

VAR Inflectional forms and phonological variants.

Il Iliad

NT Novum Testamentum

• Etymological discussion.

ETYM Etymological discussion.

RPh Revue de philologie, de litterature et d’histoire anciennes

. Revue de philologie, de litterature et d’histoire anciennes

* a reconstructed item of a proto-stage

cf. compare

► see s.v.

Robert Beekes, Etymological Dictionary of Greek, ed. Alexander Lubotsky, Leiden Indo-European Etymological Dictionary Series (Leiden; Boston: Brill, 2010), 8.

I don't know Greek so I may have messed up on identifying the root.

NB.Mick

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1269755#Comment_1269755

I am trying to determine the difference between agapao and phileo in its root form.

Reading this rings several alarm bells in my head. Maybe I'm misunderstanding you and your approach - but since you asked about the Baker Expository Dictionary recently, I found their words from the preface material potentially helpful and have added some underlining for the most relevant points:

Words and Their Meanings

A book like this should probably come with a warning label since the misunderstanding of the nature of words and the misuse of word studies are among the most common errors in Bible study and in preaching and teaching God’s Word. Several key principles should be kept in mind when doing word studies:
1. Words have a semantic range. Very few words in any language have a single or “literal” meaning. They have a range of possible meanings, what is called a semantic range. For example, it is sometimes said that the Greek word sarx literally means “flesh.” But, in fact, the word has a wide range of possible meanings, including “flesh, meat, physical body, soft tissue; human being, humankind, fallen realm of existence, corrupt or sinful human nature; lineage” (and others). None of these is the literal meaning, if by “literal” we mean single or core meaning, since the word can mean any one of these in a particular context. On the other hand, if by “literal” we mean nonfigurative or concrete, then the first four are all literal meanings (“flesh, meat, physical body, soft tissue”), while the next five are all figurative or metaphorical extensions of this meaning (“human being, humankind, fallen realm of existence, corrupt or sinful human nature, lineage”). It is almost never correct to refer to a single “literal” meaning for a word.
2. Context determines which sense is intended. If words can have various meanings, what determines which sense an author intended? The answer, of course, is context. Consider the following passages in the Christian Standard Bible:

SARX =

Matt. 24:22
“Unless those days were cut short, no one [sarx] would be saved.” - “person”
Mark 14:38
“The spirit is willing, but the flesh [sarx] is weak.” - “human ability”
Luke 24:39
“A ghost does not have flesh [sarx] and bones as you can see I have.” - “muscle or body tissue”
John 1:14
“The Word became flesh [sarx] and dwelt among us.” - “a human being”
Acts 2:26
“Moreover, my flesh [sarx] will rest in hope.” - “myself” or “I”
Rom. 1:3
“a descendant of David according to the flesh [sarx]” - “human lineage”
Rom. 6:19
“I am using a human analogy because of the weakness of your flesh [sarx].” - “human understanding”
Rom. 7:5
“For when we were in the flesh [sarx], the sinful passions aroused through the law were working in us to bear fruit for death.” - “realm of fallen humanity”
Eph. 5:29
“For no one ever hates his own flesh [sarx] but provides and cares for it.” - “physical body”

The Greek word is the same in every case, but the context determines which sense of the word is intended.
3. Words normally have only one sense in any particular literary context. Just because a word can mean different things doesn’t indicate that it means all those things in any single context. In general, writers and speakers mean only one thing when they use a word. For example, in Luke 24:39 it is unlikely that Jesus meant both that a ghost does not have a “body” and that it does not have a “sinful nature.” The exception to this one-meaning rule is when an author is intentionally making a pun or play on words. Many scholars think that Jesus is making a play on words in John 3:3 when he says that “you must be born again,” since the Greek word translated “again” (anōthen) can also mean “from above.” Since elsewhere in John anōthen means “from above” (3:31; 19:11, 23) and since Jesus emphasizes that salvation comes from the Spirit and the realm above, it is likely that there is a double meaning here. This kind of pun, however, is the exception rather than the rule, and generally words have only one meaning.
4. Etymology is an unreliable guide to meaning. A fourth principle of word studies is that word meanings change over time, so etymology is not a reliable guide to meaning. Etymology refers to the origin of a word, either its component parts or its historical derivation. We recognize in English, for example, that “pineapple” does not mean a “pine” or an “apple,” and a “butterfly” is not “flying butter.” “Understand” does not mean to “stand under,” and a “landlord” is not “lord of the land.”
Many Greek words are compounds—that is, made up of two different words, usually a preposition and a verb or noun. Our tendency is to try to derive the meaning from the two component parts. For example, the Greek word ekballō comes from two Greek words, ek (“out of”) and ballō (“throw, cast”), and ekballō can mean to “cast out” a demon. While this sometimes works, it is highly unreliable, and many words have a very different meaning from their component parts. For example, hypokritēs comes from two Greek words, hypo (“under”) and kritēs (“judge”), but it doesn’t mean to “judge under” it means “hypocrite” or “insincerity.” Similarly, the Greek word eklyō comes from ek (“from”) and lyō (“set free”), but it doesn’t mean “to set free from”; it means “to become weary.” It is popular to say that p 12 ekklēsia (“church”) comes from ek (“out of, from”) and klēsia (“called”), so the church is the “called out ones.” But whether or not the church is “called out” from the world, this meaning is wrong. The word ekklēsia does not mean “called out ones”; it means an “assembly” or “congregation” or “gathering” of people, and came to refer to the Christian assembly—that is, the church.
Etymology or historical derivation also does not work backwards. Later derivations of words should not be imposed on their earlier uses. It is sometimes said that the word “dynamite” comes from the Greek word dynamis (“power”), and so the gospel is “the dynamite of God for salvation” (Rom. 1:16). This is wrong. The Greek word dynamis does not and never did mean “dynamite.” Paul could not have been thinking of dynamite when he wrote Romans, since dynamite wasn’t invented until many centuries after he wrote. (Also, the gospel does not blow you to bits!) This is an anachronistic error, imposing a later meaning on an earlier use.

Doing Word Studies

These principles confirm that we should never do words studies on the basis of “literal” meanings, etymology, or later derivations. Rather, there are two basic steps for doing any word study:
1. Determine the semantic range: What can the word mean? While almost all words have more than one meaning, words can’t mean just anything. They have a semantic range, a limited range of meanings. We determine the range of meanings by examining how the word is used in its various contexts. A dictionary or lexicon is simply a listing of words and their semantic ranges, or definitions. So the first step in a word study is to determine the range of possible meanings by consulting the dictionary or lexicon.
2. Once you have determined what the word can mean (its semantic range), you must decide what it does mean, based on the context. Which sense is most in line with the immediate context, the flow of thought? Based on the author’s intention and purpose and broader theological perspective, which sense is most likely?
It is helpful at this point also to consult quality commentaries because they examine the meaning of words in the context of the author’s thought world and literary context.

Mark L. Strauss and Tremper Longman III, eds., The Baker Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books: A Division of Baker Publishing Group, 2023), 10–12.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1269791#Comment_1269791

I agree with your warnings ... but with a proviso as the introduction is throwing the baby out with the bathwater in avoiding the error of confusing etymology with current meaning. They are throwing out both philology and historical linguistics both of which have been key players in our understanding of ancient languages and texts especially the Bible. Etymology is very useful for tracking the meaning over time and for identifying cognates in other languages with limited texts from which to develop a sense of a word's meaning.