New Feature: Case Frames Guide Section

What is it?

Case Frames is a new guide section for verbs in the Hebrew Bible and Greek New Testament. For each verb, case frames are a way of listing pieces of information that are required to understand the verb in its context. These required pieces of information are also known as verbal “arguments.”

How does it work?

The distribution of case frames for the verb is shown by the ring graph, and a concordance of case frames is provided. Examining specific instances can help you understand what pieces of information to look for to better understand what is being communicated. For instance, if the verb is ἐσθίω (esthiō "to eat"), it is useful to identify the Agent (the entity eating) and the Patient (the entity being eaten).

Identifying the arguments for the verbs in a passage can provide a better understanding of what a passage is communicating and provide a better foundation for exegesis of the text.

Open in Logos 6

How do I get it?

The Case Frames Guide Section is available in Feature Crossgrade and Silver level base packages and higher.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

George Somsel

The distribution of case frames for the verb is shown by the ring graph

Now, can you explain it in words? Silly graphs are of no use to me. I would say that it is all Greek to me, but then I might understand it.

Dave Hooton

I know it is about verbs and that it has had a mixed reception. I tried to understand it so I won't attempt to explain it[:)]

Donnie Hale

Now, can you explain it in words?

I'll try to explain what I understand and have seen of the feature. First, it applies to verbs only (right now???). Second, it operates on the premise that verbs have different meanings, senses, semantic understandings. What they've tried to do is identify the patterns with which an individual verb is used and correlate a pattern with a particular meaning of the verb. Thus if you see verb 'A' used with pattern 'X' in a particular passage, and the verb predominately has a certain meaning when used in pattern 'X', then the chances are high that it has that meaning in that that passage.

A pattern seems to consist of whether and what kind of subject, whether and what kind of object, result of the verb (e.g. movement in a "direction"), etc. In the screenshot from the start of this thread, there's a pattern with an "Agent" and a "Patient." Those terms have technical meanings - you can click on them to see them in the glossary.

I think if you use the tool on a verb or two that you're familiar with, what they're trying to do will make more sense. Whether you agree with how they classify the patterns and the senses they assign those patterns is another question...

Donnie

MJ. Smith

Case frames are built around the semantic roles required by verbs. For example "to buy" requires a purchaser, a thing purchased and a seller. There are optional roles e.g. a payment. So the verb "to buy" is associated with a frame [purchaser] [thing purchased] [seller] [payment]. If you do this for lots of verbs you will discover:

there are a limited number of roles that are reused
some roles are required, some are optional
some roles may be [null] meaning not stated but often implied or acknowledged as missing information.

Why use frames instead of grammar?

Frames stay the same across different ways of saying it. The frames for "the dog bit me" and "I was bitten by a dog" are the same.
Frames often show required cultural knowledge e.g. "I purchased a stamp yesterday" implies a seller and a cost which are implied by a "purchased" action. ...

GaoLu

Understanding what it does isn't so hard. It inflicts discipline on readers if they lack the "self" variety. Which is good.

It seems intuitive to me if you just look at what it does. What tosses me is the tagging--agent, patient. Maybe I am not astute enough as a ɡrəˈmerēən to remember these terms. I don't recall even studying them, but who knows...probably did. So its a good refresher for that.

Jeremy Thompson

I was one of the curators for this feature. I've written a little bit longer explanation of the feature on my blog and plan to write more about it over the coming weeks:

Explore Meaning with Case Frames in Logos 6

And I'd be glad to try to answer any other questions you might have here.

Anthony H

I was one of the curators for this feature. I've written a little bit longer explanation of the feature on my blog and plan to write more about it over the coming weeks:

Explore Meaning with Case Frames in Logos 6

And I'd be glad to try to answer any other questions you might have here.

MJ provided a nice framework to drape some details on.

Writing about it is good.[:)].. but since it's a visual tool, engaging in it's use in a video with a diversity of examples, results and the assessments of the results and what could/can be concluded from the results would be a far better explanation. [;)]

Jeremy Thompson

Hi Anthony:
Request for more video explanation duly noted, though I personally think I have great a voice for silent movies . We do have a video for Semantic Roles up currently and another blog post about semantic roles where I use the example of Jesus baptizing versus being baptized. These aren't strictly about case frames, but semantic roles and case frames are related since case frames are made up of semantic roles. So, the video linked to above may be helpful for the time being and does mention case frames toward the end.

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

How does it work?

The distribution of case frames for the verb is shown by the ring graph, and a concordance of case frames is provided. Examining specific instances can help you understand what pieces of information to look for to better understand what is being communicated. For instance, if the verb is ἐσθίω (esthiō "to eat"), it is useful to identify the Agent (the entity eating) and the Patient (the entity being eaten).

What is the significance of [] ?

Example results has two lines with Patient surrounded by [] once:

Agent - [Patient]
Agent - Patient

Keep Smiling [:)]

MJ. Smith

[ ] ==> implied or missing "required" element

Van Parunak

What difference is indicated by the presence or absence of square brackets around a case names? For example, with προσκυνεω, the case tool distinguishes Agt-Exp from Agt-[Exp]. I'd expect that this means that the Experiencer is latent, not expressed, in the bracketed examples, but I can't see such a difference with προσκυνεω.

MJ. Smith

The majority of instances of ἀκούω (akouō) are Experiencer—Content or Experiencer—[Content]. In Experiencer—Content instances, the Content is explicitly stated, whereas in the Experiencer—[Content] instances the Content is implied or stated in the surrounding context. An example of the first clause type is Matt 13:18:

Thompson, Jeremy. The Lexham Glossary of Semantic Roles. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2014.

Francis

What difference is indicated by the presence or absence of square brackets around a case names? For example, with προσκυνεω, the case tool distinguishes Agt-Exp from Agt-[Exp]. I'd expect that this means that the Experiencer is latent, not expressed, in the bracketed examples, but I can't see such a difference with προσκυνεω.

The example from the NASB translation of Matthew 28:17 can illustrate that a bit: "When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful." "Him" is not actually stated in the verse, but to worship implies that someone/something is worshiped (the experiencer) whether it is stated or not. Since in this case, it is not stated, the case frame has [Exp] instead of Exp.

What difference does it make? Well, when it says that Jacob worshiped at the head of his bed (Gen 47:31), the emphasis falls on the fact that he worshiped not who he worshiped. If the experiencer (God) was stated, there would be greater emphasis on whom is being worshiped.

This can be illustrated in the following examples:

"Christians worship" -- those who know Christians know they worship YHWH but stated as it is, it is only an activity. In that sense, Christians are like Muslims, or Jews. They too worship.

"Christians worship Jesus" -- identifies who is worshiped by whom. In that sense, Christians would not be like Jews. Different emphasis.

Randy Sandford

Excellent and clear explanation.