I search Byz for <Lemma = lbs/el/ποιέω> BEFORE (sin, truth, righteousness) [by mistake] and amazingly it worked [even though English words were involved in the search]. Why did this happen?
Kind of like a reverse-reverse interlinear.
The tagging beneath the text contains Strongs numbering, English glosses, and parsing (morphology). Any of those fields can be used in a search.
You can see the available search fields by clicking the little circled i in the right hand top corner of the "locator bar"
EDIT: this extensive tagging is a key part of the reason that Logos resources sometimes cost more than other companies. All of that tagging takes work, and a worker is worth his/her wages. :-)
Thanks.
I'm not sure I fully understand how it works - but it's very nice.
TC,
I could be wrong and if I weren't so tired from burning the candle at both ends I would check prior to posting. But, I think that it is bc it is linked to a reverse interlinear that it does work.
In other words see what would happen if you did the same search against the Byz alone. I don't think it would yield the same results. Just my foggy understanding.
It is like an interlinear but nothing is displayed except the manuscript. But if you hover over a word the tip will show you the available information. You can search a lot of Greek bibles with an English word (gloss) e.g. NA27, SBLGNT as well as NA27 Int.
Dave,
Because I am tender towards challenges I tested my theory with data. I did a search on Matt 2.7 lemma kaleo in the Byz alone first and it returned a greek reply, I then added the interlinear this time NASB95 and revealed the data returned was nonsense. Your serve.
The coup de grace:
Beloved,
It is not linked with the NASB in your photo. The search is being run against the byz, and the NASB in your picture (NKJV in Bill's above) is a display version using the reverse interlinear.
That is to say the results are being searched in BYZ and displayed in both BYZ and the NASB/NKVJ. The display in English works because they are reverse interlinears, so you are close.
The question however was why does searching the BYZ using English words work? The answer remains, because the (invisible) glosses are being found. That it is only the BYZ being searched is indicated by the search terms.
I did a search on Matt 2.7 lemma kaleo in the Byz alone first and it returned a greek reply, I then added the interlinear this time NASB95 and revealed the data returned was nonsense.
I agree! This is the result you should have got
The result you got in Byz was the same as searching for <lemma = lbs/el/καλέω> alone, because you don't have results in two colours!
Are you tricking me or do you have a weird version of Byz; here's mine from the Info page:-
LLS:1.0.3312014-04-24T23:21:50ZBYZPRSD.logos4
After careful consideration of all the points raised I conclude that we all have raised relevant issues. I therefor conclude that we should end by tipping our hats to George who would insist that there is no replacement for a thorough understanding of the language in question which reverse interlinears cannot replace. [8-|]
Somehow George always wins. [y]
After careful consideration of all the points raised
You haven't answered my question re your results in Byz.
My Byz is Textform 2005 as shown, yours appears to be different. As you have correctly indicated it is searching on the manuscript form not the lemmas. I hope this satisfactorily accounts for the discrepancy you object to.
yours appears to be different.
If you display the Support Info as I did, we can know for sure.
I don't think you're going to be happy because they're not the same, but here you go:
If you display the Support Info as I did, we can know for sure. Dave, I don't think you're going to be happy because they're not the same, but here you go:
Sorry Beloved, he means open the Ntg Byz you've got up there, and in the address bar of the resource click the . This will "flip the page" and show you the resource version information. This is what Dave is hoping to compare.
Thank you TC,
Now that Dave's request is clear, here you go:
No, you need to scroll down just a little bit, to the very bottom of this page where the support info is located. It will show whether you are running against a different Logos-build of the resource. (If so, the differences may come from a different/corrupt bible index).
Did I get this right that in this thread you posted two screenshots with the exactly same search phrase against "Byz" but massively different results? Or did you take the first one before actually running the search (your construction history may indicate such)?
EDIT: But based on your latest screenshot, I think the issue is rather trivial and you get in fact the same results as Dave now. If you look at the blue highlighted English words, you will find that the search hits for "the righteous", which is not an exact match of "righteousness". These three results come from the switch "match all word forms" (which unfortunalety is still not shown on the surface of the search tab) - toggle it and you'll see Dave's results.
yet another tidbit of information:
running this same search against a more usual GNT, i.e. the NA 27, will resolve the same 6 hits in three verses Dave showed for Byz, whereas the "match all word forms" will get 16 hits in 7 verses. The reason for that is no textual variant, though, but simply that in Rom 8:30 the gloss for dikaiow is given with "to justify, do declare righteous" whereas in Byz the gloss for the exact same lemma is only "to justify".
So while this kind of searches "works", it still remains that such counts should not be overinterpreted.
As always you provide clarity. Would you kindly lend this poor beggar the information required to interpret this data?
My first search was against the Byz alone using English search terms with "match all word forms" ticked. It of course returned both "righteous" and "righteousness" in its results. My second search was against the Byz alone using Greek lemmas for all but one search term the term for sin was in the NGSF form again "match all word forms" was ticked. The results of this exercise are recorded in this thread.
When I corrected my error above and searched on all lemmas the results only returned Rev 19.11 and this was whether or not "match case" or "match all word forms" were ticked. This was the crux of my argument, namely that using English terms as opposed to Greek lemmas would effect your results greatly.
I really appreciate your input Mick. I always take away a great deal from your posts. Thanks.
-Beloved
No, you need to scroll down just a little bit, to the very bottom of this page where the support info is located. It will show whether you are running against a different Logos-build of the resource. (If so, the differences may come from a different/corrupt bible index). As always you provide clarity. Would you kindly lend this poor beggar the information required to interpret this data?
It means you have the same version of Byz as I posted previously and that we should get the same results with the same search terms.
When I corrected my error above and searched on all lemmas the results only returned Rev 19.11 and this was whether or not "match case" or "match all word forms" were ticked.
Which lemmas? None of your screenshots use lemmas in the second search term. The only lemma search term that returns Rev 19:!1 is the one for righteousness
The manuscript form (blue highlight) was one of the three you used earlier.
This was the crux of my argument, namely that using English terms as opposed to Greek lemmas would effect your results greatly.
The main point of the thread was that you can get results using (English) glosses in a Greek bible. You have been very inventive in making your point but it is one that didn't need to be made and has only generated confusion.
I concede the main assertion and being counter to it generated confusion. I have learned from this and I am therefor grateful for all input to the contrary, thanks to you Dave, TC and NB Mick.
