Search for all verb occurrences with certain case

I doubt that there is a simple solution. I've considered the verb valence approach but to the best of my knowledge Logos lacks support for this approach (I hope I'm wrong). I thought that the approach of (dative) complement might be productive as it brings up interesting search results, but that leads me into syntax searches which are above my skill level. I've also considered the case frame approach which might work but I'm not sure the clause search handles dependent noun clauses in a useful way. I don't see any way that a straight morphology search could work -- a clause search comes closer to providing the verb dependency. Perhaps someone like Rick Brannan could step in with a more definitive answer.

Andrew Batishko

The use of the operator AND indicates that you want to find places where two different terms show up independently in the search context (verse or chapter). What you want is to find the place where the terms show up on the same word.

Generally the way to accomplish this is with the INTERSECTS operator. So, that would be something like:

Lemma.g:ζάω INTERSECTS (@ND OR @DD OR @JD OR @PD)

In addition, there is a shortcut for lemma/morph combinations, which allows you to combine them together. This would look something like this:

Lemma.g:ζάω@ND OR Lemma.g:ζάω@DD OR Lemma.g:ζάω@JD OR Lemma.g:ζάω@PD

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1239919#Comment_1239919

Andrew, you and I understood the original request differently. I understood it to mean that he wanted to find verbs that "ruled" a substantive that was required to be in the genitive i.e. two separate words in the same clause -- a verb and a complement.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1239941#Comment_1239941

Andrew, you and I understood the original request differently. I understood it to mean that he wanted to find verbs that "ruled" a substantive that was required to be in the genitive i.e. two separate words in the same clause -- a verb and a complement.

Yes, MJ, that is exactly what I meant. I am not looking for the verb and the case in one and the same word but in separate words but still very much dependent on each other like a verb-object type of relationship.

Syntax searches also give me a hard time despite having watched Graham Criddles tutorials. I unfortunately almost never manage to set up syntax searches that yield useful or meaningful results, let alone the time it takes to construct them... so I find myself going back to clause or morph searches instead.

Verb valence approach and case frame approach are also new words to me. What do they mean in this regard? Thank you!

I am looking for the verses where ζάω and the dative depend on each other, i.e. where the dative is the indirect object belonging to ζάω.

I also tried Morph-Documents putting ζάω in the first segment and dative in the second segment and specifying that they should agree - but on what? None of the parameters available in the "Agreement"-list (Language, Surface, Lemma, Root etc.) seems to make sense in this regard.

Simple grammatical relationships won't provide the answer. Syntax Search will provide the Indirect Object relationship e.g.

The words can appear in any order. Results include Rom 7:2, 1 Thess 1:9, Heb 9:14, Rev 4:9; 10:6, 13:14 (include more datives in Word1 for more results).

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1239946#Comment_1239946

Verb valence approach and case frame approach are also new words to me. What do they mean in this regard?

Valency is the number of complements the verb takes; you are not interested in direct objects so you are concerned only with verb with a valency > 1

[quote]

Valency

[Topics: valency]

Definition

Valency refers to the capacity of a verb to take a specific number and type of arguments (noun phrase positions).

Discussion

The terminology comes from chemistry, in which the valency of a chemical element is its capacity for combining with a fixed number of atoms of another element—for example, hydrogen can bond with only one other element, and is called monovalent.

Verbs can be divided into classes based on their valency (how many arguments or ‘valents’ they can take). In some languages, these classes may have distinctive morphosyntactic characteristics, such as unique case marking patterns, or restrictions on tense/aspect/modality marking.

Examples

Here are some examples of possible verb classes based on valency:

Verb class
# of arguments
Example (English)
Univalent, agentive
1 agent
dance
Univalent, patientive
1 patient
die
Divalent (or Bivalent)
2
kill, eat
Trivalent
3
give, put

See also
• Transitivity

Source

Brown & Miller 1996: :359

International Linguistics Department, Glossary of Linguistic Terms (SIL International, 1996–).

For case frames, the elements you are looking for are identified by semantic role rather than grammatical role. The verbs you are looking for have specific semantic roles required or permitted. See Thompson, Jeremy. Semantic Roles and Case Frames: Dataset Documentation. Bellingham, WA: Faithlife, 2016. for a decent discussion.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1239948#Comment_1239948

Simple grammatical relationships won't provide the answer. Syntax Search will provide the Indirect Object relationship e.g.

Thank you so much, Dave. That looks very clean and exactly like what I am looking for. I guess then I have to reconsider using syntax search despite my initial frustration with wrapping my head around it. Do you know if there are good tutorials on syntax search apart from the official Logos resources?

Thank you also MJ for those really helpful explanations! It is great to be able to learn so much from this community!

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1240274#Comment_1240274

Do you know if there are good tutorials on syntax search

Try https://wiki.logos.com/A_Strategy_for_Syntax_Search

https://wiki.logos.com/Setting_up_a_Syntax_Search

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1240290#Comment_1240290

Thank you! That is great [:)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1239948#Comment_1239948

Simple grammatical relationships won't provide the answer. Syntax Search will provide the Indirect Object relationship e.g.

The words can appear in any order. Results include Rom 7:2, 1 Thess 1:9, Heb 9:14, Rev 4:9; 10:6, 13:14 (include more datives in Word1 for more results).

@Dave: I finally found time to test the approach you suggested extensively. Unfortunately it seems I was excited a little too early. The results which your syntax search rendered (Rom 7:2, 1 Thess 1:9, Heb 9:14, Rev 4:9; 10:6, 13:14) do not even include 2Cor 5:15 which is where I encountered the grammatical relationship first (i.e. ζάω + indirect object). Also, when I had a closer look at the results, I noticed that in none of them the dative is the indirect object belonging to ζάω. Yes, they all contain a dative and ζάω but they are not used in an indirect object relationship (e.g. in the case of Rom 7:2 the dative ἀνδρὶ is not the indirect object belonging to ζάω)

Why is this despite the specification of a indirect object clause function in the search you provided?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1242290#Comment_1242290

Why is this despite the specification of a indirect object clause function in the search you provided?

I can only work with the morphological data provided and 2 Cor 5:15 does not even have an indirect object. From where does your analysis come?

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1242293#Comment_1242293

From where does your analysis come?

That is a very good question! This "analysis" came from my own Greek grammar understanding which turns out to be wrong... When I checked several grammars, I found that most of them are labeling the dative in 2Cor 5:15 (i.e. ἑαυτοῖς) as Dativus Commodi which seems to not differ much from the indirect object. I wrongly assumed the Dativus Commodi to be a subtype of the dative indirect object. So, my mistake!

How would I then search for what I am looking for? CSGNTSBL does not offer any specific designation/node called "Dativus Commodi" or "Dative of advantage" like "IO" (indirect object - as e.g. in Rom 7:2). Elsewise I would try to use it in the syntax search.

Any ideas? Thank you [:)]

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1242307#Comment_1242307

"The Lexham Syntactic Greek New Testament: SBL Edition" (Bible) offers a different analysis:

Indirect Object is always Dative**. So I tried

SGNTSyntacticForce:"indirect object" NEAR lemma.g:ζάω

which provided 2 Cor 5:15 as well as Rom 7:2 and some others!

** indirect object: The substantive of the sentence which indicates to whom or for whom the action of the transitive verb is acting upon the direct object. In the LSGNT, a clause has not been found in which this type of word is used in a case other than the dative. (References: BDF §187(1-7); Wallace p. 140-142; Smyth §1469-1473.)

Lukaszewski, A. L. (2007). The Lexham Syntactic Greek New Testament Glossary. Lexham Press.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1242321#Comment_1242321

Thank you so much Dave! Even though the result list still contains a lot of results where the dative is not the indirect object determined by ζάω (but just any random other word that happens to be a dative), the list is short enough for quick manual sifting [:)]

Still I am wondering why this is so complex. It is a known grammatical phenomena that certain verbs demand certain cases for the direct or indirect object (e.g. ἀκούω and genitive as listening to something/somebody).

It is hard to believe for me that I am the first requesting such functionality...

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1242329#Comment_1242329

It is a known grammatical phenomena that certain verbs demand certain cases for the direct or indirect object (e.g. ἀκούω and genitive as listening to something/somebody).

There are lots of grammatical phenomenon that are not captured in the linguistic coding required for searches. IIRC the primary coding doesn't even include valence. You could propose that the coding necessary be added through Parks, James. Greek Grammatical Constructions Documentation. Bellingham, WA: Faithlife, 2015. Or perhaps (although less likely) The Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament. Logos Bible Software, 2011.

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1242376#Comment_1242376

Thank you MJ! I had a look at Parks book - very interesting. How and where do I make such proposal?