Comments on: What Can You Do With a Syntax Database?

By: MSH

MSH — Sat, 09 Apr 2011 17:49:06 +0000

it’s actually still on the to-do list (for me or someone in the dept). It has such a low priority, though (few ask or indicate they want this) that it always seems to get shifted down the queue. I’ll take a closer look at your search on Monday in the office.

By: Reality Checker

Reality Checker — Fri, 08 Apr 2011 09:54:50 +0000

Hi Michael!
I sure loved your logos 3 syntactical search videos, unfortunately I had purchased logos 4 and was desparate to find any help in constructing a syntactical search through the opentext syntactically analyzed greek database. As you know the user search interface is totally changed from logos 3; so while I gained valuable theoretical insight from your videos for logos 3 on the syntactical search dvd, the methodology for constructing searches was entirely changed for logos 4. You mentioned in a 12/7/09 reply that you were going to be making syntactical tutorials during 2010. May I ask if those plans ever became reality? I would love to buy them or find their wherabouts either on your website or somewhere else on the web. You have a slightly more deliberate delivery style that makes your videos much easier to understand than their other video demonstration commentators. Their delivery style doesn’t fit the audience (ME,a first time user who doesn’t know anything about Logos 4) I’ve always believed that the teacher who can put technical concepts into simple language that neophytes can understand know their subject the best and make the best teachers.
On a related subject,. I want to create a syntactical search that can locate every ‘object-complement’ in the accusative as a syntactical construct in the NT. I’m attempting to confirm Dan wallaces theory that “object- complement’ constructs in the accusative follow the same pattern for determination of their complement as the criteria laid out by goetchius grammar for determining subject and predicate in simple clauses with the copula. You created a syntactical search query Where the same Infinitive has BOTH a Subject (Noun or Pronoun) and a Direct Object (Noun or Pronoun) in the Accusative Case. if the predicator is changed to any finite verb, and the Subject as clause component was changed to Complement, would i get any closer to finding at least a handful? Amongst the examples Wallace provides in his article, I have noted that He has classified a few accusatives as the direct object which the diagrammed opentext citations reflect as Definers -i.e. a definer of the direct object would be the direct-object’s complement.- exactly opposite of Wallaces viewpoint, which I realize is the point of discussion for his article in the first place – How do we determine which is which. So this leads me to another question
Since grammarians disagree on relatively simple syntactical questions isn’t the worth of a sophisticated Syntactical search engine limited in it’s ability to find constructs by the linguistic training of the grammatical diagrammer of it’s database?
thanks for your help, keep up the Good work! Baker.

By: MSH

MSH — Fri, 18 Feb 2011 02:24:29 +0000

There will be soon – we are disambiguating pronoun references at Logos, and at some point that work will be married to syntax searching.

By: David Sloan

David Sloan — Thu, 17 Feb 2011 11:00:13 +0000

Nice. Is there a way to do a little more advanced search on “What did Jesus do?” Some verses will not have “Jesus” or “Lord” as the subject, though he is the one doing the action. (They may use a pronoun or leave the subject implied.) I see in your first search you were able to specify Deity as the subject. Can we specify an individual, like Jesus?

By: Bible Software Review Weblog » Blog Archive » Bible Software in Action

Bible Software Review Weblog » Blog Archive » Bible Software in Action — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 15:39:47 +0000

[...] Heiser explains some of the kinds of searches that can be performed with Logos’ syntactical databases. A few of the examples are geared towards scholars, while others are suited for more general uses. [...]

By: Russ

Russ — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 16:16:33 +0000

@MSH
I am running 4.0a Beta 2.

By: MSH

MSH — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 04:53:14 +0000

@Russ: are you running 4.0 or 3.0? If 4.0, what version?

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 02:02:27 +0000

Michael,
I understand the idea “why would I need that?? when speaking of these new tools…

I’ve said it myself…but I thank you for these videos for at least disbursing part of the haze….

By: Russ

Russ — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 01:04:37 +0000

Thanks for this. Very helpful to understand some applications of syntax searching. Looking forward to your future tutorials.

I replicated your Bible Word Study for Jesus from point 2.
In the Grammatical Relationships section of the Word Study, should the listings under the headings “Used Adjectivally” be swapped with the listings under”Modified by Adjective . . .”?

By: MSH

MSH — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 23:18:15 +0000

@Jason:

I’ll be making syntax tutorials in 2010 for 4.0, so there’s nothing now, but there will be.