Visual Filter Issue
I created a visual filter for a particle and left the type unmarked. I had the NASB95 open beside it - had selected NASB95 as the resource and Logos Greek morophology -- to chpt 21:8-1. That found 4 particles: 2x "Not" and 2x "Yes"
Then I selected, in turn, all the type options. The "not" hits where identified when I clicked on the "negative" type, but the "Yes" hits were never identified. Shouldn't they have been one of the options?
Screen shots:
Thanks for your help.
Chris
Comments
-
The Yes hits are actually just Particles (== @T); there are no additional morph fields applied to them, so adding the additional fields actually excludes the Yes hits.
You can check this out, by turning on the reverse interlinear pane of the NASB95 and clicking on "Yes".
0 -
If you still want to match the Yeses, but include the other "Adverb/particle Types", use the query: @T?
0 -
Also, somewhat counterintuitively the filter will evaluate faster with the same results if you don't specify a reference range ("New Testament").
0 -
The Yes hits are actually just Particles (== @T); there are no additional morph fields applied to them, so adding the additional fields actually excludes the Yes hits.
Thanks, Jacob. That makes sense, but (coupled with your next post) it would seem there is no way to just identify all the occurrence of vai (or are there others that don't fit the categories -- hard to know) and no others. Should there not be a "none of the above" option (pretty good technical language) - vai is a particle of strong affirmation. That ought to be a category, shouldn't it? IMHO
Chris
0 -
Gramcord calls it an emphatic.
Chris
0 -
[...] it would seem there is no way to just identify all the occurrence of vai [...]
Is there a reason you don't want to just search for the lemma specifically?
If you switch the visual filter document to Bible mode and type "g:nai" the lemma completion should show the specific word you're looking for.
Alternatively if you're trying to match just the @T morphs (with no other fields specified), try @T-
That ought to be a category, shouldn't it?
I don't actually know very much about the specific morphology encoding schemes; I'll have to defer to our D&E guys to answer that one.
0
