Jump to content

Syntax Search (No article + participle)


rwrobinson88
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yes!!!

 

I actually produced this episode based on a viewer's suggestion. It was a challenge, as it's been a while since I studied Greek grammar. I found it an effective review—far more so than just reading Wallace. And, you are correct, the mistakes I made along the way taught me as much as the final product.

 

It's that sort of concept I despair of communicating effectively to our users. Many are too busy to take time to "play" with the searches, analyze the results, then devise new searches that are closer to their objectives. Some of them just want plug-and-play results.

Edited by Timothy Jenney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes!!!

 

Ken posted my workspaces and User Tool on Wallace's grammar - thanx Ken. I hadn't look at it in a while and found it really only treats Nom, Voc cases. But there are many notes about what I had to do and a lot of variant searches. I made really only one comment on the genitive. I've begun having another shot at that now. It takes a while. Anyhow, so long as I can fit it in I'll slowly produce updates. But what's there now may be helpful.

 

27 Apr 2018 : Pushed a new update to github with the treatment of the genitive completed. Well as complete as I'll do for now. If you are happy to grab from there it's in my repo https://github.com/47rooks/bible-software-modules.gitunder the Accordance/Syntax/WallaceInSyntax.

 

Thx

D

Edited by דָנִיאֶל
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

I am working on a commentary for Exodus—been at it off and on—but now hope to finish it. In working with Exodus 12:40–41. I notice that the second clause is marked as "unknown syntax" in the Syntax Module. It looks to me as if verse 41 is a parallelism with the two weyahi clauses in parallel relationship, and the third line completing the two previous clauses. In this case the second clause would be the emphatic clause: clause 1: based on verse 40 focusing on the 340 years of verse 40; clause 2: highlighting "this very day" as the Passover day (the key event in this context); clause 3: the hosts of Israel exiting Egypt on the Passover Day. It would seem then that the parallelism would identify the second clause as the main clause, and clause 1 as a supporting clause, thus secondary to clause 2. (I wrote an article in "Hebrews Studies" XXIV 1983 entitled "Exodus 12:41 A Translational Problem," but there I treated the possible problem differently than I do today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...