Jump to content


Photo

Strongs keyword range search


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Martin Smith

Martin Smith

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 20 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Redondo Beach, CA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 03:31 PM

I only found a few posts that dealt with strongs range searches and didn't find one that ultimately answered the basic task. In my case how would one search for all occurrences represented by G1341-G1349? I've done the manual search of each G134x and added them but would like to know a better way to do this in the future. I did try the following:

([KEY G1341] <OR> [KEY G1342] <OR> [KEY G1343] <OR> [KEY G1344] <OR> [KEY G1345] <OR> [KEY G1346] <OR> [KEY G1347] <OR> [KEY G1348] <OR> [KEY G1349])

But, I found that the numbers did not add up (and the resulting analysis gave only the total number of verses, and not the total number of words as given when the individual key word searches are done). I suspect that my conglomerate <OR> search may not allow counting of all occurrences of the key words when more than one appears in the same verse. I'm searching in the NASB95S.

 

So, would others please point me to a simpler, more elegant way to search for key word ranges?

Thanks in advance.

 

 

 



#2 Ken Simpson

Ken Simpson

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,307 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Interests:Astronomy
    Archaeology
    Physics
    Hebrew and Greek
    Papyrology
    Surgeon
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 03:56 PM

Hi Martin,

I don't know of a much more elegant way, but there are a couple of comments I can make.

 

Firstly, if you are doing an "or" search you don't need the parentheses unless you are teaming it with another search such that you want to treat this as a single search term.

 

Unless you also drop all the "or"s and replace them with commas. Functionally that is the same search, but with the commas the search must be contained within parentheses.

 

 

([KEY G1341] , [KEY G1342] , [KEY G1343] , [KEY G1344] , [KEY G1345] , [KEY G1346] , [KEY G1347] , [KEY G1348] , [KEY G1349])

 

so while this is not a lot more elegant it is a little simpler.

 

Finally, the total number of hits (words found) is still available in this search and the right hand end of the search bar, the number of verses is at the left. I haven't done the adding up to see if it all works though.

 

Attached File  Workspace.png   81.19KB   19 downloads


Regards
Ken
Australian Accordance Demonstrator

Administrator, Accordance Exchange

Assistant Minister, Summer Hill Church


#3 Daniel Semler

Daniel Semler

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,125 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 04:46 PM

Does [KEY G134?(1-9)] not work ?


Edited by Daniel Semler, 01 July 2013 - 04:46 PM.

Accordance Configurations :

 

Mac : 2009 27" iMac                 Windows : HP 4540s laptop

      Intel Core Duo                          Intel i5 Ivy Bridge

      12GB RAM                                8GB RAM

      Accordance 10.4.2.1                     Accordance 10.4.2.2 and Aleph 10.4.3b1

      OSX 10.9 (Mavericks)                    Win 7 Professional x64 SP1


#4 Martin Smith

Martin Smith

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 20 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Redondo Beach, CA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 05:13 PM

Thanks Ken. On my individual searches (the nine G134x), the results give 253 words within 218 verses. When I run the conglomerate <OR> the results give 206 verses and [Flex] (2 total words). Interestingly when I run your conglomerate nested comma version I get a [slightly] different result: 206 verses but [Flex] (254 total words). The resulting analysis window list of words is also reported and grouped differently. [side note: not sure why your results only gave 204 verses, perhaps the Strongs keyword use is different between texts?]

 

Can someone comment on 'Flex' and if it would be useful to inhibit 'Flex' hits?



#5 Timothy Jenney

Timothy Jenney

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sunny Winter Haven, FL
  • Interests:a good cup of coffee, sci-fi, playing bass, listing to jazz and the blues, camping, fishing and the great outdoors
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 05:14 PM

Does [KEY G134?(1-9)] not work ?

Actually it doesn't. However, [KEY G134?] does.

 

I am getting 240 hits in 212 verses in the KJVS for the [KEY G134?] search. Flex search and exact search make no difference—and they shouldn't for this case.

 

If you want the exact search originally described, you have to add the <NOT> command: [KEY G134?] <NOT> [KEY G1340]. that reduces the number of hits by two.


Edited by Timothy Jenney, 01 July 2013 - 05:20 PM.

  • JonathanHuber likes this
Blessings,
"Dr. J"

Timothy P. Jenney, Ph. D.
"Lighting the Lamp" Host and Producer

#6 Martin Smith

Martin Smith

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 20 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Redondo Beach, CA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 05:16 PM

Daniel, I tried [KEY G134?(1-9)]. It didn't work, the results gave 1 verse.

 

Dr. J, this is the result of  [KEY G134?] <NOT> [KEY G1340]:

(total number of verses displayed = 206) 

 [KEY G134?] <NOT> [KEY G1340]  [Flex] (254 total words)
 
Again, close. I can guess that the 206 verses are true synthesized count of multiple word occurrences within one verse. Not sure why the total word count difference of 253 and 254. 
Thanks Dr. J.

Edited by Martin Smith, 01 July 2013 - 05:26 PM.


#7 Timothy Jenney

Timothy Jenney

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,428 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:sunny Winter Haven, FL
  • Interests:a good cup of coffee, sci-fi, playing bass, listing to jazz and the blues, camping, fishing and the great outdoors
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 05:22 PM

Martin, I just edited my post to eliminate that number. See above.


Blessings,
"Dr. J"

Timothy P. Jenney, Ph. D.
"Lighting the Lamp" Host and Producer

#8 Daniel Semler

Daniel Semler

    Platinum

  • Active Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,125 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:58 PM

Curiously this also works : [KEY G134?(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)]


Accordance Configurations :

 

Mac : 2009 27" iMac                 Windows : HP 4540s laptop

      Intel Core Duo                          Intel i5 Ivy Bridge

      12GB RAM                                8GB RAM

      Accordance 10.4.2.1                     Accordance 10.4.2.2 and Aleph 10.4.3b1

      OSX 10.9 (Mavericks)                    Win 7 Professional x64 SP1


#9 Helen Brown

Helen Brown

    Mithril

  • Admin
  • 7,984 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:heart in Israel
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 01 July 2013 - 10:01 PM

In answer to the question as to whether the results will differ between texts, definitely yes! In theory the same Strong's numbers should be found in each verse whatever the translation. However, the NAS95 added their own numbers (a's and b's), and the G/K number system is quite different. Both sets of scholars saw that Strong combined words which they felt should be differentiated.

 

However, even with the same set of numbers, different people are responsible for tagging the words in different texts, and they may not treat them in the same way.


Helen Brown
OakTree Software

#10 Ken Simpson

Ken Simpson

    Platinum

  • Accordance
  • 1,307 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia
  • Interests:Astronomy
    Archaeology
    Physics
    Hebrew and Greek
    Papyrology
    Surgeon
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 02 July 2013 - 12:38 AM

Hi Martin,

what text are you using? All of the different permutations I have tried have given the exact same number of hits. When you are doing a KEY search, flex and exact give the same results (as in an original language search). So there is no need to make it exact.

 

Post me more details! Accordance version as well. Thanks


Regards
Ken
Australian Accordance Demonstrator

Administrator, Accordance Exchange

Assistant Minister, Summer Hill Church


#11 Martin Smith

Martin Smith

    Member

  • Active Members
  • Pip
  • 20 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Redondo Beach, CA
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 02 July 2013 - 11:07 AM

Hi Ken, I'm using NASB95S with Accordance v10.1.7. As Helen explained, different translations use varying degree of (Strong's) keyword resolution (which must explain the difference in your ESVS 204 hits and my NASB95S 206 hits). I originally started on the Strong's keyword path because I'm doing a study on underlying Hebrew and Greek words related to justice. I found the related keywords after starting in NASB95S and then opening an analysis window. I then realized that I needed to probe around the keyword values and find the boundaries for related keywords to the Hebrew root (same in Greek). It's caused me to just reconsider using the root search capability within BHS-W4. I haven't spent an extensive amount of time with Strongs keywords but I do like the way one can quickly resolve from English to original language words/roots. 



#12 Joel Brown

Joel Brown

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • 2,486 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Houston, TX
  • Accordance Version:10.x

Posted 22 July 2013 - 09:07 PM

I wanted to grave-dig this topic a little bit and address it, especially given the recent flurry of activity regarding KEY search syntax.  My thoughts:
 
1) As noted elsewhere, ranges (and negatives) inside a KEY command were broken (probably been this way for years), but will be fixed in an upcoming update.
 
2) Remember that the <NOT> command is like a negative <AND> command, in that it applies to words in the same verse, not modifying the actual word!  Fortunately, this KEY isn't that common, so it didn't make a difference, but remember there is a difference between [KEY G134?] <NOT> [KEY G1340]  (not what you wanted)  vs. [KEY G134?]@-[KEY G1340]  (what you wanted!).
 
3) So, given the wildcard support, there are a variety of ways to properly do the search.  Let me list them in increasing verbosity :)
 
[KEY G134?(-0)] (Requires the 10.2.1 fix)
[KEY G134?(1-9)] (Requires the 10.2.1 fix)
[KEY G134?(123456789)]
[KEY G134?]@-[KEY G1340]
[KEY G134?(1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9)]
([KEY G1341], [KEY G1342], [KEY G1343], [KEY G1344], [KEY G1345], [KEY G1346], [KEY G1347], [KEY G1348], [KEY G1349])
[KEY G1341] <OR> [KEY G1342] <OR> [KEY G1343] <OR> [KEY G1344] <OR> [KEY G1345] <OR> [KEY G1346] <OR> [KEY G1347] <OR> [KEY G1348] <OR> [KEY G1349]
 
 
Whew!  All of these searches should give you the same result, provided its the same text.  And yes, all of these give me 254 exact hits in 206 verses.  Makes me appreciate Accordance's flexibility :) 
  • Ruben Gomez and Martin Smith like this
Joel Brown

By day: Consultant for Oaktree
By night: Freelance Trombonist and Private Instructor




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users