Similar searches with different results - Bug?

[joker]

Hi,

I tried to search in the WTM Hebrew Morphology for perfect forms with waw.

First I tried
'*@v?p* w@* and got 281 verses, 3892 forms and 322 hits.
Then I tried
.*@v?q* and got 3640 verses, 1950 forms and 6138 hits.

I am wondering, where the difference is between the two searches. In both hitlists I get - for example - the form hyhw - but the hitlists do not overlap, when these forms occure. What is happening here?

Thanks for reading!

Edit: I am working with BW 7.0.012g in Wine on Kubuntu 7.10.

Greeting,

Joker

[Ben Spackman]

Theoretically, your two searches aren't equivalent, since not every perfect + vav is a "vav-consecutive." Your first search is finding every non-vav-consecutive perfect (as searching for *@v?p* eliminates those tagged as vav-consecutive perfects.

Your second search (again, theoretically) is finding perfects +vav which are tagged as "vav-consecutives" which is a little bit redundant.

[Adelphos]

I tried to search in the WTM Hebrew Morphology for perfect forms with waw.

Does this give you what you want? --

.*@v[wq]*

[joker]

Hi again,

sorry, but I really had no chance to answer directly on the posts. Too much work...

I think the problem I mentioned is really a big problem.


Your second search [...] is a little bit redundant. It is impossible to say that.

In BibleWorks the search I used is called OT Morphology. The results of two search procedures are different as shown above. But the decision, if qatal + w or weqatal is meant, is the second step. In the scientological discourse in the last century, this decision was made. But if it was a REAL Morphology in BibleWorks, this pre-decision would not be made, because in a morphological view it is not possible to distinguish qatal + w from weqatal.

The search for "real weqatal forms" with the command ".***@v?q*" should not be used any more in the next versions. It should be replaced through a real morphology with qatal + w.

Kind regards,

Joker

[benelchi]

Hi again,

sorry, but I really had no chance to answer directly on the posts. Too much work...

I think the problem I mentioned is really a big problem.

It is impossible to say that.

In BibleWorks the search I used is called OT Morphology. The results of two search procedures are different as shown above. But the decision, if qatal + w or weqatal is meant, is the second step. In the scientological discourse in the last century, this decision was made. But if it was a REAL Morphology in BibleWorks, this pre-decision would not be made, because in a morphological view it is not possible to distinguish qatal + w from weqatal.

The search for "real weqatal forms" with the command ".***@v?q*" should not be used any more in the next versions. It should be replaced through a real morphology with qatal + w.

Kind regards,

Joker

I can't say that I would agree with that argument. Removing that "pre-decision" as you put it would remove search capabilities that are available (and useful) to those studying the Hebrew texts and the functionality you are looking for is available using a different search syntax. I don't believe removing search capabilities over semantic issues would be justified.