Syntactic structures - Revision history

imported>Martins at 01:59, 14 August 2013

2013-08-14T01:59:26Z

imported>Martins at 01:57, 14 August 2013

2013-08-14T01:57:54Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:57, 14 August 2013
Line 73:		Line 73:
	:Specifiers, adjuncts and complements are to be represented as complex structures, even when they are composed of a single node		:Specifiers, adjuncts and complements are to be represented as complex structures, even when they are composed of a single node
	:*a boy		:*a boy
	:**<strike>NS("boy";"a");</strike>		:**<strike>NS([boy];[a]);</strike>
	:**NS("boy";DP("a"));		:**NS([boy];DP([a]));
	;Strings are represented between "quotes" while lemmas are represented between [brackets].		;Strings are represented between "quotes" while lemmas are represented between [brackets].
	:The UNL<sup>arium</sup> distinguishes between strings (to be represented between "quotes") and lemmas (to be represented between [brackets]). The difference between strings and lemmas has to do with variance and the dictionary status: if the constituent is expected to figure as an entry in the dictionary (e.g., "in", "the", "after", "love", "sense", etc) or if may vary (e.g., if it may be inflected, or further composed by specification, adjunction or complementation), it must be represented between brackets; if it's a full phrase whose internal structure is not relevant, because invariant, it must come between quotes:		:The UNL<sup>arium</sup> distinguishes between strings (to be represented between "quotes") and lemmas (to be represented between [brackets]). The difference between strings and lemmas has to do with variance and the dictionary status: if the constituent is expected to figure as an entry in the dictionary (e.g., "in", "the", "after", "love", "sense", etc) or if may vary (e.g., if it may be inflected, or further composed by specification, adjunction or complementation), it must be represented between brackets; if it's a full phrase whose internal structure is not relevant, because invariant, it must come between quotes:
Line 80:		Line 80:
	:*VC([sense]); (the term "sense" may be further specified: ''make'' > ''make sense'', ''make any sense'', ''make no sense'', etc).		:*VC([sense]); (the term "sense" may be further specified: ''make'' > ''make sense'', ''make any sense'', ''make no sense'', etc).
	;XH and XP are not the same:		;XH and XP are not the same:
	:*VP("make"); = the verbal phrase is "make" (there's no other constituent in the phrase)		:*VP([make]); = the verbal phrase is "make" (there's no other constituent in the phrase)
	:*VH("make"); = the head of the phrase is "make" (the phrase may contain other constituents)		:*VH([make]); = the head of the phrase is "make" (the phrase may contain other constituents)
	;Phrases may be replaced by unique indexes for simplification reasons:		;Phrases may be replaced by unique indexes for simplification reasons:
	:indexes are to be expressed by ":<VALUE>", where <VALUE> is a two-digit string		:indexes are to be expressed by ":<VALUE>", where <VALUE> is a two-digit string
	:*NA("boy";JA("beautiful";AP("very"))); (no indexes)		:*NA([boy];JA([beautiful];AP([very]))); (no indexes)
	:*NA("boy";:01)JA:01("beautiful";:02)AP:02("very"); (with indexes)		:*NA([boy];:01)JA:01([beautiful];:02)AP:02([very]); (with indexes)
	;Relations are juxtaposed (and not separated by ","):		;Relations are juxtaposed (and not separated by ","):
	:*NS(DP)NA(JP);		:*NS(DP)NA(JP);
Line 93:		Line 93:
	;Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) are not commutative (the order is relevant):		;Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) are not commutative (the order is relevant):
	:*PB(PB("a";"b");"c"); is different from PB(PB("a";"c");"b");		:*PB(PB("a";"b");"c"); is different from PB(PB("a";"c");"b");
	;~~S-rules~~ always end in ";":		;Rules always end in ";":
	:*NS(DP)NA(JP);		:*NS(DP)NA(JP);
	:*<strike>NS(DP)NA(JP)</strike>		:*<strike>NS(DP)NA(JP)</strike>

imported>Martins at 14:36, 21 September 2010

2010-09-21T14:36:58Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:36, 21 September 2010
Line 43:		Line 43:

	<b>Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB)</b> define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while <b>head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA, XH)</b>		<b>Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB)</b> define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while <b>head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA, XH)</b>
	define the syntactic roles of the constituents (with reference to the head). They are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive.		define the syntactic roles of the constituents (with reference to the head). They are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive in the same level of representation.

	== Examples ==		== Examples ==

imported>Martins at 14:34, 21 September 2010

2010-09-21T14:34:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:34, 21 September 2010
Line 64:		Line 64:
	:*NB(NB(head;complement);complement);		:*NB(NB(head;complement);complement);
	:*<strike>NB(head;complement;complement);</strike>		:*<strike>NB(head;complement;complement);</strike>
	;In head-driven relations (XA, XC and XS), heads may be omitted:		;In the head-driven relations XA, XC and XS, heads may be omitted:
	:*NC(head;complement);		:*NC(head;complement);
	:*NC(complement);		:*NC(complement);
	;In sentence-driven relations (XB, XP), heads may not be omitted:		;In sentence-driven relations (XB and XP), heads may not be omitted:
	:*NB(head;complement);		:*NB(head;complement);
	:*<strike>NB(complement);</strike>		:*<strike>NB(complement);</strike>

imported>Martins at 14:31, 21 September 2010

2010-09-21T14:31:40Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:31, 21 September 2010
Line 42:		Line 42:
	Where X must be replaced by one of the eight possible heads (N, P, V, A, J, C, D, I).		Where X must be replaced by one of the eight possible heads (N, P, V, A, J, C, D, I).

	Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA)		<b>Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB)</b> define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while <b>head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA, XH)</b>
	define the syntactic roles of the constituents (with reference to the head). They are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive.		define the syntactic roles of the constituents (with reference to the head). They are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive.

imported>Martins at 14:30, 21 September 2010

2010-09-21T14:30:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:30, 21 September 2010
Line 43:		Line 43:

	Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA)		Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA)
	define the syntactic roles of the constituents (with reference to the head). They are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive:		define the syntactic roles of the constituents (with reference to the head). They are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive.
	~~:*<strike>PB("a";PC("a";"b"));</strike> = XP and XB are sentence-driven relations (they ), whereas XC, XA and XS are head-driven relations (they~~

	== Examples ==		== Examples ==

imported>Martins at 14:30, 21 September 2010

2010-09-21T14:30:10Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:30, 21 September 2010
Line 43:		Line 43:

	Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA)		Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA)
	define the syntactic roles of the constituents with reference to the head). ~~THey~~ are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive:		define the syntactic roles of the constituents (with reference to the head). They are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive:
	:*<strike>PB("a";PC("a";"b"));</strike> = XP and XB are sentence-driven relations (they ), whereas XC, XA and XS are head-driven relations (they		:*<strike>PB("a";PC("a";"b"));</strike> = XP and XB are sentence-driven relations (they ), whereas XC, XA and XS are head-driven relations (they

imported>Martins at 14:29, 21 September 2010

2010-09-21T14:29:42Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:29, 21 September 2010
Line 41:		Line 41:
	'''		'''
	Where X must be replaced by one of the eight possible heads (N, P, V, A, J, C, D, I).		Where X must be replaced by one of the eight possible heads (N, P, V, A, J, C, D, I).

			Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) define the syntactic configuration of the sentence, while head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA)
			define the syntactic roles of the constituents with reference to the head). THey are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive:
			:*<strike>PB("a";PC("a";"b"));</strike> = XP and XB are sentence-driven relations (they ), whereas XC, XA and XS are head-driven relations (they

	== Examples ==		== Examples ==

imported>Martins at 14:28, 21 September 2010

2010-09-21T14:28:01Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:28, 21 September 2010
Line 90:		Line 90:
	;Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) are not commutative (the order is relevant):		;Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) are not commutative (the order is relevant):
	:*PB(PB("a";"b");"c"); is different from PB(PB("a";"c");"b");		:*PB(PB("a";"b");"c"); is different from PB(PB("a";"c");"b");
	~~;Sentence-driven relations (XP, XB) and head-driven relations (XC, XS, XA) are different ways of representing the same information and, therefore, are mutually exclusive:~~
	:*<strike>PB("a";PC("a";"b"));</strike> = XP and XB are sentence-driven relations (they define the syntactic configuration of the sentence), whereas XC, XA and XS are head-driven relations (they define the syntactic roles with reference to the head)
	;S-rules always end in ";":		;S-rules always end in ";":
	:*NS(DP)NA(JP);		:*NS(DP)NA(JP);
	:*<strike>NS(DP)NA(JP)</strike>		:*<strike>NS(DP)NA(JP)</strike>

imported>Martins at 14:26, 21 September 2010

2010-09-21T14:26:12Z

@@ Line 56: / Line 56: @@
 == Observations ==
 ;Constituents are phrases
 :Specifiers, adjuncts and complements are to be represented as complex structures, even when they are composed of a single node
@@ Line 68: / Line 79: @@
 :*VP("make"); = the verbal phrase is "make" (there's no other constituent in the phrase)
 :*VH("make"); = the head of the phrase is "make" (the phrase may contain other constituents)
 ;Phrases may be replaced by unique indexes for simplification reasons:
 :indexes are to be expressed by ":<VALUE>", where <VALUE> is a two-digit string

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:59, 14 August 2013
Line 46:		Line 46:

	== Examples ==		== Examples ==
	*'''NH("boy");''' ("boy" is the head of a noun phrase)		*'''NH([boy]);''' ("boy" is the head of a noun phrase)
	*'''DP("a");''' ("a" is a determiner phrase)		*'''DP([a]);''' ("a" is a determiner phrase)
	*'''JH("beautiful");''' ("beautiful" is the head of an adjective phrase)		*'''JH([beautiful]);''' ("beautiful" is the head of an adjective phrase)
	*'''AP("very");''' ("very" is an adverbial phrase)		*'''AP([very]);''' ("very" is an adverbial phrase)
	*'''JP("very beautiful");''' ("very beautiful" is an adjective phrase)		*'''JP("very beautiful");''' ("very beautiful" is an adjective phrase)
	*'''JA("beautiful";AP("very"));''' (the adverbial phrase "very" is an adjunct in the adjective phrase headed by "beautiful") = very beautiful		*'''JA([beautiful];AP([very]));''' (the adverbial phrase "very" is an adjunct in the adjective phrase headed by "beautiful") = very beautiful
	*'''NS("boy";DP("a"));''' (the determiner phrase "a" is the specifier of a noun phrase headed by "boy") = a boy		*'''NS([boy];DP([a]));''' (the determiner phrase "a" is the specifier of a noun phrase headed by "boy") = a boy
	*'''NA("boy";JP("very beautiful");''' (the adjective phrase "very beautiful" is an adjunct in the noun phrase headed by "boy") = very beautiful boy		*'''NA([boy];JP("very beautiful");''' (the adjective phrase "very beautiful" is an adjunct in the noun phrase headed by "boy") = very beautiful boy
	*'''NA("boy";JH("beautiful"));''' (the adjective phrase headed by "beautiful" is an adjunct in the noun phrase headed by "boy") = (very) beautiful boy		*'''NA([boy];JH([beautiful]));''' (the adjective phrase headed by "beautiful" is an adjunct in the noun phrase headed by "boy") = (very) beautiful boy
	*'''NA("boy";JA("beautiful";AP("very"));''' (the adverbial phrase "very" is an adjunct in the adjective phrase headed by "beautiful"; the adjective phrase headed by "beautiful" is an adjunct in the noun phrase headed by "boy") = very beautiful boy		*'''NA([boy];JA([beautiful];AP([very]));''' (the adverbial phrase "very" is an adjunct in the adjective phrase headed by "beautiful"; the adjective phrase headed by "beautiful" is an adjunct in the noun phrase headed by "boy") = very beautiful boy
	*'''NP(NB("boy";JP("very beautiful"));DP("a"));''' (the noun phrase headed by "boy" has an adjunct (the adjective phrase "very beautiful") and a specifier (the determiner phrase "a")) = a very beautiful boy		*'''NP(NB([boy];JP("very beautiful"));DP([a]));''' (the noun phrase headed by "boy" has an adjunct (the adjective phrase "very beautiful") and a specifier (the determiner phrase "a")) = a very beautiful boy

	== Observations ==		== Observations ==