How to Search for "Piel immediately followed by Maqqeph"

[Martin Z]

Hello,

 

I was looking for Hebrew verb: Piel (3rd person, Pefect) immediately followed by Maqqeph.

Can anyone help me accomplish this?

 

I tried the syntax search, as below, but it only finds me with Piel (3rd person, Perfect) followed by ONE element, then followed by Maqqeph.

I cannot change the number of <Within> command to "0." Which would theoretically meet my need.

 

 

Thank you very much!

 

Martin

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Hey Martin,

 

  Does this work ? It's not a construct just a search string in the search box.

 

.־@ [verb piel third perfect]

 

Thx

D

[Martin Z]

Daniel,

 

Thanks a lot! This seems to work.

May I ask why the Maqqeph has be to placed before the Verb in this search string?

(The logical way is to place it after the verb, which I tried, and failed).

 

Blessings,

Martin

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Actually the string above pasted LTL from an RTL original. Here is a screenshot of how I actually entered it :

 

 

If I've misunderstood what you are asking let me know

 

thx

D

 

 

 

[Λύχνις Δαν]

BTW, just tried them this way and it worked also :

 

 

Thx

D

[Martin Z]

Daniel,

 

That was what I asked about.

Normally, I would expect to have something like (incorrect search command, but more logical to me):

 

The string you offered, seems to me, by Accordance, should mean: Search for Maqqeph which takes Piel Verb (3rd person, Pefect). But, this logically understood, at least to me, that Piel verb is after the Maqqeph, not before.

I'm so amazed that you can come up with this string!

 

 

So, following up, how would you search for, let's say, a Maqqeph immediately followed by a verb?

For example, Gen 2:19: מַה־יִּקְרָא־ל֑וֹ

 

Thanks!

Martin

[Martin Z]

How come they yield the same result?

 

BTW, just tried them this way and it worked also :

 

sc.jpg

 

Thx

D

[Λύχνις Δαν]

I think my lack of Hebrew helps !

 

But also I don't think the maqqef is considered a separate word which is why you end up needing things like a WITHIN 0 which doesn't exist. The @ approach applies both terms - the maqqef and the [verb ...] to the same word. I strongly suspect the maqqef is considered part of word preceding it. If you simply search for the maqqef the word before it is highlighted with each hit.

 

Thx

D

[Martin Z]

Daniel, 

You are amazing!!!

 

Now I completely understand.

Maqqeph is taken by Accordance to be belonging to the previous word.

Like you have said, the previous word will be highlighted if we search only for Maqqeph.

It also makes sense why both of the search strings you posted above yield the same result.

 

With this understand, searching for Maqqeph immediately followed by a verb is as simply as shown below:

 

 

Blessings,

Martin

 

[Λύχνις Δαν]

 

Daniel, 

You are amazing!!!

 

 

Opinions vary I assure you But I'm glad you have what you need.

 

Thx

D

[Douglas Fyfe]

You can use construct if you put both search terms in the same column.

 

 

That's essentially how you do @ in a construct search.

 

D

Edited October 17, 2016 by Douglas Fyfe

[Λύχνις Δαν]

Thanx for that Douglas. I never really made that connection. Good to know.

 

Thx

D