lprado317 Posted February 17, 2023 Share Posted February 17, 2023 Hi, It's been a while since I've had to conduct a search. I'm looking at Exod 7:28, specifically ובבית עבדיך ובעמך. I want to conduct two searches that are similar to this construction: (1) a head singular noun in construct with a plural noun; (2) a head singular noun in construct with two nouns connected by waw. I'd appreciate any help! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lprado317 Posted February 17, 2023 Author Share Posted February 17, 2023 Just curious - this post has over 30 views and not a single response. Did I ask in the wrong category? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Nathan Parker Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 I moved this to Original Languages. We’ll see if it gets some traction there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Cobb Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 Give this a try. I haven't looked at all the occurrences but at least it picks up the verse you're interested in. I put a <NOT> for kôl as I figured that would be too general. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Cobb Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 (edited) To go a little further, you'd want a construction that specifies that the first two nouns are grammatically connected. Generally, that would look like a second noun in the absolute state but in this case, it's preempted by the suffix which puts it in a construct state. In order to show that, you'd need to use one of the syntax modules and set it up so that the head noun is grammatically connected to the second noun, no matter what state it might be in. That's a little out of my league for the moment. Edited February 18, 2023 by Donald Cobb 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Cobb Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 This construction should be something like what you're looking for, but it doesn't pick up your verse. I'm also not sure why it puts in between each hit an unhighlighted verse that doesn't seem to have the specified elements in it. A bug? I haven't used the syntax modules much so someone else will have to chime in here. At least this might give you something to chew on! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Holmstedt Posted February 18, 2023 Share Posted February 18, 2023 The syntax modules would not help in this case, since this is a morphological search. But it's certainly an interesting search. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Cobb Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 14 hours ago, Robert Holmstedt said: The syntax modules would not help in this case, since this is a morphological search. But it's certainly an interesting search. My thinking was that, in the example given, the noun that would "normally" be in the absolute state is in the construct state because of the suffix. So one can't just do a search that would look something like: *@noun abs. state <followed by> *@noun construct state followed by *@noun. To catch the nuance, you would need to have something like *@regens followed by *@rectum (the two being grammatically connected to each other at the clause level), followed by waw + noun. That would require a syntax module, wouldn't it? It seems difficult on the ETCBC module. Perhaps the Holmstedt one allows it, or the Andersen-Forbes, but I'm still somewhat overwhelmed by the latter (and I don't yet have the former). 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Holmstedt Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 I understand what you are looking for, and it is definitely do-able in Accordance. "Absolute" and "construct" or "regens" and "rectum" are all simply morphological features. Syntax is about subject, verb, object/complement, etc. with that said, one could put all the elements in the morph search inside a single syntax PHRASE and it would eliminate many incorrect hits. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donald Cobb Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 32 minutes ago, Robert Holmstedt said: I understand what you are looking for, and it is definitely do-able in Accordance. "Absolute" and "construct" or "regens" and "rectum" are all simply morphological features. Syntax is about subject, verb, object/complement, etc. with that said, one could put all the elements in the morph search inside a single syntax PHRASE and it would eliminate many incorrect hits. Soo, suggestions? I'm pretty much up the creek... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Holmstedt Posted February 19, 2023 Share Posted February 19, 2023 (edited) So I finally looked the OP's example -- the initial noun is not bound to the following two nouns in Exod 7:28. There are two prepositional phrases. The search for "a head singular noun in construct with a plural noun" is a simple morphological search. The search for "a head singular noun in construct with two nouns connected by waw" is what I suggested the PHRASE feature of the syntax modules might help, though the variations possible (one or the other of the host nouns might have a pronoun, etc.) make it a multiple search process. In any case, I created one and it didn't return the few hits listed in the reference grammars, even though the tagging is correct. So I don't know quite what to say. Edited February 20, 2023 by Robert Holmstedt Typos 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.c3123c857d1029f98e39c9394adc358d.png)
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now