OT Syntax Search in A-F, Cognate between predicate and object

Hello.
I was trying to help someone on a previous post, so I started doing some syntax search and I was "blocked" by one problem while searching in A-F in Hebrew.

I want to find lexeme cognates between a predicate and a object. See the search query I built:

Well I could find some results. For example, it retrieves me Gen 12:3 "I will bless those who bless you." However it is not accurate, it does not retrieve all the occurrences. A clear case, which should be part of the result but does not show up is in Gen 37:9 "he dreamed a dream again." Notice that A-F takes 2 lexemes for "dream." The verb is a lexeme and the noun is another. So, in this case, how can I find a cognate even when the lexeme is different, but at the same time from the same Head Word? Does any one have an idea if this is possible? I must be missing something in the search.

I thank in advance for any help.

Blessings,

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Dave Hooton

I tried Agreement with stem and semantics without success (they can be added to Lexeme). If it had Louw-Nida Semantic Domains (as per DBL Hebrew lexicon) there would be no problem!

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242460#Comment_242460

I tried Agreement with stem and semantics without success (they can be added to Lexeme).

I'm learning a lot more I can do with the Search but you are running into the same obstacles I do. One can tell both of you are better with searches than I - you get to the problems far faster than I.[:D]

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242465#Comment_242465

you get to the problems far faster than I.

But you get to the questions even faster[:D]

David Knoll

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242460#Comment_242460

I tried Agreement with stem and semantics without success (they can be added to Lexeme). If it had Louw-Nida Semantic Domains (as per DBL Hebrew lexicon) there would be no problem!

Lexemes are simply incompatible with Semitic Languages. Root searching is imperative. Logos' competitors figured that out on their own. Hebrew search capabilities need to be upgraded with the aid of a Semitist.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242526#Comment_242526

Lexemes are simply incompatible with Semitic Languages.

[Y]

Please vote for http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-4/suggestions/682641-stem-cognate-search

James W Bennett

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242645#Comment_242645

I've had three votes on this feature for almost a year. Is there anyway that we can use more votes [:D]

David Knoll

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242865#Comment_242865

I've had three votes on this feature for almost a year

Same here.

Nielsen Tomazini

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242872#Comment_242872

Same here.

Tim Finlay

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242874#Comment_242874

I just gave it three votes. It now stands at 103 votes.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242865#Comment_242865

Is there anyway that we can use more votes

We need to find a way to show the "average" searcher how their results would be improved by being able to search on roots. Even better, if we could find a method of word study that is dependent on roots rather than lemmas, so Mr/Ms Average see how to use it would also help. Best would be getting Hebrew/Greek et. al. instructors to post how their students need the capability in order for them to require Logos not another product. Super best would be a combination of all three.[H]

David Knoll

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243084#Comment_243084

The things that come up to mind are:

1) to investigate the semantic field of a word you need to see how its cognates behave.

2) To understand why a translator (LXX, Peshitta etc.) translated a Hebrew word with a certain lemma (sometimes he derives his interpretation of a verb from a noun from the same root)

3) to investigate syntactic and morphological behaviour as shown in this search.

4) To learn. When you learn a semitic language you cover the varied manifestations of the roots. Thus if you reach the word חלם to dream you also learn the noun חלום dream. you also need to understand the noun patterns i.e. the ways in which the root materialises as a noun.

Thus if you want to understand what the verb ברא (create) means, you need to cover בריאה (creation) as well.

and to demonstrate the second section see 2 Chr 35:13

The Hebrew reads:

"וַֽיְבַשְּׁל֥וּ הַפֶּ֛סַח בָּאֵ֖שׁ כַּמִּשְׁפָּ֑ט וְהַקֳּדָשִׁ֣ים בִּשְּׁל֗וּ בַּסִּיר֤וֹת וּבַדְּוָדִים֙ וּבַצֵּ֣לָח֔וֹת וַיָּרִ֖יצוּ לְכָל־בְּנֵ֥י הָעָֽם׃"

ESV: "And they roasted the Passover lamb with fire according to the rule; and they yboiled the holy offerings in pots, in cauldrons, and in pans, and carried them quickly to all the lay people."

But LXX:

"καὶ ὤπτησαν τὸ φασεχ ἐν πυρὶ κατὰ τὴν κρίσιν καὶ τὰ ἅγια ἥψησαν ἐν τοῖς χαλκείοις καὶ ἐν τοῖς λέβησιν, καὶ εὐοδώθη, καὶ ἔδραμον πρὸς πάντας τοὺς υἱοὺς τοῦ λαοῦ."

in the English translation of Brenton: "And thus they did till the morning. And they roasted the passover with fire according to the †ordinance; and boiled the holy pieces in copper vessels and caldrons, and the feast went on well, and they quickly served all the children of the people."

The word צלחת (small bowl) occurs only 3 more times in the OT and only once is it translated in the LXX. This is the only place in the OT where it occurs in the plural. The translator misinterpreted this word as "to go well". He understood that the root here is צל"ח he knew well the verb צלח with the same consonantal root (even if etymologically different) which means to succeed and be successful (Isa 53:10 Jer 12:1 etc.) so he translated בצלחות as to go well or to succeed. This is a famous example and it is quoted in the LXX lexicons and in the commentaries so you can depend upon them to give you this information but usually you need to solve these problems on your own. If you cannot search by root = if you cannot think using the translator's paradigms you are handicapped.

Robert Pavich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243084#Comment_243084

We need to find a way to show the "average" searcher how their results would be improved by being able to search on roots.

I'm one of those average users....

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/242645#Comment_242645

Lexemes are simply incompatible with Semitic Languages.

Please vote for http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-4/suggestions/682641-stem-cognate-search

As the one who originated this item on Uservoice thanks to everyone who has voted for it. I can think of no other search feature that would upgrade Logos' usefulness so drastically as the ability to search for roots/stems

If you're on the fence about this one hop off and jump in, it really will be that useful!

Keep Smiling 4 Jesus :)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243541#Comment_243541

Lexemes are simply incompatible with Semitic Languages.

Please vote for http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-4/suggestions/682641-stem-cognate-search

As the one who originated this item on Uservoice thanks to everyone who has voted for it. I can think of no other search feature that would upgrade Logos' usefulness so drastically as the ability to search for roots/stems

If you're on the fence about this one hop off and jump in, it really will be that useful!

Looking at Revised Edition of the Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament , wonder about usability for stem/cognate search ? Also wonder about corresponding Analytical Lexicon for Old Testament ?

Keep Smiling [:)]

Robert Pavich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243414#Comment_243414

and to demonstrate the second section see 2 Chr 35:13

Can i ask a dumb question?

Why did the LXX translate it that way also "to do well"?

Are you saying that the translators of the LXX are incorrect also?

Just trying to understand...

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243560#Comment_243560

Looking at Revised Edition of the Lexham Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament , wonder about usability for stem/cognate search ? Also wonder about corresponding Analytical Lexicon for Old Testament ?

I have had the same thought. This revision could be part of the background work needed to make a stem/cognate/root search work; I hope it is.

Kevin Becker

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243563#Comment_243563

Can i ask a dumb question?

Why did the LXX translate it that way also "to do well"?

Are you saying that the translators of the LXX are incorrect also?

Just trying to understand...

Robert,

David did answer your question already here

The word צלחת (small bowl) occurs only 3 more
times in the OT and only once is it translated in the LXX. This is the
only place in the OT where it occurs in the plural. The translator
misinterpreted this word as "to go well". He understood that the root
here is צל"ח he knew well the verb צלח with the same consonantal root
(even if etymologically different) which means to succeed and be
successful (Isa 53:10 Jer 12:1
etc.) so he translated בצלחות as to go well or to succeed. This is a
famous example and it is quoted in the LXX lexicons and in the
commentaries so you can depend upon them to give you this information
but usually you need to solve these problems on your own. If you cannot
search by root = if you cannot think using the translator's paradigms
you are handicapped.

The English translation of the Septuagint shows that the LXX translator mistook a rare form for a similar and more common word, something that can be easy to do with Hebrew. So, yes the LXX translator here was wrong. David's point is that searching by roots will make this kind of analysis easier.

Robert Pavich

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243580#Comment_243580

Oh....!! I see...I THOUGHT he was referring to the English translator.....not the LXX translators....thanks very much!

Mark Barnes

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243583#Comment_243583

Just to let you know that I emailed Vincent Setterholm to ask him to comment on this thread. Hopefully he'll do so after the easter break.

George Somsel

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243541#Comment_243541

As the one who originated this item on Uservoice thanks to everyone who has voted for it. I can think of no other search feature that would upgrade Logos' usefulness so drastically as the ability to search for roots/stems

If you're on the fence about this one hop off and jump in, it really will be that useful!

I would like to, but it seems I'm out of votes. It says I can change my votes, but I don't remember what I put them on.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243619#Comment_243619

It says I can change my votes, but I don't remember what I put them on.

Your allocated votes are displayed when you sign in.

Vincent Setterholm

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243585#Comment_243585

Just to let you know that I emailed Vincent Setterholm to ask him to comment on this thread.

We're looking into tagging roots/derivational nouns, etc. (The NT Peshitta based on the SEDRA 3 database already has root data, for those interested.)

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243886#Comment_243886

We're looking into tagging roots/derivational nouns, etc.

Thanks for letting us know.

Milford Charles Murray

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/243541#Comment_243541

Lexemes are simply incompatible with Semitic Languages.

Please vote for http://logos.uservoice.com/forums/42823-logos-bible-software-4/suggestions/682641-stem-cognate-search

As the one who originated this item on Uservoice thanks to everyone who has voted for it. I can think of no other search feature that would upgrade Logos' usefulness so drastically as the ability to search for roots/stems

If you're on the fence about this one hop off and jump in, it really will be that useful!

Kevin, Peace!

I just gave it 3 votes! At this point it has 122 votes! 2011-04-26 - 3:05 Eastern Daylight Time

*smile*