<div dir="ltr">Thanks Ann. That makes sense. I&#39;ll work it into my implementation for cases where it&#39;s optional.</div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 1:07 AM, Ann Copestake <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk" target="_blank">aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
  
    
  
  <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <p>So the reason why the optionality is an issue, if the semantics
      is the same when it&#39;s present or absent, is the desire to make
      sentences which are direct paraphrases of each other have the same
      MRS.  Since that&#39;s not achievable in general, and since there
      often seem to be subtle distinctions between different phrasings,
      it shouldn&#39;t be an absolute principle.  <br>
    </p>
    <p>If it&#39;s not optional, but the semantics can be entirely captured
      by the &quot;although&quot; part, there&#39;s an argument from simplicity to
      just have the &quot;although&quot;.  Again, that&#39;s not absolute, so if the
      &quot;but&quot; part can occur independently, I wouldn&#39;t think it&#39;s worth
      spending a lot of effort making the &quot;but&quot; disappear.  On the other
      hand, if it really just occurs in that construction, I would feel
      inclined not to give it its own semantics.</p>
    <p>All best,<br>
    </p>
    <p>Ann<br>
    </p><div><div class="h5">
    <br>
    <div class="m_-6729882833019005880moz-cite-prefix">On 19/06/2017 20:55, Kristen Howell
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">Thanks Ann and Emily. I think in many cases it is
        not optional to omit the adverb in the main clause. If
        &quot;although&quot; or &quot;if&quot; is present in the subordinate clause &quot;but&quot; or
        &quot;if&quot; is required in the main clause. Ann, I you are suggesting
        that optionality would be a reason for omitting &quot;but&quot;, so if
        it&#39;s not optional, it does require its own EP? Am I interpreting
        that right? I&#39;m inclined to think that if it&#39;s required, it&#39;s
        meaning can be captured by the EP for &quot;although&quot;, but if it&#39;s
        optional, giving &quot;but&quot; its own EP allows us to capture the
        distinction between cases when it is present or absent.</div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Ann
          Copestake <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk" target="_blank">aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk</a>&gt;</span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
              <p>So the question is whether the &quot;but&quot; should be part of
                the semantics?  I think the &quot;although&quot; part clearly has
                to be there.</p>
              <p>Reasoning along the same lines as English &quot;if ...
                then&quot;, the &quot;then&quot; is optional and doesn&#39;t seem to convey
                additional meaning, so if the analogous situation held,
                there would be an argument for omitting the &quot;but&quot;.  <br>
              </p>
              <p>That said, I do see a contrast between:<br>
              </p>
              <p>If they win, I&#39;ll regret saying the manager was an
                idiot.</p>
              <p>If they win, THEN I&#39;ll regret saying the manager was an
                idiot.    <br>
              </p>
              I can imagine that not having anything in the MRS
              corresponding to `then&#39; might make accounting for that
              more difficult.  I&#39;m not suggesting a change in the ERG,
              just thinking it has some possible downsides and shouldn&#39;t
              necessarily be taken as determining what&#39;s done in other
              grammars in this respect.<br>
              <br>
              All best,<br>
              <br>
              Ann
              <div>
                <div class="m_-6729882833019005880h5"><br>
                  <br>
                  <br>
                  <div class="m_-6729882833019005880m_-7103727554260378422moz-cite-prefix">On
                    19/06/2017 18:06, Emily M. Bender wrote:<br>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </div>
              <blockquote type="cite">
                <div>
                  <div class="m_-6729882833019005880h5">
                    <div dir="ltr">Thank you, Ann.  I think one of our
                      questions is whether we should ever treat the
                      adverbs
                      <div>as contentful, and if so what that looks
                        like.  Mandarin gives us several examples of
                        these,</div>
                      <div>including pairs like&quot;虽然 ... 但是&quot; (&#39;although
                        ... but&#39;; I&#39;m not at the office today, so I
                        can&#39;t</div>
                      <div>look through my grammar books).  It seems
                        like rather than treating one (or both) as
                        semantically</div>
                      <div>empty, we might want something like:</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>h1:although(h2,h3)</div>
                      <div>h2:but(h4)<br>
                      </div>
                      <div>h5:main-clause-ltop</div>
                      <div>h6:subord-clause-ltop</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>h4 qeq h5, h3 qeq h6</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>Does that sound sensible?</div>
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      <div>Emily</div>
                    </div>
                    <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
                      <div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at
                        5:25 AM, Ann Copestake <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk" target="_blank">aac10@cl.cam.ac.uk</a>&gt;</span>
                        wrote:<br>
                        <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Kristen,<br>
                          <br>
                          I can discuss the way the MRS might look,
                          though not the details of how you get there.<br>
                          <br>
                          If there&#39;s a semantic relationship between the
                          two clauses, then there needs to be some sort
                          of two-place predicate taking the LTOP of each
                          clause as an argument (usually via a qeq). 
                           If the two elements of the pair always go
                          together, and there is a restricted range of
                          options, this two-place predicate might be the
                          only element of the semantics.  If both
                          elements are adverbial, the semantics might
                          have to be associated with the construction
                          rather than trying to do it via unusual
                          semantics for an adverb.<br>
                          <br>
                          Looking at the ERG demo and delphin-viz, it
                          seems that if_x_then is used for a range of
                          situations, including ones without any lexical
                          marking - e.g.,<br>
                          <br>
                          &quot;Had I slept, it rained.&quot; (actually I find
                          that ungrammatical, but never mind ...  &quot;Had I
                          slept, it would have rained.&quot; is fine)<br>
                          <br>
                          In terms of the actual semantics, one could
                          say there are two things going on with
                          if_x_then - one is a causality relationship
                          and the other is a hypotheticality marking.<br>
                          <br>
                          &quot;I slept, so it rained.&quot;<br>
                          <br>
                          is just causality.   So one could analyse<br>
                          <br>
                          if X then Y.<br>
                          <br>
                          as (schematically)<br>
                          <br>
                          cause(hyp(X),hyp(Y))<br>
                          <br>
                          and<br>
                          <br>
                          X so Y<br>
                          <br>
                          as<br>
                          <br>
                          cause(X,Y)<br>
                          <br>
                          I don&#39;t think this would be a good idea for
                          English (too much decomposition, so it
                          probably doesn&#39;t capture the nuances), but it
                          might be more convenient for other languages.<br>
                          <br>
                          It is not the case that we can always capture
                          the meaning directly for English.  For
                          instance:<br>
                          <br>
                          &quot;I slept and, as a consequence, it rained.&quot;<br>
                          <br>
                          implies causality, but we won&#39;t capture that
                          directly in the MRS.  I&#39;d say that what&#39;s
                          going on is that `and&#39; gives a two place
                          relationship of the right form, but highly
                          underspecified.  &quot;as a consequence&quot; means it
                          has to be interpreted causally.<br>
                          <br>
                          In context:<br>
                          <br>
                          &quot;I slept and it rained.&quot;<br>
                          <br>
                          can do the same thing.<br>
                          <br>
                          To sum up, what I&#39;m saying is that I think
                          you&#39;ll always want some type of two-place
                          clausal connective, but it might be
                          underspecified to some extent with additional
                          meaning conveyed via additional predications
                          on individual clauses.<br>
                          <br>
                          All best,<br>
                          <br>
                          Ann<br>
                          <br>
                          <br>
                          <br>
                        </blockquote>
                      </div>
                      <br>
                      <br clear="all">
                      <div><br>
                      </div>
                      -- <br>
                      <div class="m_-6729882833019005880m_-7103727554260378422gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">
                        <div dir="ltr">
                          <div>
                            <div dir="ltr">
                              <div>
                                <div dir="ltr">Emily M. Bender<br>
                                  Professor, <span style="font-size:12.8px">Department
                                    of Linguistics</span></div>
                                <div dir="ltr">Check out CLMS on
                                  facebook! <a href="http://www.facebook.com/uwclma" target="_blank">http://www.facebook.com/uwclma</a><br>
                                </div>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </div>
                <div id="m_-6729882833019005880m_-7103727554260378422DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
                  <table style="border-top:1px solid #d3d4de">
                    <tbody>
                      <tr>
                        <td style="width:55px;padding-top:13px"><a href="http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=link&amp;utm_campaign=sig-email&amp;utm_content=emailclient" target="_blank"><img src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png" alt="" style="width:46px;height:29px" height="29" width="46"></a></td>
                        <td style="width:470px;padding-top:12px;color:#41424e;font-size:13px;font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;line-height:18px">Virus-free.
                          <a href="http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&amp;utm_source=link&amp;utm_campaign=sig-email&amp;utm_content=emailclient" style="color:#4453ea" target="_blank">www.avg.com</a>
                        </td>
                      </tr>
                    </tbody>
                  </table>
                  <a href="#m_-6729882833019005880_m_-7103727554260378422_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1" height="1"> </a></div>
              </blockquote>
              <br>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
  </div></div></div>

</blockquote></div><br></div>