Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: quick search

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    19

    Default quick search

    I am trying to query in the GSE to find places where an articular infinitive is used but without an introductory preposition...I do not seem to be able to figure it out, so any help would be appreciated.

    Ron Snider

  2. #2

    Default

    Well, this is a little clunky, but it achieves what you want. At least I think so...
    When you run the attached QF, you will find some verses returned where it looks like there is not hit. It is a matter of how I had to set the query in order to get rid of hits where the preposition is separated from the articular infinitive by a δε, γαρ, γε but where it might be at the beginning of a verse. (In the query properties, you'll see I had to add cross verse searching, so this search runs a bit more slowly.) So if a verse does not have a hit, it means there is one at the beginning of the next verse.

    EDIT: Updated query below
    Last edited by MGVH; 02-05-2014 at 11:16 AM.
    Mark G. Vitalis Hoffman
    Professor of Biblical Studies
    Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg
    ltsg.edu - CrossMarks.com
    Biblical Studies and Technological Tools

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MGVH View Post
    Well, this is a little clunky, but it achieves what you want. At least I think so...
    When you run the attached QF, you will find some verses returned where it looks like there is not hit. It is a matter of how I had to set the query in order to get rid of hits where the preposition is separated from the articular infinitive by a δε, γαρ, γε but where it might be at the beginning of a verse. (In the query properties, you'll see I had to add cross verse searching, so this search runs a bit more slowly.) So if a verse does not have a hit, it means there is one at the beginning of the next verse.
    Attachment 1173
    Mark, what do you think of this? I tried first making a sub-query with all prepositions and ἕως excluded, then connected that to a search for the article (neutr., sing.) and all infinitive verbs, with no intervening words. If there is "at most one word", this skews the results and allows for constructions like this one: τὸ θεῖον εἶναι ὅμοιον, etc. The search yields 191 results in BGM. Here's the file:

    NoPrepositionArticularInfinitives2.qf

    The only drawback is that this query also cuts out valid constructions with a negative particle (e.g., τοῦ μὴ θύειν αὐτοῖς). Any thoughts on how to include these?

    Don Cobb
    Aix-en-Provence, France

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    19

    Default

    Thanks so much for both replies. I should have told you I was only looking for NT usages, but I was able to change to GNM and use the searches.

    The first one search by Mark seemed to be accurate, since it returned 60 NT hits.

    The second search by Donald seemed to be too restrictive, since it only returned 15 hits, and missed the verse in Romans 1:24, which is the one I am considering.

    What I am trying to do was find all the places where Paul used the genitive articular infinitive w/o a preposition (which often makes the meaning more clear) and see how often he had purpose, result, or an epexegetic meaning in mind.

    Thanks for your work, and I certainly appreciate the quick replies. If anyone has a definitive way to do this, and it is made far more complicated by conjunctions, negatives, and other intervening terms (Rom. 8:12), please let me know. Perhaps the simplest way is to select the genitive of the da and the infinitive from with 0-2 or 3 intervening words and check each result. Using the attached search, I got it down to 133 hits, but some were not correct.

    High regards,

    Ron Snider
    Attached Files Attached Files

  5. #5

    Default

    Don, I'd forgotten about the negatives. Good thinking! I also see that you made the articles neuter singulars which would help eliminate extraneous hits. However, I hardly get any hits with your query. To make things go faster I was just using the NT, and I only got 15 hits using your query.

    So, I just took my previous query and added an OR to include all the negative articular infinitives. Now I get 236 hits in the NT. (20 of them are the negatives.) For the whole BGM LXX and NT, I get 4654 hits.

    I think by the way I've set up the "at most" and "exactly" ranges, I don't get the false hits of neuter articular nouns followed by an infinitive.

    Try this one...

    EDITED: Look for updated query below
    Last edited by MGVH; 02-05-2014 at 11:06 AM.
    Mark G. Vitalis Hoffman
    Professor of Biblical Studies
    Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg
    ltsg.edu - CrossMarks.com
    Biblical Studies and Technological Tools

  6. #6

    Default

    Ron, I was updating my query and posted the same time as you were replying.

    Ah, those delectable infinitive constructions. Both Paul and Luke can get rather fancy! (Cf. Luke 1.62 or 22.24)

    Now that you point out the kind of construction you are looking for, I think I have it. It gets the Romans hits you want.
    The only one I see extra that I'm not sure how to filter out is Acts 15.1: ἐὰν μὴ περιτμηθῆτε τῷ ἔθει τῷ Μωϋσέως, οὐ δύνασθε σωθῆναι.

    Let me know if this does what you want. I get 398 hits in the NT.
    By the way, instead of changing everything to GNM, you can also just use L NT to limit your search to the NT and then use the BGM.

    NoPrepositionArticularInfinitives4.qf
    Mark G. Vitalis Hoffman
    Professor of Biblical Studies
    Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg
    ltsg.edu - CrossMarks.com
    Biblical Studies and Technological Tools

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    104

    Default

    Hello Ron and Mark,

    The problem seems to be more complicated than what it looks like! My setup does leave out too many things, especially for such a frequent grammatical structure (I should have noticed immediately that something was awry in seeing so few hits!). Here are a couple thoughts and/or questions:

    Mark, your setup is useful to better see how the construction has to be set up in order to work. I still have difficulties with the GSE! One question, though: why are there verses like Mk. 12.32; Lk. 2.23; Ph. 3.9, etc. where there is no infinitive?

    Ron, it's helpful to know that your search is for constructions similar to Rm. 8.12 (τοῦ κατὰ σάρκα ζῆν). That being the case, a simpler way of doing it might be looking for the definite article + preposition + noun + infinitive, i.e.: '*@d?ns *@p* *@n* *@vn* If you wanted to include negative constructions, you would have to use the GSE, though (I think!).

    Doing the search this way turns up six verses in the BGM. Two hits aren't really relevant (2 M 2.25 has a preposition before it and the structure of 2 Co 7.11 is the continuation of what precedes) but there are few enough examples that it's not really a problem.

    Don

    P.S.: As I posted this I noticed Mark had already replied, apparently while I was writing my response!
    Last edited by Donald Cobb; 02-05-2014 at 12:35 PM. Reason: Added P.S.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Donald Cobb View Post
    Hello Ron and Mark,

    Mark, your setup is useful to better see how the construction has to be set up in order to work. I still have difficulties with the GSE! One question, though: why are there verses like Mk. 12.32; Lk. 2.23; Ph. 3.9, etc. where there is no infinitive?
    Hi, Don,
    Those verses are given as hits, but the actual occurrence is in the following verse. I needed to set cross verse boundaries in the query properties, otherwise hits that occur within the first word or two of a verse would be omitted.
    Mark G. Vitalis Hoffman
    Professor of Biblical Studies
    Lutheran Theological Seminary at Gettysburg
    ltsg.edu - CrossMarks.com
    Biblical Studies and Technological Tools

Posting Permissions

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