Why doesn't this work?
Jump to content
Posted 27 February 2016 - 05:45 PM
Posted 27 February 2016 - 06:56 PM
Something like רמ(ת)ה ילך or אדם יקרא where רמה and אדם are the complement (not the subject) and they are not preceded by a particle like ב or ל etc.
Posted 27 February 2016 - 07:46 PM
By "רמ(ת)ה" you're referring to the place name? With or without the locative ה?
And with the אדם example, you're looking for an NP complement of the verb קרא?
Posted 27 February 2016 - 07:50 PM
Posted 27 February 2016 - 07:54 PM
Try this in general. It won't catch the locative ה examples, since the postposition ה is it's own complement for many movement verbs and the NP inside is the complement of the locative ה.
You can specify the lexical verb as קרא by simply adding it.
Screenshot 2016-02-27 19.52.26.png 19.45KB 0 downloads
p.s. I don't find any examples with אדם (PN) as the complement of קרא. And also, check the "search both directions" box to reverse the order of verb and complement.
Edited by Robert Holmstedt, 27 February 2016 - 07:55 PM.
Posted 27 February 2016 - 07:59 PM
These were merely examples. I am interested in the structure. How can I leave out the ones which have the nota accusativi or anything else before the noun?
Edited by David Knoll, 27 February 2016 - 08:00 PM.
Posted 27 February 2016 - 08:34 PM
Excluding את complicates the search significantly. The attached search is our best try yet. You can modify for the verb and NPs you want.
Definite Noun Comp wo DOM MGA.accord.zip 2.82KB 3 downloads
Posted 27 February 2016 - 08:48 PM
I reversed the order (Complement first) searched only in that direction and with proper nouns and I got only 2 results: Deut 14.27; Amos 5.5
I sifted through the previous search and got these as well:
Deut 2:11; 1 Sam 5:8; 1 Kgs 12:1; Ezek 23:27; Hos 7:11; Ps 135:4; Lam 5:6; Esth 9:10; 2 Chr 10:1.
Assuming 1 Kgs 12:1; 2 Chr 10:1 were left out because of the כי there are still 7 verses missing.
Posted 27 February 2016 - 09:17 PM
Posted 28 February 2016 - 07:18 AM
This search gets all the one you listed, except for Esth 9:10, because the complement begins a few verses back and the PNs are preceded by את.
Screenshot 2016-02-28 07.16.53.png 27.32KB 0 downloads
Posted 28 February 2016 - 10:09 AM
Many thanks. This is very close to what I wanted.
But the thing is, I don't quite understand how it works.
Could you explain what you did in the first column (from the right)?
and why have you decided to make the depth=0 for both phrases?
Posted 28 February 2016 - 10:59 AM
The first column negates (the - minus sign) both את and ו, but includes any other lexical item.
The part of speech tag limits the items to nouns = proper names.
The place =1 specifies that whatever is hit is also the first first item in the complement phrase (otherwise, the search will hits PNs that are preceded by את).
And the complement tag specifies that the hit is not an adjunct within the complement phrase, but the complement itself.
I have a slightly less complex search that hits most examples, but does not allow one to put the predicate after the complement phrase. The linear properties of language can really get in the way of finding the hierarchical relationships.
Depth has been refined for 11.1.5 and I believe it will remain this way: depth = 0 means that the search structure strictly follows the hierarchical structure of the phrase/clause type desired. This refers to syntactic phrase levels, such that putting a subject phrase and predicate phrase inside a clause is 0 level, but inserting subject and predicate syntactic items (not phrases) inside a clause level requires depth =1. Within the subject phrase, a subject item = depth 0. Inside a predicate phrase, a predicate = depth 0, as does a complement phrase/clause. But if you insert a complement item (not phrase/clause) inside a predicate phrase, the depth must be =1, since that violates the hierarchical structure.
Essentially, any depth greater than 0 is a "fuzzy" search.
p.s. Amos 5.5 is not hit in this latest search because the proper name as a definite article on it.
Edited by Robert Holmstedt, 28 February 2016 - 11:01 AM.
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users