I’ve released a new version of my [MorphGNT].
Details of the changes are on the [MorphGNT] page but they all stem from a simple query performed via a Python script: in cases where there is no parse-code (i.e. the word is essentially uninflected), is the text form the same as the lexical form (other than accentuation)?
In some cases this rule means that new lexical forms need to be provided to allow for spelling variation, rather than the lexical form normalising spelling. This is an editorial decision I’ve made that makes more sense in the larger picture of where I’m going with the MorphGNT.
The corrections I’m making to the CCAT database are really just a side-effect of my efforts to build an original database of New Testament Greek morphology. I’ll say more about it as it develops but the idea is that surface forms, lexical forms, spelling variations, roots, stems, suppletion, morpho-phonological rules, etc. will all be catalogued with relationships between them expressed as a directed labelled graph.
Eventually, the MorphGNT will reference into this graph rather than merely give the lemma. There’ll be a partial ordering of nodes in the graph (expressed by a subset of arc types) and so references will be to the node that is as general as can explain the specific surface form.
originally published on jtauber.com