I am looking at constructions with Null subjects right now as part of investigation of the eis + acc standing in to S-PN. I know that this is documented behaviour but I'll describe it anyway and then ask about possibilities for changing it.
When I search for Null and Subject in the first column of a construct and restrict to Acts ch 4 (for simplicity in this example) as here :
[LINK Greek Construct] <AND> [RANGE Acts 4]
NullSconstruct.jpg 10.71KB 0 downloads
I get 4:11 highlighted as shown :
Acts4_11.jpg 22.26KB 0 downloads
This is great - its very obvious where the syntax believes the missing word in the text should be.
Now if instead I try this as part of a larger search I see the following word being highlighted instead.
Here's the construct :
NullSubjPredPhraseConstruct.jpg 14.56KB 0 downloads
And the highlighted result :
followingwordHighlighted.jpg 19.64KB 0 downloads
I believe the second method of highlighting is much less clear. Its particularly problematic with a predicate phrase where a verbal participle follows an article and one needs to be on one's guard. Also the inconsistency in these two cases here make me wonder when its highlighted one and when another. The documentation documents the second case as the norm though I believe there is reference to the first case in at least one place also, I just can't recall where I read it.
Any chance that all such searches returning missing elements could be made to highlight in the first way rather than the second ?