Greek Lemma Questions

Page 3 of 4 (76 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 Next >
This post has 75 Replies | 1 Follower

Posts 8893
fgh | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 6:17 AM

MJ. Smith:
To enter a single root and gets results for multiple roots would be confusing and misleading.

But MJ, according to posts above, Logos already does this for some verbs, only not for others. Isn't that far more confusing and misleading? 

I haven't really thought about these issues in the past, but now that I try, lemma and root search seems to give the exact same number of hits with Match All Word Forms unchecked, as with it checked -- which seems perfectly logical: if you didn't want different word forms you wouldn't do a lemma or root search. That means we have an option with a suitable name that isn't used. What if Match All Word Forms on included all related roots, while off only included the specific root/lemma that was entered? Wouldn't that solve Mark's and Lee's issue, while still respecting your concern, and taking away the confusion with some words doing this and some words doing that?

"The Christian way of life isn't so much an assignment to be performed, as a gift to be received."  Wilfrid Stinissen

Mac Pro OS 10.9.

Posts 2465
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 6:50 AM

To fgh:

I think you want to add more light, but actually I am confused even more. I thought the context was entering search commands using the syntax lemma:X (I seem to recall that this field is added by the Logos engine by default, but I could be wrong).

I am so puzzled by this discussion!

As a user, this is what I need: clarity of design, conformity with standards. I hope something will be done in that regard.

Posts 13312
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 7:07 AM

Lee:
As a user, this is what I need: clarity of design, conformity with standards. I hope something will be done in that regard.

Part of the issue here is that there are no standards. Different software packages will try and meet their customers needs in different ways. Most Greek scholars will consider λεγω and ειπον to be different lemmas. Roots are not an answer, because roots in Logos tend to be fairly broad. On both these issues, Logos' implementation is perfectly acceptable, even if it's not exactly what you want. (And if it was exactly what you want, it would upset plenty of other people. Sometimes there is just more than one way to tackle a problem.)

Posts 2465
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 7:23 AM

Mark Barnes:

Part of the issue here is that there are no standards. Different software packages will try and meet their customers needs in different ways. Most Greek scholars will consider λεγω and ειπον to be different lemmas. Roots are not an answer, because roots in Logos tend to be fairly broad. On both these issues, Logos' implementation is perfectly acceptable, even if it's not exactly what you want. And if it was exactly what you want, it would upset plenty of other people...

I would beg to differ with almost all of the above. Anyway, I recognize that the specifics of what I want are not important, if I am just a tiny minority. Just sayin'. Cool

Posts 136
Mark Hoffman | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 8:57 AM

To summarize...

  • Logos has chosen to follow BDAG in categorizing "lemmas." That is a perfectly reasonable choice
  • It does create some problems if one has learned a bunch of second aorists and does a search for a word like λεγω for which BDAG associates the suppletive form with a different lemma. (BTW, I'm thinking that this issue is only possibly an issue with verbs with second aorists.)
  • I think there are two solutions we have identified:
    1. Simply do "root" searches instead of "lemma" searches
      • The problem with this is that you are going to get a lot of words you may not have wanted
      • The good thing about this is that a "root" search is really an incredible and powerful tool
    2. Do an OR search with multiple lemmas (lemma:λεγω OR lemma:ειπον )

      • This would be a preferred way to get the hits one was probably trying to get, but you have to know that there is a suppletive form for the verb and know what it is.

      • What is needed, then, is a list of verbs for which BDAG designates the second aorists as suppletive forms. So far, the only ones I've found are λεγω and οραω. Ok, I can live with that, but I'd like to be certain when I do a search that I am getting what I want.

  • So, maybe it can go in this thread or someone can add it on the Logos Wiki, but let's start a list of verbs w/ suppletive forms as designated by BDAG.

I'll start the list:

  • λεγω    ειπον

  • οραω    ειδον

Posts 9945
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 9:12 AM

Mark Hoffman:

To summarize...

  • Logos has chosen to follow BDAG in categorizing "lemmas." That is a perfectly reasonable choice
  • It does create some problems if one has learned a bunch of second aorists and does a search for a word like λεγω for which BDAG associates the suppletive form with a different lemma. (BTW, I'm thinking that this issue is only possibly an issue with verbs with second aorists.)
  • I think there are two solutions we have identified:
    1. Simply do "root" searches instead of "lemma" searches
      • The problem with this is that you are going to get a lot of words you may not have wanted
      • The good thing about this is that a "root" search is really an incredible and powerful tool
    2. Do an OR search with multiple lemmas (lemma:λεγω OR lemma:ειπον )

      • This would be a preferred way to get the hits one was probably trying to get, but you have to know that there is a suppletive form for the verb and know what it is.

      • What is needed, then, is a list of verbs for which BDAG designates the second aorists as suppletive forms. So far, the only ones I've found are λεγω and οραω. Ok, I can live with that, but I'd like to be certain when I do a search that I am getting what I want.

  • So, maybe it can go in this thread or someone can add it on the Logos Wiki, but let's start a list of verbs w/ suppletive forms as designated by BDAG.

I'll start the list:

  • λεγω    ειπον

  • οραω    ειδον

You can use the same morphological tags in a root search as in a lemma search in order to narrow down the forms presented. 

Off the top of my head ἔρχομαι  ἧλθον

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 136
Mark Hoffman | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 10:04 AM

Uggghhh... Instead of starting another thread, I'll add here another matter I just discovered.

I was working w/ prepositional phrases in the LXX and NT. I was looking for certain απο phrases. Using a Morph search with the Logos LXX, I start to type >   lemma:apo
and this is what I get:

That last one has to be a typo somewhere. It turns out that the first, unaccented απο will return all the abbreviated forms: απ' and αφ'

The same deal goes for επι with two different forms, but a lemma search for υπο finds both abbreviated and non-abbreviated forms.

Upon further investigation, it appears that this is just an issue w/ the LXX. The NA27 correctly does things.

SO... I'm hoping someone from Logos reads this and notes that the Logos LXX database needs some correcting for abbreviated forms of prepositions.

Posts 136
Mark Hoffman | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 10:06 AM

@George who wrote:

You can use the same morphological tags in a root search as in a lemma search in order to narrow down the forms presented. 

Off the top of my head ἔρχομαι  ἧλθον

>> A lemma search for ἔρχομαι will turn up all the aorist forms using ελθον since BDAG does not identify it as a suppletive form.

Posts 9945
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 10:31 AM

Mark Hoffman:

Uggghhh... Instead of starting another thread, I'll add here another matter I just discovered.

I was working w/ prepositional phrases in the LXX and NT. I was looking for certain απο phrases. Using a Morph search with the Logos LXX, I start to type >   lemma:apo
and this is what I get:

That last one has to be a typo somewhere. It turns out that the first, unaccented απο will return all the abbreviated forms: απ' and αφ'

The same deal goes for επι with two different forms, but a lemma search for υπο finds both abbreviated and non-abbreviated forms.

Upon further investigation, it appears that this is just an issue w/ the LXX. The NA27 correctly does things.

SO... I'm hoping someone from Logos reads this and notes that the Logos LXX database needs some correcting for abbreviated forms of prepositions.

The last one is a null search.  I don't know where ἀπόʼ might be found, but apparently not in the LXX.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2465
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 10:48 AM

Mark Hoffman:

To summarize...

  • Logos has chosen to follow BDAG in categorizing "lemmas." That is a perfectly reasonable choice.

A remarkably intuitive and clean schema. Following BDAG's lemmatization, except in the case of stub entries. Yes, I'll commit that to memory. Thank goodness I have my trusty Logos BDAG.

This schema works so well, we should perhaps recommend it to some other software makers and databank administrators, who may not have considered the tremendous advantages it offers.

Posts 9945
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 10:59 AM

Lee:

Mark Hoffman:

To summarize...

  • Logos has chosen to follow BDAG in categorizing "lemmas." That is a perfectly reasonable choice.

A remarkably intuitive and clean schema. Following BDAG's lemmatization, except in the case of stub entries. Yes, I'll commit that to memory. Thank goodness I have my trusty Logos BDAG.

This schema works so well, we should perhaps recommend it to some other software makers and databank administrators, who may not have considered the tremendous advantages it offers.

You neglected to include the tags <Sarcasm>…</sarcasm>.  What you are basically saying is that you want them to do it your way and you won't be satisfied otherwise.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2465
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 11:03 AM

My way? No, George. I tire of repeating myself.

The intuitive way. The commonly accepted way. The clearly explained way.

If that way happens to be the Logos way, so be it. Rationalize, explain, document, implement. And everybody's working along smoothly, and this thread might never have started.

If not, something needs to change.

That's for Logos. As for me, if I need to make any important queries for research, you can be sure I won't be using Logos for now.

 

 

Posts 9945
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 11:10 AM

Lee:

My way? No, George. I tire of repeating myself.

The intuitive way. The commonly accepted way. The clearly explained way.

If that way happens to be the Logos way, so be it. Rationalize, explain, document, implement. And everybody's working along smoothly, and this thread might never have started.

If not, something needs to change.

 

 

And the "intuitive way" is by (your) definition your way.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2465
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 11:14 AM

George Somsel:

And the "intuitive way" is by (your) definition your way.

Are you implying some kind of idiosyncratic insistence on my part? Be my guest and prove your point. Checking out.

Posts 9945
George Somsel | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 11:29 AM

Lee:

George Somsel:

And the "intuitive way" is by (your) definition your way.

Are you implying some kind of idiosyncratic insistence on my part? Be my guest and prove your point. Checking out.

I don't need to prove my point since you've already done that.

george
gfsomsel

יְמֵי־שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וְרָהְבָּם עָמָל וָאָוֶן

Posts 2465
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 11:32 AM

Nothing from linguistics, nothing from K.G. studies, nothing from current databases, nothing from other software practices, nothing from documentation. Just your pert opinion and the wall of status quo, versus "my way", as you would call it and wave it away.

And the world moves on.

Posts 725
Harry Hahne | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 11:55 AM

I agree with the concerns of the original post. I never knew that Logos does not find the irregular verb forms for some verbs. I frequently search on lemma with verbs that have second aorists and other tenses that are based on different stems. I had never encountered an instance where the irregular forms were not found. It seems to work fine for most verbs. For example, a search for lemma:ἔρχομαι@VA finds lots of second aorists based on ἦλθον. How is this different than lemma a lemma search on λέγω, which does not find forms based on εἶπον?

The only reason I can see is that BDAG says εἶπον is "used as" the 2 aorist of λέγω. But in the entry for ἔρχομαι, he simply lists the principal parts and includes ἦλθον as the 2 aorist of ἔρχομαι. In both cases, they were historically derived from words that came from different Greek dialects. But speakers of a language don't think about etymology, any more than modern English speakers care that "went" came from a different old English word than "go". Modern English dictionaries will list "went" under the article for "go", probably with a cross reference for "went".

I understand and appreciate the value of basing the morphological tagging on the conventions of BDAG Greek lexicon, which is the generally accepted standard modern scholarly lexicon of Hellenistic Greek. But I wonder in this case, whether the difference of wording between the lexicon entries for λέγω and ἔρχομαι is somewhat arbitrary. Did the author actually think that the 2 aorist of ἔρχομαι was not from a different stem? I doubt it. I think he simply chose in this case to list the principle parts and not to mention the etymology for forms of ἔρχομαι, whereas he did mention this for the forms of λέγω.

From a software user standpoint, this tagging decision results in inconsistent searches. I never know whether I need to search for every individual principle part or whether the lemma search will do what I need. At the very least, I would like to see a documented list of verbs (and other parts of speech?) for which a lemma search does not find all forms of verbs with irregular tenses. Otherwise, I never know if I can really trust my research tool.

Posts 13312
Forum MVP
Mark Barnes | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 12:16 PM

Lee:

Nothing from linguistics, nothing from K.G. studies, nothing from current databases, nothing from other software practices, nothing from documentation. Just your pert opinion and the wall of status quo, versus "my way", as you would call it and wave it away.

And the world moves on.

Lee, Read Harry's post, just after yours. He agrees with you. But he sure says it a lot more reasonably than you have (and it seems he's taken more care to read and understand what others have said.

Harry raises some useful points, so I'm going to send an email to one of the Greek experts at Logos to ask them to comment. If they were reading this thread at the beginning, they're probably no longer doing so, as it's going round in circles.

Posts 2465
Lee | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 12:23 PM

As far as I know, I am using good language. Not breezy American English. But Rest-of-World kind of English.

If anyone says I am not being reasonable, or factual, or logical or polite, he is free to quote me within context. I am open to correction. But one should always think of both sides of the fence, and not assume too much about anything.

Posts 7943
LogosEmployee
Bradley Grainger (Faithlife) | Forum Activity | Replied: Tue, May 28 2013 12:35 PM

Mark Hoffman:

SO... I'm hoping someone from Logos reads this and notes that the Logos LXX database needs some correcting for abbreviated forms of prepositions.

I can reproduce this and have sent the case to our Greek experts for investigation.

Page 3 of 4 (76 items) < Previous 1 2 3 4 Next > | RSS