Hi all,

I would like to use a value list for summarizing part of the data in my database. My database is a linguistic on - the main table is 'Sentences' in which sentences are stored, then there is a table 'Morphemes' which stores information on words from these sentences (I enter data into Morphemes through a portal in Sentences). I want to make a list with the unique values present based on two combined fields from the table 'Morphemes' individually for each language, and also have Filemaker count the unique items on that list (so I basically know how many morphemes of one type each language has).

I created a new table, called ‘Analysis’, in which I created a new field, ‘list_field’, in which I placed a value list. This value list is supposed to hold the contents of the two fields from the table ‘Morphemes’: ‘morpheme’ and ‘morpheme_type’. I want to create a unique list on the basis of the information in these two fields.

I run into several problems:

1. I combined the information from the two fields (‘morpheme’ and ‘morpheme_type’) into a single new field called ‘type_morpheme_combi’ (in table ‘Morphemes’) using the calculation ‘morpheme & “-” & morpheme_type’. This creates new values like 'walk-verb', 'man-noun', 'red-adjective', etc. However, this field doesn’t display its new values in the Morphemes table. I think the reason for that is that records in Morphemes are filled through a portal from table ‘Sentences’. Only if I place the ‘type_morpheme_combi’ field in the portal along with ‘morpheme’ and ‘morpheme_type’, the content of ‘type_morpheme_combi’ is created. However, it does not display in the table ‘Morphemes’. Why could this be and how can I solve it?
   

1. On the basis of this new field ‘type_morpheme_combi’ I made a value list that displays in the new table ‘Analysis’, in the field ‘list_field’. However, the value list is not a complete list: if for instance, there are two occasions of a certain morpheme and morpheme type in the Morpheme table, for instance ‘walk-verb’ for record 10 and ‘walk-verb’ for record 15, it only appears once in the value list. So it seems that the value list has already undergone a process of ‘duplicate removal’ when it is created. How does this work exactly and how can I stop it from doing that if necessary?
   

1. The lists that I want to create need to be dependent on a third value, namely that of ‘language’. This is stored in another table called ‘Language’, which is connected to the main table ‘Sentences’. Essentially, I want to create in my ‘Analysis’ table different fields with access to different value lists for each language. How can I do that?
   

I hope there is someone out there who can at least tackle part of this!

Thanks,

Annemarie

I've restated the most troublesome part of my problem below:

I have three tables that I need to be involved in creating a conditional value list.

First, I have the table ‘Sentences’. In this table, sentences are stored (i.e. ‘John hit Mary’). Sentences can be from different language, and that information is stored in a field “translation_language”.

To the ‘Sentences’ table is connected a table “Verb” which stores information on the verbs in the sentences. The relevant field would be ‘morpheme’, which stores the infinitive of each verb from each sentence.

Then, what I need to do in another table called ‘Analysis’, is to have a conditional value list which gives a list of the verbs based on the field ‘morpheme’ from table ‘Verb’ based on the information stored in ‘translation_language’ in ‘Sentences’. I want value lists of verbs created by language, so one list of verbs per language.

So my problem is that the information that I need to set up the conditional value list is not stored in one table, but in two. I’ve tried to put the the information from ‘translation_language’ into the “Verb” table using a look-up or a reference (“Display data from: Sentences::translation_language” in a new field in the “Verb” table) but to no avail, it won’t make a proper value list if I just connect “Verb” to “Analysis”.

Any help? I'm sure this most be doable!!

Thanks for your comments,

Annemarie