Bug?: Lexham Syntax Search Missing Objective Genitive Checkbox
I might just be missing something, but I do not see the objective genetive checkbox in the syntax search of the Lexham Syntactically Analyzed New Testament.
I am able to find a checkbox for a subjective genitive, but I do not see objective. Is this a bug?
Comments
-
Jonathan said:
I might just be missing something, but I do not see the objective genetive checkbox in the syntax search of the Lexham Syntactically Analyzed New Testament.
I am able to find a checkbox for a subjective genitive, but I do not see objective. Is this a bug?
There are quite a few uses of the genitive in addition to subjective and objective (or possession). Take a look at Smyth's grammar—the genitive is dealt with from p 313 (§1289) through p 337 (§1449). If there is a bug, I would rather be inclined to place it in attempting to assign it to any particular category. I realize that this is somewhat a necessity if you intend to construct a syntax search, but perhaps it should limit the choices to the clear-cut instances and add an "undefined" category in which the reader must then decide how he wishes to consider the genitive use. The subjective/objective distinction can be particularly troubling in many instances.
george
gfsomselיְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן
0 -
George Somsel said:Jonathan said:
I might just be missing something, but I do not see the objective genetive checkbox in the syntax search of the Lexham Syntactically Analyzed New Testament.
I am able to find a checkbox for a subjective genitive, but I do not see objective. Is this a bug?
There are quite a few uses of the genitive in addition to subjective and objective (or possession). Take a look at Smyth's grammar—the genitive is dealt with from p 313 (§1289) through p 337 (§1449). If there is a bug, I would rather be inclined to place it in attempting to assign it to any particular category. I realize that this is somewhat a necessity if you intend to construct a syntax search, but perhaps it should limit the choices to the clear-cut instances and add an "undefined" category in which the reader must then decide how he wishes to consider the genitive use. The subjective/objective distinction can be particularly troubling in many instances.
Logos actually has marked several of the Genitives as being both subjective and objective. Thus, allowing for the reader to make this final determination. Although, I agree that you have to do your homework.
I am simply pointing out that even though the text tags items as objective genitive, the latest Mac release does not seem to provide a checkbox for this particular category, even though it provides categories for every other tag. Therefore, I am pretty sure this is not an intentional omission. Either, I am not seeing the checkbox or it was deleted somehow in the development of Logos 5.
0 -
Hi Jonathan
Jonathan said:I am simply pointing out that even though the text tags items as objective genitive, the latest Mac release does not seem to provide a checkbox for this particular category, even though it provides categories for every other tag. Therefore, I am pretty sure this is not an intentional omission. Either, I am not seeing the checkbox or it was deleted somehow in the development of Logos 5.
I will look into this on Monday. Note that I am also in the process of integrating root data into the Lexham Syntactic Greek NT, so a release with a fix may wait a few days until the root data is integrated and verified.
Thanks for the report.
Rick Brannan
Data Wrangler, Faithlife
My books in print0 -
Rick Brannan (Logos) said:
Hi Jonathan
Jonathan said:I am simply pointing out that even though the text tags items as objective genitive, the latest Mac release does not seem to provide a checkbox for this particular category, even though it provides categories for every other tag. Therefore, I am pretty sure this is not an intentional omission. Either, I am not seeing the checkbox or it was deleted somehow in the development of Logos 5.
I will look into this on Monday. Note that I am also in the process of integrating root data into the Lexham Syntactic Greek NT, so a release with a fix may wait a few days until the root data is integrated and verified.
Thanks for the report.
No problem. Thanks for looking into it.
0 -
Rick Brannan (Logos) said:
I will look into this on Monday.
Yes, a checkbox for Objective Genitive was missing. I have added it.
I'm still in the process of integrating root data. But when that is complete and verified, I'll submit it for release. I'll notify via this thread when that occurs.
Rick Brannan
Data Wrangler, Faithlife
My books in print0 -
Rick Brannan (Logos) said:
Yes, a checkbox for Objective Genitive was missing. I have added it.
I'm still in the process of integrating root data. But when that is complete and verified, I'll submit it for release. I'll notify via this thread when that occurs.
I've completed the work on all the necessary resources to add roots. Verified one can actually search for objective gentives. I've notified the proper teams that these resources need to be put into the queue for users. So I'm not sure exactly when they'll be distributed, but the process has begun. If that changes, I'll let y'all know.
Rick Brannan
Data Wrangler, Faithlife
My books in print0 -
Rick Brannan (Logos) said:Rick Brannan (Logos) said:
Yes, a checkbox for Objective Genitive was missing. I have added it.
I'm still in the process of integrating root data. But when that is complete and verified, I'll submit it for release. I'll notify via this thread when that occurs.
I've completed the work on all the necessary resources to add roots. Verified one can actually search for objective gentives. I've notified the proper teams that these resources need to be put into the queue for users. So I'm not sure exactly when they'll be distributed, but the process has begun. If that changes, I'll let y'all know.
Great! Thank you!
0
