Why does this search not return this particular verse

Michel Pauw

Why does this clause search in the Hebrew OT ...

sense:to honor AND person:A Son

... not return 1 Sam. 2:29 that contains both sense:to honor and person:A son?

Another one:

Why does this clause search in the Hebrew OT ...

sense:to honor AND object:God

... not return 1 Sam. 2:30 that contains both elements of the query?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Gregory Lawhorn

On your first question, Logos is including the results for to honor = to crown in a search for to honor.

The search returned for "honor" was:

sense:="to honor"

Notice the equals sign. I didn't put it there; Logos did.

sense:"to honor" returns 38 results in 31 verses.

sense:="to honor" returns 31 results in 26 verses.

The different passages are Psalm 8:5, 65:11, 103:4, Hebrews 2:7, 5:5.

The highlighted word in the search is crown, crowns, or crowned (in the Psalms passages and Hebrews 2:7) and glorify in Hebrews 5:5.

The sense tagged to those words are to honor = to crown and to honor = to glorify, using the doubled-headed arrow rather than an equals sin.

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259380#Comment_1259380

On your first question, Logos is including the results for to honor = to crown in a search for to honor.

That's true Gregory but I don't understand how this addresses Michael's question - unless I am missing your point.

By default - without the : - Logos will search for all "subordinate senses" of a sense which is what I think you are seeing here.

Graham Criddle

Why does this clause search in the Hebrew OT ...

sense:to honor AND person:A Son

... not return 1 Sam. 2:29 that contains both sense:to honor and person:A son?

I don't have an answer but, on checking, I found that the search for person:A son on its own did not return a hit for that verse

Similarly a search for object:God does not return a result for 1 Sam 2:30

Gregory Lawhorn

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259383#Comment_1259383

That's true Gregory but I don't understand how this addresses Michael's question - unless I am missing your point.

I should have been clearer. My point was that Michael's search was incorrect; it needed to be sense:honor=crown, not sense:honor.

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259465#Comment_1259465

That's true Gregory but I don't understand how this addresses Michael's question - unless I am missing your point.

I should have been clearer. My point was that Michael's search was incorrect; it needed to be sense:honor=crown, not sense:honor.

Sorry - I'm still not getting it and concerned I am missing your point.

That search doesn't provide a hit on 1 Sam 2:29 - one of the verses Michael is interested in - as that isn't the sense used in that verse.

Dave Hooton

sense:to honor AND object:God

... not return 1 Sam. 2:30 that contains both elements of the query?

It contains subject:God, so your query should be subject:God AND sense:to honor

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259384#Comment_1259384

I don't have an answer but, on checking, I found that the search for person:A son on its own did not return a hit for that verse

and yet a Bible Search will return a result for sense:"to honor" AND person:"A Son".

I don't have much confidence in Clause search.

Rosie Perera

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259481#Comment_1259481

I don't have an answer but, on checking, I found that the search for person:A son on its own did not return a hit for that verse

and yet a Bible Search will return a result for sense:"to honor" AND person:"A Son".

I don't have much confidence in Clause search.

Doesn't Clause Search require quotation marks around the phrase that the tag (or prefix or whatever it's called; that keyword with the colon after it such as sense: or person:) applies to? I think I recall reading here on the forums somewhere that it doesn't, and that bugs me, because of the inconsistency.

You see, in the Library Find box, a colon binds more strongly than other operators (besides parentheses), including the implied AND of juxtaposition. So you have to put quotation marks around an author's name, for example, if you want Logos to understand correctly, and this is a good thing, for clarity! For example author:william abraham finds all books by authors whose first name is William and that mention Abraham anywhere in their metadata,whereas author:"william abraham" finds all books by the author named "William Abraham".

Why, pray tell, doesn't Clause search work that same way?

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259484#Comment_1259484

Doesn't Clause Search require quotation marks around the phrase that the tag (or prefix or whatever it's called; that keyword with the colon after it such as sense: or person:) applies to?

No. If you type person:A and select one of the multiple word suggestions, it is completed without quotes.

It wasn't touched by the new L10 Search syntax.

You see, in the Library Find box, a colon binds more strongly than other operators (besides parentheses), including the implied AND of juxtaposition. So you have to put quotation marks around an author's name, for example, if you want Logos to understand correctly, and this is a good thing, for clarity!

Thankfully, Library search syntax was also not affected. If you want to be more precise you can use the {Extension Syntax}.

Why, pray tell, doesn't Clause search work that same way?

I'll let Faithlife answer that

Gregory Lawhorn

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259474#Comment_1259474

Sorry - I'm still not getting it and concerned I am missing your point.

That search doesn't provide a hit on 1 Sam 2:29 - one of the verses Michael is interested in - as that isn't the sense used in that verse.

My apologies, Graham, for not being clearer.

I recognize that honor = crown is not tagged in 1Sam 2:29; it's simply to honor. Nevertheless, that is the search that brings up honor in that verse (see below). Notice that the search phrase is not sense:"to honor" but sense:="to honor". I suppose it's an error in the tagging.

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259497#Comment_1259497

Thanks Gregory

But the search without the equals sign also produces a result so I don't think there is a tagging issue

Michel Pauw

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259498#Comment_1259498

Thanks, all!

Right-clicking 1 Sam. 2:30 shows that it has the tag 'person:God'.

Right-clicking 1 Sam. 2:30 also shows that it has the sense tag 'to honor'

That's why a Bible search will return this verse for the query sense:"to honor" AND person:God

BUT - I wanted to do a Clause Search for person:God to be the object of to honor.

And exactly that link seems to be missing, which indeed makes the Clause Search unreliable.

I don't have much confidence in Clause search.

@Faithlife, what can be done to make the Clause Search more reliable?

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259503#Comment_1259503

sense:"to respect(honor)" object:God should work but this clause search froze Verbum beta. I use the clause search because that is the only option for semantics roles

Graham Criddle

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259555#Comment_1259555

sense:"to respect(honor)" object:God should work

Why do you think this would work, MJ?

The sense itself only has four matches

EDIT: Sorry, MJ, I see from your related post that you were trying this search in the GNT whereas I had assumed the Hebrew Bible

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259503#Comment_1259503

My query is "working" in the sense of returning appropriate results:

This shows why 1 Sam 2:30 is not selected:

This may be the query you want verb-sense:to honor patient:God

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259503#Comment_1259503

Right-clicking 1 Sam. 2:30 shows that it has the tag 'person:God'.

Right-clicking 1 Sam. 2:30 also shows that it has the sense tag 'to honor'

That's why a Bible search will return this verse for the query sense:"to honor" AND person:God

BUT - I wanted to do a Clause Search for person:God to be the object of to honor.

And exactly that link seems to be missing, which indeed makes the Clause Search unreliable.

You won't get that for 1 Sam 2:30 as I stated above! Otherwise object:God sense:to honor will return results.

Michel Pauw

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259571#Comment_1259571

You won't get that for 1 Sam 2:30 as I stated above! Otherwise object:God sense:to honor will return results.

Well, I don't, but I think it should, shouldn't it?

Again:

'me' in 1 Sam. 2:30 is tagged person:God
'honor' in 1 Sam. 2:30 is tagged sense:"to honor"
since syntactically, 'me' is the object of the verb honor, even though it is suffixed to the verb, a properly working Clause Search with the query object:God AND sense:to honor should return 1 Sam. 2:30, but it doesn't

This makes the Clause Search pretty much unreliable and - in fact - worthless for me. I'm not interested in 'some' examples, as I want to see them all.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259584#Comment_1259584

since syntactically, 'me' is the object of the verb honor, even though it is suffixed to the verb, a properly working Clause Search with the query object:God AND sense:to honor should return 1 Sam. 2:30, but it doesn't

That is not how the text is analyzed as you can see here:

None of my 3 Hebrew clause visualization resources show the breakdown you are expecting. I'm not sure of the source of the Hebrew clause analysis.

Dave Hooton

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259584#Comment_1259584

since syntactically, 'me' is the object of the verb honor, even though it is suffixed to the verb, a properly working Clause Search with the query object:God AND sense:to honor should return 1 Sam. 2:30, but it doesn't

You could start a thread with subject Data Bug:xxxxxxxx to draw attention to the issue. The Andersen-Forbes Analysis sees it as a direct object.

Michel Pauw

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259585#Comment_1259585

That is not how the text is analyzed as you can see here:

That's exactly the problem.

It looks like they completely skipped / missed the relative clause.

The sentence is: I will honor those [who honor me].

What you see is that Logos has tagged 'those' as 'A Person', and object of 'I will honor', which is correct.

However, the relative clause 'who honor me' doesn't seem to be tagged at all, which is likely the core of the problem of this thread.

Jimmy Parks

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/1259587#Comment_1259587

That is correct. There is not a syntactic analysis of each subordinate clause. If you look at the Anderson Forbes syntax diagrams, they do not provide syntactic analysis within this subordinate clause.