re: grammar tagging systems, why not two?

From: Clayton Bartholomew (
Date: Sat May 10 1997 - 06:37:04 EDT

This question has been rankling for a few years without an answer. In
reviewing the tagging systems that are used for Greek NT, LXX and Hebrew
OT I have never seen one that specifically addresses the *functional*
level of syntax separated from morphology. Why not?

There are systems like the one used for the CCAT LXX, which are strictly
limited to morphology. There are systems that are primarily morphology
but mix in a little function like the Friberg NT. Then there are systems
that mix up morphology and function rather completely.

Two simple examples to illustrate the difference:

Friberg Tags: CC, CH, CS include a second element that shows
CCAT Tag: C does not show function
Friberg Tags: PG, PD, PA include a second element that shows
CCAT Tag: P does not show function

Has anyone developed a rather full, robust *functional* tagging system
for the GNT which divorces it from morphology? Has it been applied to
the whole NT and if so is it available?

I would appreciate any information you might have on this topic. Even if
the tagging system has not been applied to the entire NT. Just to have
a robust functional tagging system would be a benefit in doing analysis
of the NT.

Thanks to you all.

Clay Bartholomew
Three Tree Point

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:38:15 EDT