Assistance with morphological searches requested

[Steve Long]

I have seven searches I am trying to make and want to make sure that I have done it correctly.

1) I want all verbs in the Gospels that are in the indicative mood, future tense (regardless of voice, person or number). Would that be .*@vif* ?
2) All verbs in the subjunctive mood, any tense, voice, person or number. Would that be *.@vs* ?
3) All verbs in the aorist subjunctive that are preceded by ou mh. Not sure at all how to do that.
4) Similarly, verbs future indicative preceded by ou mh.
5) All aorist subjunctives preceded by mh.
6) All verbs in the imperative mood regardless of tense, voice, person or number. *.@vd* ?
7) All verbs in the imperative mood preceded by mh.

Thanks for your help.

[MGVH]

I have added my comments in italics

I have seven searches I am trying to make and want to make sure that I have done it correctly.

1) I want all verbs in the Gospels that are in the indicative mood, future tense (regardless of voice, person or number). Would that be .*@vif* ?
Yes, but be sure that you are using a morphological version: BGM / BNM or GNM (Do note that you will get slightly different results due to particular analysis conventions or ambiguities in analysis. E.g., BGM identifies a "future perfect" in Heb 8.11; GNM notes that a word in 1 Cor 9.21 might be a Fut Indic instead of an Aor Subjn.)


2) All verbs in the subjunctive mood, any tense, voice, person or number. Would that be *.@vs* ?
Yes, again, be sure to be using a morph version.

3) All verbs in the aorist subjunctive that are preceded by ou mh. Not sure at all how to do that.
You are actually looking for a phrase here, so start w/ an apostrophe: 'ou mh *@vsa* (the ou mh should be in Greek, of course) BUT this will miss some in instances where the verb does not follow immediately after the ou mh, so use 'ou mh *1 *@vsa* - You can increase the *1 to *2 or more...

4) Similarly, verbs future indicative preceded by ou mh.
'ou mh *1 *@vif*

5) All aorist subjunctives preceded by mh.
This is trickier... You could run a search as in #2 above (omitting the ou), but you will get all the "ou mh" subjunctives in addition to just the mh subjunctives. (To sort these out you could use the GSE or the verse list manager or filtered search.) The bigger issue is that the verb does not always occur right after the μη, so perhaps you should just run a normal AND search: .μη *@vsa* - This will generate some false hits that you will have to sort through. (To get just instances where the μη controls the Aor Subjn verb, you will need to use a syntactic database as ... other ... programs have.) One more thing! What about μηδε? To search for all instances of μη or μηδε with an Aor Subjn, use this: (/μη μηδε).*@vsa*

6) All verbs in the imperative mood regardless of tense, voice, person or number. *.@vd* ? Yes, but it's .*@vd*

7) All verbs in the imperative mood preceded by mh. Similar to #5

Thanks for your help.

That's a start...

[Steve Long]

Thanks for your help. That is a useful learning experience as well as getting my problem solved.

[Stouks]

I am new to BW, so thanks for your patience.

Here is what I am trying to search for:

Def. art (any case, gender num) followed by any noun followed by any anarthrous participle (that is, all predicate adj participial constructions). How would that look on the search line? Thanks very much.

[MGVH]

To get exactly what you request, use the BGM or BNM text. (Command line: BGM >Enter)

Then: 'o *@n* *@vp*

The apostrophe starts a phrase search. The o is the article. *@n* gets you any noun. *@vp* gets you any participle.

Note that this is an exact phrase of these three words in that exact order.
If you are wanting agreement of the three elements (which is what I think you want), then use:
'o *@n* *@vp* =GNC

Adding the =GNC at the end indicates agreement of gender, number, case.

If you want to allow for some extra words like δε or other nouns, then you need to add a wildcard:
'o *1 *@n* *@vp* or 'o *2 *@n* *@vp*

That still won't get you all pred adj participles, but it goes a long way...

[Precha1]

Hi Prof MGVH,

I did the search you suggested using BGM as the search version with no limits set and got 1352 verses, 29235 forms, 1439 hits in 7.70 secs. Does this seem remotely right? It seems rather high to me.

[MGVH]

Hi Prof MGVH,

I did the search you suggested using BGM as the search version with no limits set and got 1352 verses, 29235 forms, 1439 hits in 7.70 secs. Does this seem remotely right? It seems rather high to me.

That's exactly what I get... except it took 13.6 secs on my creaky old computer...
I guess I don't know why the "forms" count is so high. I would think that the maximum forms could only be the number of hits (1439) x 3 (for the three words in the search) and it should be less than that given repetition of forms.