NEAR operator for words

Rubén Gómez · Post by **Rubén Gómez** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 8:11 pm

Dear Costas,

Are you planning to add a NEAR operator for words, rather than verses? This would be very useful for both Bibles and non-Bibles (which have no verses, of course). I think we talked about this in the past, but I'm not sure if you were hoping to implement it in TW3 (I hope you do!)

Thanks,

Rubén Gómez

Post by **csterg** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 11:23 pm

Hi Ruben,
I understand the use of "NEAR" for searching non-Bibles (will do that).

What is the use for Bible texts? I am thinking that the NEAR operator is used when one wants to locate 2 words with the assumption that "since they are near each other, it is possible that there is also a logical connection between them"; since the versification of the Bible is already done on this "assumption" (e.g. logical 'entities', each one being one verse) one can actually "express himself" in a similar manner just by using the NEAR operator for verses.
I am not sure if what i say is clear, my point is that i cannot think of a case that the NEARW (NEAR for Words) can be used in a different logical manner than the already existing NEAR operator.

What do you think?
Costas

Rubén Gómez · Post by **Rubén Gómez** » Fri Mar 16, 2007 1:57 pm

Costas,

The whole point is that verses are arbitrary units anyway, whereas smaller units (sentences, clauses, and so on) are a lot more meaningful, IMO. I think it would be a great plus to have a NEAR operator for verses and a NEAR operator for words (NEARW?). This would allow for searches like "john NEARW james" (all instances where "john" and "james" [or "james" and "john"] are separated by no more than "n" words). The default value of NEARW could be set under the Options tab, just like you do now with NEAR in the current version of TW.

The example above is, admittedly, very simple. However, if/when you add the ability to search based on morphology (or even on Strong's numbers), the advantages of having a proximity operator like this will become quite evident, I think.

Finally, if you implement a NEARW operator the user would be able to apply the same search syntax across TW, no matter what resource is being searched (Bible, commentary, dictionary, note, etc.).

Hope this helps.

Rubén Gómez

Post by **csterg** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 12:27 am

Rubén Gómez wrote: The whole point is that verses are arbitrary units anyway, whereas smaller units (sentences, clauses, and so on) are a lot more meaningful, IMO. I think it would be a great plus to have a NEAR operator for verses and a NEAR operator for words (NEARW?). This would allow for searches like "john NEARW james" (all instances where "john" and "james" [or "james" and "john"] are separated by no more than "n" words). The default value of NEARW could be set under the Options tab, just like you do now with NEAR in the current version of TW.

Will propably do.

The example above is, admittedly, very simple. However, if/when you add the ability to search based on morphology (or even on Strong's numbers), the advantages of having a proximity operator like this will become quite evident, I think.

Can you provide some real-world examples including Strong numbers?
Can you also provide some suggestions for searched based on morphology?

Finally, if you implement a NEARW operator the user would be able to apply the same search syntax across TW, no matter what resource is being searched (Bible, commentary, dictionary, note, etc.).

Well, this will be done (there is no other way to search non-Bibles. This is why it should make little difference to also implement it for Bible searches.

Costas

Rubén Gómez · Post by **Rubén Gómez** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:29 pm

Can you provide some real-world examples including Strong numbers?
Can you also provide some suggestions for searched based on morphology?

Sorry, but I'm not sure what you are requesting here. Can TW perform morphological searches already? (I am not aware of it...)

At any rate, proximity searches are always the same, whether you are using English/Greek words, Strong's numbers or morphological codes. What I was referring to is that if you base your search on morphology, it does make a lot of sense to apply word proximity searches (rather than verse proximity ones) in order to find certain patterns -- like articular infinitives that may be separated by a number of intervening terms.

Rubén Gómez

Post by **csterg** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 9:32 pm

No, TW cannot perform morphological searches, but it is something i was considering; but i was a bit lost on what actually would be needed so i didn't do anything

This is what you could help with,
Costas

Rubén Gómez · Post by **Rubén Gómez** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 11:27 am

csterg wrote:No, TW cannot perform morphological searches, but it is something i was considering; but i was a bit lost on what actually would be needed so i didn't do anything

This is what you could help with,
Costas

Implementing morphological searches would surely involve quite a lot of work. If you want to follow that route I would suggest you look at some of the commercial programs I've mentioned before. However, given the nature of TW, you might not want to get into that just yet. As I see it, there are other priorities that would be nice to have addressed for version 3. For example, the use of wildcards (? and *) in boolean searches. That, together with the new Strong's-based searches and the power of Regex searches, would really make TW stand in a class of its own.

Just my opinion.

Rubén Gómez

Post by **csterg** » Sat Mar 24, 2007 9:21 pm

Thanks for the suggestions Ruben, will consider and see what makes it in ver. 3!
Costas