Modules - Morphology vs Syntax vs Tagging: Help!

[Matt Fredenburg]

Hi,

I'm trying to get my head around what these terms mean in the context of Accordance modules, and I've been going around in circles. From here (http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-syntax-and-morphology.htm) and here (http://linguistics.stackexchange.com/questions/3484/whats-the-difference-between-syntax-and-grammar), I believe I have a grasp on the difference between morphology and syntax, but I am still flummoxed as to what these terms (and tagging) mean in Accordance.

 

In General:

• When an Accordance module is tagged, what does that mean exactly?
• When an Accordance module has a 'morphology,' what does that mean exactly?
• I believe that when an Accordance module has a 'syntax database,' that means that you can view diagrams of the verse/sentence structures. Is that correct?

 

And in particular:

• The Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia with Apparatus and tagging (http://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=BHS-T) states that it has 'Groves-Wheeler Westminster Hebrew Morphology 4.14'. What is the difference between it being tagged and having a 'morphology'? If it were tagged, but did not have the morphology, what would be missing in Instant Details?
• The BHS with Westminster Hebrew Morphology (http://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=BHS-W4) does not mention tagging, but when I hover over a word in this one, and a word in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia with Apparatus and tagging that has tagging, Instant Details look identical for both.
• The Biblia Hebraica with Westminster Hebrew Morph 4 does mention tagging, but when hovering over words, the Instant Details appear almost identical as the other two, except I saw the '(Adjunct)' when hovering over the very first word in Genesis 1:1. If the Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia with Apparatus and tagging has a morphology and is tagged, why doesn't it show '(Adjunct)' as well?

 

 

Thanks so much!

 

Matt

[Helen Brown]

For English and other texts, tagged may just mean that Key numbers have been added to some or most words to indicate the lemma (dictionary form) of the original language word it translates.

 

In original language texts, tagged and morphology mean the same thing: the text database includes the lemma and the morphological parsing for each word. This lets us link to our own lists of glosses and roots to display alongside. It lets us cross-highlight to other tagged texts, and display the interlinear.

 

The syntax databases, currently BHS-W4.syntax and GNT28-T.syntax, work only with the specific version of the text. They do let you view a tree displaying the functions and relationships of each word in the passage. They also let you search those texts for the syntactical definitions, and much more. The syntactical term associated with a word is also pulled into Instant Details, if syntax is installed. This is why you see '(Adjunct)' in the BHS-W4 but not in BHS-T. The presence of all the sigla for the apparatus as well as other formatting changes make it impossible to align the syntax with the BHS-T and NA28-T.

[Anon]

Matt,

 

The basic understanding of "Tagging" is such that an additional layer of data has been added to what you would otherwise see in a print volume. For example, if we were to open a Hebrew Bible, let's say its Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia (hereafter BHS Print), we would find on the page the inflected forms. The decisions you make as a reader, discerning what lemma is a verb or a noun, whether it's Qal or Hifil, whether a particular noun is singular or plural is the act of tagging a text. Thus, "Tagging" is supplying the morphology (root, stem, tense, person, etc.). In the early days of Accordance, Tagging wasn't ambiguous, and it was used to indicate that the text (say BHS Print) had been supplemented with a Tagging database so as to facilitate morphological searches (e.g., find all Hifil, third masculine singular verbs).

 

Since the arrival of the Syntax database, the act of Tagging isn't restricted to morphological tagging but also to Syntax. Syntax tagging accompanies BHS-W4, hence the reason you only see "Adjunct," a syntactical relationship of a constituent, in the BHS-W4 and not the other Hebrew Texts. From what I can gather, other BHS texts in Accordance were not prime to use with the Syntax, for the synchronization between the Text and the Syntax Tree were not permissible (or rather would be too much programming than worthwhile).

 

Consequently, Tagging is the act of a researcher (a skilled expert in either Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, Latin, or Syriac) to add an additional layer of data, either Morphology or Syntax, to a text to aid in research of linguistic queries.

 

I believe the above answers your questions. But let me be pedantic so as to ensure your questions are specifically addressed.

 

1. When an Accordance module is tagged it means that it either has an accompanying morphology or syntax database, enabling searches on said data. The database is visible by means of the Instant Details.

 

2. When an Accordance Module has "morphology" it means it has the ability to facilitate searches on higher level of linguistic abstraction. For example, you could search for [ANY third feminine plural].

 

3. Yes, Syntax tagging is visible via the Add Parallel.

[Matt Fredenburg]

Thank you to both Helen and Jack! Between the two of you, I believe you have brought me out of the mire! To summarize:

 

English Texts

• Tagging, in the vast majority of cases means that the words of a Text have a Strong's or G/K number associated with them.
• Morphology - does not apply
• Syntax - does not apply

 

Original Language Texts

• Tagging = Morphology, which means that the database that maps words in the Text associates with each word, not only the lemma, but certain grammatical information about the word such as part of speech, root, stem, tense, person, etc.
• Syntax denotes that there is additional information available about how a word fits into a larger semantic structure such as a 'sentence.'

 

 

 

To put this all together, when working with

• an Original languageText, the information which appears in Instant Details is governed solely by whether the text is tagged and what information is contained in the tagging database, as well as whether the Original Text has a syntax database associated with it.
• an English Text, the information which appears in Instant Details is governed both by what modules are installed, and how the 'Interlinear Source Texts' are configured in the Preferences. e.g. if I set 'Old Testament' to BHS-T, when I hover over 'created' of ESVS Genesis 1:1, I see certain morphological information which is being drawn from the BHS-T database. But if I change 'Old Testament to HMT-W4, I see the additional information associated with the HMT-W4 database, such as syntax.

 

Thanks,

 

Matt

[Joel Brown]

Matt, you are on the right track. A couple more pieces to the puzzle:

 

• A few texts are 'lemmatized', which means they have the lemmas marked and searchable, but not the rest of the grammatical information. (e.g. some German texts like ELBER-LEM)

• The GNT-TRS is a 'tagged' original language text, but the 'S' denotes that it is actually tagged with Strong's numbers instead of grammatical information. I believe this is our only strongs/gk tagged nonroman text.

• The RVR09S is a non-english, non-original language text that is tagged with key numbers.

• The instant details for original languages may also show Keyed text information, just like you noted for the keyed texts showing original language information. This happens if Preferences -> Instant Details -> Key Information is checked, and is based on your 'Keyed Text' preference in the Interlinear Source Texts.

• Remember that having the Syntax available gives you much more information than just what the instant details reports (Subject, Complement, Adjunct, etc.). It also enables the view of the syntax tree to understand the sentence, and it allows for complex construct searches to find specific syntactical forms.