Jump to content

Help with Greek construct search for Hortatory Subjunctive


mgvh
 Share

Recommended Posts

I am trying to locate all the instances of the hortatory subjunctives (1st plural) in the GNT.

After many trials, I think this gets them using the command line:

 (*@[verb subjunctive first plural]) <AND><NOT> <PRECEDED BY> <WITHIN 5 Words> ("ου μη" <OR> (αχρι, εαν, εανπερ, ει, τις, ινα, εως, οταν, μεχρι, μηποτε)) <AND> <NOT> <FOLLOWED BY> .;

I only have a few false hits: Acts 21.16; 27.29; Rom 15.4; 2Cor 9.4; 13.7; 1Thess 5.10; Tit 2.12; 3.7; Heb 3.6; 6.18; 1Pet 2.24; 1John 1.6; 2.28; 3.23; 5.2 (most are part of clauses where one of the NOT words is more than 5 words away, but raising the number filters out more hits that I do want)

Trying to eliminate lots of questions, it does filter out Rom 3.8 which is a hit

There are some instances where a verb may be either indicative or subjunctive and taken either as declarative or hortatory. (2 Pet 3.13; 1 John 4.19)

 

Now there ought to be a way to use a Greek construct with syntax elements to get more accurate results, but I'm stymied. The NOT feature does not seem to work. Trying to eliminate a question mark character doesn't seem to work.

Anyone have an idea of constructing the search? Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Mark,

 

  I tried playing with this a bit. I logged a couple of issues as a result. The NOT WITHIN thing is a bit tricky. I am not getting results I like yet. My first thought was hortatory subj should be in direct speech. And indeed you find a bunch there. The question mark thing is tricky. Syntax doesn't tag for questions and it gets a little tricky to exclude it. I did it by including the questions in the query initially and then using a second tab with a search box query to exclude questions. That works but you have to add the subjunctive tag to get the words highlighted. Still I have a lot of missing hits. I really need an answer to the NOT WITHIN issue I logged to get much further I think. But I'll post what I here in case it helps you at all in the meantime.

 

  The ws below has cross check tabs to compare your search box query hits and the syntax based ones I am getting in both directions. The NOT for the WITHIN should be on the WITHIN not the list of lexes but that cause me to require and additional surrounding WITHIN - I am waiting on some clarity on how that should work. But at least this shows what I did with the question mark and is getting some way toward your goal I think.

 

  This workspace is from Mac but you should just be able to unzip and open it in Windows.

 

Thx

D

 

 

MarkHortSubj.accord.zip

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Dan,

I tried to download your file, but my antivirus is blocking it saying it has a virus / malware. Maybe it's a Mac/Windows deal, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Dan. I was able to download / run your construct search. I see how you basically recreated my command line search but without the question.

I don't know why it includes Matt 6.31 as the first hit, since the subjunctives are preceded by τι which was excluded in the construct. Similarly Mark 15.32 which is preceded by ινα.

I was able to filter out more using your search results, opening a new NA28 tab, using CONTENTS to limit hits to the ones from the construct search, and then using <NOT> .; to eliminate verses with questions.

I have updated my morph coding which I've attached here. I think I have all the HortatorySubjunctives tagged with the gold indicative and a red frame. That was going through lots of results individually, so I don't think I have any false hits, but I am not 100% sure I have all hits.

Thanks again!

UnderstandingNTG2.hlt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, mgvh said:

Thanks, Dan. I was able to download / run your construct search. I see how you basically recreated my command line search but without the question.

I don't know why it includes Matt 6.31 as the first hit, since the subjunctives are preceded by τι which was excluded in the construct. Similarly Mark 15.32 which is preceded by ινα.

EDIT: Delete rubbish theory.

 

Ok, τις and τίς are different lexes and both have to be excluded. But in this case that is not enough and I'm not yet sure why. I am not sure it matters but in both these cases the excluded word directly follows a punctuation mark of some kind. It's something to do with putting the CLAUSE element around it. Without it the search exclude Matt 6:31 properly.

 

Thx

D

Edited by Λύχνις Δαν
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually this may get you closer, just dropping the syntax chart out of the picture.

 

sc.thumb.jpg.fe1604a3bd86d3cdd64ae81a8b49c61d.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, Dan! I see what you did! It inspired this command line (without using the construct).

So what you've improved from my first try is including the = in front of the excluded words in order to actually exclude them.

 

(Not sure why your search picks up Matt 21.39)

 

It's close. Still get false hits like the ones I note in my first post and misses Rom 3.8

 

I think we've taken this about as far as we can go!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, mgvh said:

 

(Not sure why your search picks up Matt 21.39)

 

 

This is because my search is using Sentence scope and there are two verses in that sentence. You'll notice the second sentence (Matt 21:39) has no highlighted words.

 

Thx

D

  • Like 1
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...