View Full Version : Diagramming Module

04-29-2006, 03:58 PM
While working with Leedy's NT diagrams, I couldn't find anything in John's gospel after John 11:10. Is that all there is?

Michael Hanel
04-29-2006, 04:06 PM
That's all there is so far. Not sure there has ever been any kind of announcement on when Leedy would be finishing the diagramming, just that whenever it is done, it would be available to BW7 users. I imagine more would come out during the summer as I believe he is a professor, and as well all know professors have to use summers to get projects like these done :)

Steve Watkins
04-29-2006, 04:10 PM
While working with Leedy's NT diagrams, I couldn't find anything in John's gospel after John 11:10. Is that all there is?

Right. Half of John, the book of Acts, and the book of Revelation are not covered in the diagraming module. But you can create diagrams in the module - so if you get any of those covered, upload them!

04-29-2006, 04:14 PM
Thanks for your help. I just wanted to make sure I was looking in the right places.

05-01-2006, 02:10 PM
Hopefully I am not out of place in responding to this thread; if so, my apologies to BW management!

I am not certain exactly what BW's update plans are as the diagramming work progresses. I have finished my work on John and am currently diagramming in Acts 5. God willing, my part of the work will be finished sometime this summer. Release dates and update procedures are of course BW's prerogative to determine.

I will add that I am aware of the fact that there is room for improvement in the diagrams. No definite plans have been made for revisions at this point. I suspect that one important consideration about how much time (=money) to spend revising will be the level of interest in the diagrams that emerges from the market. So far we have not seen widespread enthusiasm; for example, I have been watching the B-Greek discussion list pretty closely without seeing any mention of the diagrams at all. Obviously, the wisdom of spending more time on something that the market does not value very highly is questionable.

Randy Leedy

05-02-2006, 12:03 PM
I have found the diagrams to be very helpful! Thank you for your dedication to this work.

Tom Rogstad

05-02-2006, 01:38 PM
Hi BW Users one and all,

I apologize for the fact that we haven't posted diagram updates yet. We anticipate only two updates at this point, primarily because of the size of the files. When we post the updates we expect our server to max out. They will be a large download. We just received Randy's April update and will try to post that in the next few days. After that the next post, unless the server stress is less than expected, will probably be in the July time frame, which is the target for completion of the project. That is just a guess, but Randy has been consistently ahead of schedule.

FYI, we are discussing now the next step after the diagrams, which is s search engine built on the diagram databases. We'll start on that this summer. Of course, it will be free to BW7 users. There's a lot of cool stuff that can be done with that, but it's a complex project and a lot of work. So please pray for us.

I hope that the diagrams are useful. I suspect that people are using them but not saying much. 99% of the input that we get is related to problems or desired features. People don't tend to write when they are happy with the tools. That's human nature I guess. But people should be aware of the fact that Randy has done a massive piece of work and done a good job.


05-02-2006, 04:02 PM
Hi, Mike,

I guess you're not mad at me for saying too much. :-)

Is there any reason that ALL the files have to be included in an update? Would it work to make a patch that only contains new files and files that have been revised?

If you would like, I think I can easily supply you with a set of diagram files created or revised AFTER a certain date, though I guess you could do the same thing just as easily yourself.

Thanks for the nice words and for jumping into this thread. I'll add that the project has been not only a challenge but also a joy.

05-02-2006, 04:26 PM
Hi Randy,
We'd post patch files, which would just have the new stuff. But you have done a lot of work since the CD masters were made and the updates will still be sizeable. It's not just the diagrams, but the note files that go with them. I could be wrong about the sizes, but we'll see when we get the April update posted how much of a problem it is.
I am excited about the possibility of making these files searchable. That will open up whole new realms of research I think.

05-02-2006, 04:29 PM
When working with the Greek NT browser, I often wish that I could see the "descriptive labels" for the different parts. However, when I check that option under "view," the diagram becomes a complete mess. Is there any way to clean that up (maybe by spreading out the diagram to accomodate more information on the screen)?


05-02-2006, 04:46 PM
Those labels are pesky. They do indeed make a mess of the screen. Deciding how compactly to draw the diagrams was a tough decision at the outset. Knowing there is no way to optimize the work for everyone, I opted for reasonable compactness as the primary virtue (I think I explained this in the documentation somewhere). A good many diagrams are large enough that spacing them out on the page to accommodate those labels would make them essentially unprintable, and compactness provides the additional virtue of being able to see large constructions on a single screen, without scrolling.

There is a command to scale selected symbols. (I'm not talking about the zoom level at which they are viewed but a scaling of the actual size of the diagrams.) You can scale the symbols without changing the size of the font. Scaling to 200% provides plenty of room for most labels; here and there will still be some overlap that could perhaps be corrected by some additional programming code to avoid overprinting. I won't promise that the diagrams will always hang together right when scaled, but I think problems will be relatively rare.

Another factor is that there are places where, to be honest, I'm just as happy for someone NOT to see the label, since the choice of diagramming symbol is sometimes only marginally attractive. For example, is KAI really an adjective when attached to a noun (in the sense "also" or "even")?

Perhaps a program feature could be provided where, when holding down the control key or something, the name of the diagramming symbol the mouse is pointing to could be displayed. That wouldn't help the person who wants to see ALL the symbols, but at least it would show a particular one clearly, and it would also require less mouse clicking.

05-02-2006, 04:51 PM
Thanks for your comments, they were helpful and promising.

Philip Brown
05-04-2006, 10:06 PM
Hi, Randy,

I think MikeB is right. Most folks who are happy with the diagrams probably aren't going to say much.

I used them yesterday in a 2nd year Greek class discussion about whether two dative nouns were dative direct object or datives of reference.

Thanks for all the hard work! It is much appreciated!


05-05-2006, 06:47 PM
We just posted the latest NT diagrams update. It's more than 80% done now.

05-06-2006, 12:43 PM
That dative question (and occasionally the other oblique cases) is often one of the tough ones. BDAG often notes that a particular case is used with a verb without specifying whether it is object or adverbial. My guiding light is to try to determine whether the verb is transitive or intransitive (the verb itself, regardless of any prepositional prefix--see note below). Transitive verbs take objects; intransitive verbs take adverbial modifiers. I don't know of any reference works that thoroughly treat this question. BDAG often specifies transitive or intransitive, which is a big help, and only rarely would I depart from their judgment. It's hard to know to what degree my own assessments rest on a feel for English and to what degree on Greek. I try to "think Greek" as much as possible, but how much is possible? I am sure there are many places in my diagrams where this question is debatable and I have not made a note about the alternative. So I wouldn't want you to feel bound by my decision in those cases. It's nice when something in a reference source does happen to confirm your own inclination, though, isn't it? (So did we agree or not?)

Additional note: an important question that floats somewhat doubtfully in my mind is whether an intransitive verb can become transitive by the addition of a prepositional prefix. PROSERCOMAI would be a good example. ERCOMAI is clearly intransitive. Can PROSERCOMAI with a dative be read as transitive so that the dative is the direct object? It seems to me that such a reading rests too much on what we do with the English "approach" used transitively. And in most cases the Greek verb can be expanded with a repetition of the preposition, which would obviously be an adverbial element, as well as a bare case. Why call the bare case an object when the same noun in a prepositional phrase would have to be construed as adverbial? So my strong rule of thumb (though I'm not sure I can say I NEVER violated it) is to assume that if the unprefixed verb is intransitive, it remains intransitive with prepositional prefixes. "Direct object" should mean something like "object of the verbal action," not "object of the prepositional idea prefixed to the verb." I have not done a careful search through grammatical literature for discussions on this point, but I am not aware of any explicitly articulated consensus on the question, and I'd be glad to receive any pointers to such discussion that may exist in competent literature.

I'm not sure I have any extensive discussion of this topic in the documentation; probably I should add or expand on this point when I next revise the documentation or write something further on diagramming method.

After today I probably won't be on the forums much for a while. Lots to do, including cranking out the rest of the diagrams. :-)

Philip Brown
05-07-2006, 02:48 PM
So did we agree or not?

The datives were toi/j pneu,masi and auvtw|/ in Mark 1:27. The student was wondering if they could be datives of reference since they felt "command" and "obey" were intransitive.

My gut was that they were D.O.'s, though "command" and "obey" are not your standard transitive verbs.

You agreed with me (which was nice). Interesting that BDF list such datives as "the dative as a necessary complement" (Sec. 187).