Jump to content

Hebrew Construct - Agreement between two sub-phrase units at different levels


AviShmidman
 Share

Recommended Posts

One more question for today about HMT Hebrew Syntax searching:

 

The "Agree" function is one of the very best parts of Accordance's Hebrew Construct search dialog. Even before the syntax module was added, this function allowed us to find verses which reuse the same lexeme multiple times. Of course, when performing that sort of query, usually what we want is to find cases where those lexemes are used repetitively in the space of a single syntactical unit. This type of query is possible by leveraging the Agree feature together with the syntax module, since we can specify that the multiple agreeing lexemes must occur within one specific Phrase unit.

 

However, one problem that I've come up against is when the agreement must occur between one item which is within an overarching phrase, and another item which is within a subphrase.

 

I've enclosed a screenshot demonstrating this type of query. In the screenshot, I search for a Phrase which contains a preposition, and which also has an Appositive Phrase with a preposition. What I want to do is to specify that those two prepositions should have Lexical Agreement. That is, I want to put in an Agree node with one leg on the Particle Preposition in the rightmost column, and the second leg on the Particle Preposition in the second column. However, while the interface allows me to put an Agree node into the middle Appositive Phrase area, it doesn't let me extend the legs outside of the Appositive Phrase area. (The Agree node appears in the screenshot, but not as desired, due to this limitation).

 

The point of the query is to find cases where a preposition is repeated in apposition, such as Gen 47:29, which states: 

ויקרא לבנו ליוסף

 

Sincerely,

Avi Shmidman

Bar-Ilan University

 

 

post-23007-0-58722000-1567636447_thumb.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given the limitation of the AGREE command, I would either specify the lexeme for the preposition in a search similar to your example ("A"), or try the construct in the image below ("B"). "B" gave fairly accurate and interesting (Ex 33:1-3) results as I scanned over them. I tested "B" by specifying lamed ("B*") and comparing the results to "A." I used the CONTENTS command to identify some differences between the two searches. At least for lamed, they are pretty similar. I had to increase the search depth of "A" to catch some of the hits that "B" was getting. Also, in "B" I limited the Phrase depth to clausal boundaries. So, it seems like "B" is a descent attempt at what you are trying to do. Perhaps someone has a better idea.

 

Construct A:

 

post-31158-0-90193200-1567694916_thumb.png

 

 

Construct B:

 

post-31158-0-93960300-1567694961_thumb.png

 

Construct B*:

 

post-31158-0-70254800-1567695005_thumb.png

 

Compare Results:

 

post-31158-0-35843200-1567695082_thumb.png

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be clear, any case of apposition in which a preposition is repeated is considered preposition apposition. This means that the preposition is actually within the appositive tag. Thus, the way that David set of Construct A is technically the correct way to do it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Prof. Holmstedt,

 

Thank you!

 

By the way, in a number of cases I noticed that Syntax Version 3.0 has apposition tags where Syntax Version 2.8 did not (such as מבול מים in Gen 6:17). Did the parameters of Apposition change between those two versions?

 

Sincerely,

Avi

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...