#135) Syntax

[Timothy Jenney]

[Accordance 11.1.4 Advanced] Over the past few years we’ve worked hard to make our original language syntax searches faster, more accurate, and more intuitive.  In this podcast, Dr. J demonstrates the value of the add-on HB and GNT syntactical databases. He also offers guidance in how to use Syntax Trees, perform syntactical Word Searches, and hone our syntactical Construct Searches. A working knowledge of Greek or Hebrew will help viewers get the most out of this episode.

 

http://accordancefiles2.com/podcasts/p135_syntax.mp4

[rwrobinson88]

I want to say, this was very helpful. So, thank you.

 

Recently, some changes where made, when there is a dependent clause, it will have the typical L but now there add another smaller letter. So, for example, at 1 Corinthians 1:7, there is a L^x and one level down from that there is a L^a. If I'm understanding that correctly, the first is a dependent clause that functioning appositionally and the second is a dependent clause functioning as an adjunct. Is this correct?

 

The explanation of the phrases and the clauses and how to determine what was what in the graphs was very helpful for me. That has been somewhat confusing.

 

The only thing that I'd request is that when one searches for phrases and/or clauses without a word, it would be helpful if the lines were able to be seen easier. It is really hard for me to tell when there is 1 line or three and so on. 

 

Thanks!

[Timothy Jenney]

You are very welcome, Ryan!

 

You're right about the extra superscript letters too—and I admit I forgot to mention them in the podcast.

 

Actually, I find the lines hard to see also, but I have to admit I'm not as young as I used to be.

[rwrobinson88]

I'm 27. I don't find them easy to see.  

 

Good to know on the superscripted letters with the dependent clauses. Appreciate it. 

 

I've seen that there are future Hebrew Syntax Graphs coming in the future. Any plans for any other Greek ones?

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Hey Ryan,

 

  Hebrew syntax already exists. http://www.accordancebible.com/store/details/?pid=HMT-W4.syntax.

  As to other Greek syntax I don't know.

 

Thx

D

[Abram K-J]

I just hope to be looking at a Septuagint syntax tree in Accordance at some point....

[Λύχνις Δαν]

I very nearly mentioned that too Abram. Last time that was floated around here though it seemed very unlikely but I'd love to see it.

 

Thx

D

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Just viewed this, Dr. J. Very nicely done. Thank you.

 

D

[theblackbluejay]

I very nearly mentioned that too Abram. Last time that was floated around here though it seemed very unlikely but I'd love to see it.

 

Thx

D

 

 

So do I!  But would it matter, for the feasibility of creating the module, whether this was done for Göttingen or Rahlfs?  Would both be equally feasible?  

[Abram K-J]

So do I!  But would it matter, for the feasibility of creating the module, whether this was done for Göttingen or Rahlfs?  Would both be equally feasible?

 

I suspect Accordance could get a Septuagint syntax tree finished before the Göttingen volumes are done!

[Douglas Fyfe]

[Accordance 11.1.4 Advanced] Over the past few years we’ve worked hard to make our original language syntax searches faster, more accurate, and more intuitive.  In this podcast, Dr. J demonstrates the value of the add-on HB and GNT syntactical databases. He also offers guidance in how to use Syntax Trees, perform syntactical Word Searches, and hone our syntactical Construct Searches. A working knowledge of Greek or Hebrew will help viewers get the most out of this episode.

 

http://accordancefiles2.com/podcasts/p135_syntax.mp4

 

When you have some free time you'll want to update this!

 

Especially when trying the construct searches:

• Hebrew depth 0 doesn't find anything - needs to be depth 1 now.
• And Greek search gives 1/3 fewer results than in your example - although this could just be finessing as time has gone by.
• And there are a few more options when choosing which type of clause to search.
• AND did I mention there's also the ETCBC syntax module too now (back then we only had the one).

[Timothy Jenney]

Thanks, Douglas!

 

I'm actually planning on featuring the ETCBC in an upcoming podcast.

 

As for updating the syntax podcast, it's an ongoing project for all of our features. Users find bugs, request improvements, we add features, …another podcast is born! :-)

 

Thanks for the feedback—and for viewing our podcasts.