Another Syntax Problem

I would, but my computer died this past weekend and I won't have a new one until Friday and installing L4 won't be a priority until probably Tuesday.

William

Michael,

I am sorry I am not a greek person but I can help with the other. The easiest thing to do is do a PrntScrn in windows. Then open MS paint.. then Cntrl V to paste the print screen. use paint to crop the picture. Save that picture. Then just attach the picture using the paper clip. There is another way. You would want to download Jing. It is a free screen capture and movie maker (up to 5 minutes). you do the same attaching with the paper clip. Jing will give you the link to paste into your document for the movie that can be stored on their server. I have just started using Jing myself and it is rather neat.

This is based on the graph, but I introduced the Unordered element in case the words could appear in any order.

It appears Ro 5.1 is the only solution as I found from a bible search <Lemma = lbs/el/δικαιόω> WITHIN 10 words <Lemma = lbs/el/εἰρήνη>

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100032#Comment_100032

DAVE,

CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY YOU HAD TO PUT THE SECOND CLAUSE FUNCTION AS A OBJECT "SECONDARY OBJECT" AND HOW? AND ALSO WHY YOU HAD TO PUT THE LEMMA AS IBS.EL.WORD ON BOTH AND HOW? THANK YOU.

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100057#Comment_100057

Secondary object is to catch any instances where "peace" was not the primary object. The search is no different when you uncheck the secondary object because there are no examples of peace being a secondary object of justify. Dave was just trying to catch as many examples as possible.

The lbs.el.word is done automatically to inform the program that you are looking for a lemma.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100059#Comment_100059

KEVIN,

MY SEARCH DID NOT PUT THE IBS.EL WORD IN THE SEARCH NOR DID IT RETURN ANY RESULTS. HELP!!!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100059#Comment_100059

KEVIN,

I SEEM TO HAVE CONSTRUCTED THE SEARCH EXACTLY THE WAY DAVE DID, EXCEPT FOR THE LBS.EL IN THE LEMMA BOX AND AGAIN I RECEIVED NO SEARCH RESULTS. THANKS FOR ALL YOUR HELP.

MICHAEL

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100064#Comment_100064

I SEEM TO HAVE CONSTRUCTED THE SEARCH EXACTLY THE WAY DAVE DID, EXCEPT FOR THE LBS.EL IN THE LEMMA BOX AND AGAIN I RECEIVED NO SEARCH RESULTS.

I think 4.0a does not use the lbs.el and I only use 4.0b beta, but that should not affect results. Do you have a dotted line from the Clause Function to the Word? Right click the Word box and select "Matching skips levels".

It's best to post an image of your search to comment further.

Terry Poperszky

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100064#Comment_100064

KEVIN,
I SEEM TO HAVE CONSTRUCTED THE SEARCH EXACTLY THE WAY DAVE DID, EXCEPT FOR THE LBS.EL IN THE LEMMA BOX AND AGAIN I RECEIVED NO SEARCH RESULTS. THANKS FOR ALL YOUR HELP.
MICHAEL

Michael, Caps are the equivalent of shouting on a forum. Neither David nor Kevin are known to be hard of hearing [;)] Heretical? Yes, but not hard of hearing. [:O]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100070#Comment_100070

DAVE,

WHAT EXACTLY DOES "MATCHING SKIPS LEVELS" MEAN IN THE SYNTAX SEARCH? THANKS!

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100081#Comment_100081

DAVE,

WHAT EXACTLY DOES "MATCHING SKIPS LEVELS" MEAN IN THE SYNTAX SEARCH? THANKS!

Matching skips levels is the new terminology for the "Must be an immediate child of parent" function in Logos 3. Basically if you do not check this option the entry (in this case the words) would have to branch off directly from the Clause Function. When you check matching skips levels it allows for intervening nodes to come between the Clause Function and the Word.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100084#Comment_100084

KEVIN,

THANKS FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100092#Comment_100092

In light of these Q's I just updated http://wiki.logos.com/A_Strategy_for_Syntax_Search

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100070#Comment_100070

because of the way Cascadia functions, you don't actually need the "Matching skips levels" for this particular search.

Both δικαιοω & ειρηνη are the heads of their respective phrases and Cascadia's linguistic framework is head-driven (literally, the name of the framework is Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar). Thus, the following search will produce identical results with far less clutter (granted, there's only one hit there anyway). You should never need to included words or terminal nodes while searching Cascadia and you should only need to using "Matching skips levels" when the match you're looking for is higher above the word level (e.g. "Clause --> Phrase (Matching skips levels) or "Phrase --> Phrase (Matching Skips Levels)).

The claim here is that grammatical & lexical information isn't merely a word-level phenomena, but truly functions at the phrase level. More specifically, phrases are "driven" by their lexical heads. A NOUN functions as the HEAD of its respective PHRASE and that PHRASE receives the grammatical information encoded by its HEAD. This all may sound rather obvious, but 1) there's much more to it than that, which I won't go into, and 2) it is the key for unlocking the power of Cascadia's database.

See: http://www.amazon.com/Syntactic-Theory-Introduction-Language-Information/dp/1575864002/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1267918899&sr=8-2 for a basic introduction to the framework of Cascadia using English grammar (though, I use the word "basic" loosely. This is an advanced undergraduate or graduate linguistic text.

PS - the addition of "Indirect Object" was just out of curiousity to see if the hits would change at all or not. The distinction between DO, IO, & SO is slightly (but not entirely) arbitrary.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100900#Comment_100900

because of the way Cascadia functions, you don't actually need the "Matching skips levels" for this particular search.

Mike,

This is the hard part for people just beginning to explore the Syntax Search. My "Control" text search shows there is only one solution anyway but I opted for "skipping levels" to illustrate how to avoid specifying all the intermediate levels when they have no effect on the query, or because they vary between different results. And because it is equally applicable to an OpenText query. Cascadia's head-driven structure takes a little more explaining so it seems appropriate to expand the topic on the wiki - if you could add a paragraph to http://wiki.logos.com/A_Strategy_for_Syntax_Search it would be appreciated.

BTW you don't need Anything within an Unordered term.

thanks,

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100942#Comment_100942

BTW you don't need Anything within an Unordered term.

Thanks! Learn something new all the time!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/100942#Comment_100942

if you could add a paragraph to http://wiki.logos.com/A_Strategy_for_Syntax_Search it would be appreciated.

will do when I have a free moment, its been busy lately...