Explanation please, Rick, Bradley or Sean - I've almost got it.

Okay, I step back to look at the BWS afresh - with words that seemed straightforward rather than a word that presents difficulties. In the clean example, I have only two pieces that still don't make sense:

1. How does קָדֵשׁ 2 end up with 2 roots when there is no oblivious compounding and the 1st homograph does not show 2 roots?

2. Why does קָדֵשׁ 2 end up with no results in the Senses section? The examples uses does show it being used as a noun.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Bradley Grainger (Logos)

1. I know very little about Hebrew, but I think the Logos Hebrew analysis gives each proper noun its own distinct root (as well as the other roots that the word has). The 1st homograph doesn't have this second root because it's not a form of the proper noun Kadesh. (If Vince sees this thread, I'm sure he can explain in much better detail how the root analysis was performed.)

2. There are no results in the Senses section because this lemma is not associated with any senses. (Click the 18 hits from the translation graph and see that the Sense line in the reverse interlinear is blank for each one.) The Bible Sense Lexicon is still "under construction"; many words have yet to be tagged with their senses. When they are, the results will appear here. (In this particular case, entering "Kadesh" into BSL doesn't even suggest a match, so there isn't even a sense for the proper name Kadesh; if Sean sees this thread, I'm sure he can explain the plans for tagging proper names with senses.)

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/429592#Comment_429592

Thank you. It's a big help to understand the special processing for proper nouns. I think I'm convinced that I finally understand the BWS

Fr Devin Roza

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/429644#Comment_429644

If I remember correctly, I think I've also seen that some words have two roots assigned to them (even when they are not compound words) when it is not yet clear from which of the two roots a certain word was derived historically. I don't remember any examples right now but I'm pretty sure I've seen this as well. When it occurs, when you right click on a word you actually see both roots and you can pick from them (this is not the case in your example of course).