Proximity search with Greek Lemmas

Matt Jarka said:

I am looking to find all the locations of the lemmas γινώσκω or ἐπιγινώσκω near οἶδα.  It appears that a Proximity Search can be performed use Manuscript words only, not Lemmas.  When I perform the search with lemmas, e.g. 'γινώσκω NEAR οἶδα' I get 0 results.  When I use the more narrow manuscript form 'ἔγνων NEAR ᾔδειν', I get an expected result from Rom. 7:7.  Is there any way to perform a proximity search with Lemmas, not just manuscript terms?  Thank you for any help available.

It's usually easiest to use a morph search when looking for lemmas. The syntax there is simply lemma:γινώσκω NEAR lemma:οἶδα. You can either enter the Greek characters directly into the search field, or type g:ginosko [select the right verb] NEAR g:oida [ditto].

That said, using NEAR doesn't find Romans 7:7 (although using AND will). NEAR means within 47 characters, and in Romans 7:7 the words are just slightly too far apart.

Hi All,

The problem is when I do a lemma proximity search in Philo (or any non-biblical greek text) all of the results are in the same verse.  I want to do a proximity search of non-biblical greek texts with the results being 'across verses' (trans versed).  All of the solutions provided thus far (btw....thank you) do not provide trans versed results of non-biblical texts. For instance when I try searching for these two words φιλοσοφέω κεφαλή (WITHIN 20 WORDS) in Philo, I do not get a result across Decalogue 57-58 even though it is there. What am I missing?

Peace,

Carl

carl balowski said:

What am I missing?

You're not missing anything. This is standard (but dumb) Logos behaviour, that we've consistently asked be changed. Logos won't do proximity searches across articles. Usually article boundaries coincide with TOC headings, which means the English text of Philo is fine for proximity searching, because it only has TOC headings at the beginning of each work, whereas the Greek text has headings at the beginning of each section.

I just voted Mark.  Good call.

Dave Hooton said:

The main criterion is length as proximity searches can take a very long time in "large" articles.

The main criterion is a logical boundary. Length is a secondary consideration.

The boundaries in Philo don't seem logical in that Logos treats each verse as an 'article'. Granted the verses in Philo are longish, but the sections (which are logical divisions) in Philo are about the same length as an average biblical chapter.  Why didn't Logos use the sections instead of the verses as logical boundaries?

Carl

I'm still looking (probably in vain) for a work around. [^] 

It seems that some of Philo's work (e.g. De specialibus legibus, Quis rerum divinarum heres sit, etc...) have section numbers grouped together. But still they don't turn up in trans versed proximity searches.  

Look at the table of contents for De specialibus legibus and notice the section groupings of 1-6, 7-12, 13-18, etc.....

What do you think?

Sorry for bringing up this old post,

but seemingly the problem has not been solved yet.

It is still not possible to do "WITHIN-searches" accross the boundaries of a single bible verse.

I have tried the work-around that goes via morph to basic search and it worked OK.

But does that not mean that I have to do that work-around EVERY time I do a "WITHIN-search" or something similar in morph-mode because I can never be sure that I do not miss an important verse?!

And does that not mean that morph-search is giving out FALSE results?

Let me specify what I mean by "FALSE":  How often have we heared a preacher say "there is NO VERSE IN THE BIBLE that says so-and-so". Well, such claims can be quite convincing in certain contexts provided they are TRUE. But if we rely on searches that provide results that are defective in the sense that they don´t find verses that ACTUALLY DO EXIST, then such a search and the subsequent conclusion is misleading and FALSE.

And even if we exclude this "no verse in the bible - claim", it still makes me nerveous when there is always the possibility of missing important verses in my sermon preparation.

Of course, it is everyone´s own responsibility to know his bible without a bible software, but yet we do want to exploit the potential of such search tools as in Logos.

I think it is absolutely ESSENTIAL that the searches are RELIABLE AND TRUE. But they are NOT if I miss certain verses because of the described limitation of morph searches within a bible verse. The verse divisions - as we all know - are not inspired and oftimes not at all fitting the original language (see Eph. 1:3-14 -- one single sentence in Greek, but MANY verses in the translations).

So, seeing that 2-3 years have passed since the original discussion and that the problem still exists, I would like to encourage once more that this FAULT should be fixed very soon.

I do not think that this request falls into the "nice-to-have" category. We are not talking about a feature we would like to have because we would like to have an additional tool to play with. I think this is a true FAULT / BUG / DEFICIENCY in the programme like an engine that only works on two cylinders instead of four, or a calculator that displays a "4" when you press the number "3". It definitely needs fixings soon!

I need to be able to rely on my search results. Otherwise it does not make sense to use them or even integrate in the programme at all.

So may I very politely ask once more on behalf of the "search-community" that this problem will be solved soon?

Thanks very much.