Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Strong's-based search malfunction

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5

    Default Strong's-based search malfunction

    I tried a straightforward search today and had unexpected results. I wanted to find all the times that the NAU translates εν as "among." I used the following search line syntax with the search limited to the NT:

    .among@1722

    This produced 200 hits. The third of these, Matthew 7:9, does not contain the word εν or the Strong's number 1722. It contains the word "among," translating εξ. I didn't keep looking, but I'm sure I could find other faulty hits in this list. It's as though the search is totally disregarding my request for the Strong's number. [Out of curiosity, I searched for the word "among" and got 205 hits.]

    [If it makes any difference, I'm using BW7, current with updates.]

    I assumed I'd gotten the syntax wrong, as this was my first such search. I checked the Online Help file, and it seems I was doing it exactly right. To test this, I tried the example provided:

    .man@444 will find all verses where "man" is used to translate "a;nqrwpoj".
    I used that exact search and found the same error resulted. The very first hit, Matthew 1:19, does not even contain a;nqrwpoj!

    I thought my search settings might be affecting my results, so I tried the same searches with and without "Extend Strong's Tags to all words" selected, but it made no difference.

    Can anyone help? I feel like this should be really simple, but it's not working the way the Help File says it should.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,080

    Default

    I can't help you with BW7 and why it may not be working, but in BW9 I don't seem to see any problems.

    .man@444 produces 321 hits, the first is Mat 4:4
    .among@1722 produces 128 hits, the first is Mat 2:6
    Michael Hanel
    PhD candidate Classics Univ. of Cincinnati
    MDiv Concordia Seminary
    MA Classics Washington University
    Unofficial BibleWorks Blog
    LibraryThing!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Huh. Guess I'd better upgrade, eh?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    2,080

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yitzhaq View Post
    Huh. Guess I'd better upgrade, eh?
    Well I can't tell you exactly why you're not getting the results you want with BW7 (there could be multiple reasons, I'm sure), but I did want to let you know that it works fine in BW9. You may want to try contacting BW support to see if there's some explanation. It is possible that BW7 does not have a very good NAU Strong's Version, but I do not know if that's true or not.
    Michael Hanel
    PhD candidate Classics Univ. of Cincinnati
    MDiv Concordia Seminary
    MA Classics Washington University
    Unofficial BibleWorks Blog
    LibraryThing!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5

    Default

    Hooray! I just got the correct results by changing the syntax from

    .among@1722

    to

    'among@1722

    Case closed.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •