Power Lookup 2.0 or a true Power! Lookup?

Anyone up to the challenge to create a comprehensive search string that would return all, but only,results for a specific Heb/Ar/Gk word in a specific verse (processing all forms of the word, root/lemma/mss form, both in script and transliteration), so as to surface all potentially relevant comments from all the resources in one's Logos library?
[This is a follow-up to a meandering post: "Corpus of resources shown in Power Lookup?" re. תִּשָּׁגַלְנָה in Zc 14:2. Warning: Phrasing as to searching made below, to elaborate on type of results such a PL 2.0 would return, were made by a computer caveman. And searching would need to process all specific verse references; not limited to "headword" sections.]

The current Power Lookup (more of a Lexical Lookup, IMHO) may use a search something like headword:שָׁגֵל to return lexical type resources/entries that refer to the word alone and links those sections to the mss Kethiv in Zc 14.2 [to be returned with single click from context menu, having selected the word.
It does not limit those results to lexical resources specifically referencing the word in a specific verse.]

So for my differently imagined PL 2.0, something would need to be added (to subtract) to that search string to cull only those lexical resources that cite the word in a specific verse.
EG Search All Grammars may use something like milestone:“Zech 14.2” to return a grammar, IBHS.
EG Search Lemma in Passage uses something else to return a commentary/NICOT result (if in one's library, according to HJ.van der Wal).
EG Collections recovers other results (from my personal books) depending on the collection selected.

Each of these searches (operative behind the scene) have a link to the specific word in the specific verse, but parceled out to different sections in Logos.
How to gather all such as these together, and at the same time restrict the results to only those that specifically mention a specific word in a specific reference?

[Of course, a query or successive queries could be designed to produce such desired results in Study Assistant, but here I am asking for a search string for a friend who does not have a subscription.
And, since none other than me would have any interest in such a look-up, we need not ask how it could be implemented with a single click on a mss word in Heb/Ar/Gk text.]

If the goal of such a search/power look-up is still unclear (apologies, then), maybe consider a piddling trial which shows broader results (grammar, lexical resource, grammar, even commentary and Bible) from a collection/corpus inside the larger corpus of my library for a single form (transliterated root), but it does not at the same time, as desired, restrict results to only resources commenting on a specific word (let alone all its forms) in a specific verse.

Find more posts tagged with

Logos

Desktop App

Accepted answers

Graham Criddle

but it does not at the same time, as desired, restrict results to only resources commenting on a specific word (let alone all its forms) in a specific verse.

To find comments on a specific word within a specific verse requires resources to have a Bible index (such as a commentary as shown on the right below)

While resources such as lexicons (shown on the left) are indexed by headword so can't be searched constrained to a particular verse.

This is one of the reasons why multiple sources / tools are needed to get to the sort of information you are interested in.

(I've used a different search term as I'd rather not focus on the topic of rape - I appreciate there was a particular morphological issue that caused this to be a focus)

All comments

Dave Hooton

You should simply this description and make a request in the Suggestions forum

Graham Criddle

but it does not at the same time, as desired, restrict results to only resources commenting on a specific word (let alone all its forms) in a specific verse.

To find comments on a specific word within a specific verse requires resources to have a Bible index (such as a commentary as shown on the right below)

While resources such as lexicons (shown on the left) are indexed by headword so can't be searched constrained to a particular verse.

This is one of the reasons why multiple sources / tools are needed to get to the sort of information you are interested in.

(I've used a different search term as I'd rather not focus on the topic of rape - I appreciate there was a particular morphological issue that caused this to be a focus)

Don Parker

Sorry, Dave, I thought this was a forum where "Explorers are known for actively asking questions and digging deeper."

Graham had suggested that I make another post.

But now Graham implies that no such search can be performed with Logos.

I will abandon hope ….

PS, Graham: You share the same sensibilities as the Masoretes, who supplied a different word/Qere reading in place of what was assuredly in the earliest consonantal texts. [Here's an additional "hunt and peck" search result from a different location in my EG: "The Hebrew Bible normally uses the root shkb (lie with) for sexual intercourse. However, four times (Deut 28:28–30; Isa 13:16; Jer 3:1–2; Zech 14:2) the Hebrew Bible uses the root for sexual intercourse, shgl. Scholars disagree about whether this was vulgar in Hebrew, but it is clear that these passages intended to shock the readers. Most English translations prefer to reduce the shock." Arthur Walker-Jones, Hebrew for Biblical Interpretation (Resources for Biblical Study 48) (SBL, 2003), 124.]

Don Parker

PPS, Graham:
re: "I appreciate there was a particular morphological issue that caused this to be a focus"

Kudos to you! Although you profess no substantive Hebrew training, you clearly comprehended that the issue was related to verbal forms of a specific root/lemma/mss form (in Kethiv).

I'd guess not a few individuals, even with some biblical Hebrew training, might have missed that.

[Even if you might not express that — for words that are vocalized as Pual (passive) in one form (perfect), but appear nowhere in BH as the corresponding active Piel — one might entertain an archaic Qal passive form, including for an imperfect of that verb — even if, hundreds of years later, the vocalization of the common later representation corresponding to a passive of Qal, Niphal, came to be substituted. Or, given that there are MANY Qal passive participles, one might expect that, at some point, there were other select im/perfect forms of Qal passive for certain words.]