[matrix] One quick question

[Emily M. Bender]

Hi Nidhi,

This kind of bug is harder to track down: you have a case
where you're missing a constraint, rather than a case of an
extra constraint.  You need to add a constraint to the rule
or lexical entry that licenses the intended input of the lexical
rule so that it is not a possible daughter of a phrase structure rule.

The lexical rule sets produced by the customization system
use the feature INFLECTED (now complex, not boolean) to
track whether all required rules have applied.  Is the rule
that is not forced to apply one that you have added since
customizing your grammar?

Emily


On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 1:04 AM, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi31121979 at gmail.com> wrote:
> I have tried to solve it by changing the feminine oblique suffix to iii
> instead of ii . Earlier it was the same for dir and obl. Is that the right
> way of doing it or is there another way ?
>
> Regards
> Nidhi
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 1:22 PM, Nidhi Sharma <nidhi31121979 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Antske
>>
>> In order to account for coordination, I have changed the lexicon. I have
>> also tried parsing sentences, however I am unable to solve one issue.
>>
>> The grammar is wrongly giving a parse for
>>
>> larkene                   aur larkii                       chiinkaa
>>
>> boy (singmasc obl)  and girl (sing masc obl) sneeze (perf)
>>
>> boy and girl sneezed
>>
>> It also gives the correct sentence,
>>
>> larkene                   aur larkiine                      chiinkaa
>>
>> boy (singmasc obl)  and girl (sing masc obl) sneeze (perf)
>>
>> boy and girl sneezed
>>
>> I found out that actually the erg-lex rule is not getting applying to
>> larkii in the first example . I have tried really hard but I am unable to
>> understand why.
>>
>> It is giving all other sentences correctly.
>>
>> I really request you to please help me solve this one
>>
>> Any suggestions would be welcome.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Nidhi
>>
>> Note: Given below is the chart dump for the two parses - first one is
>> correct and the second one is wrong
>>
>> chart dump:larkene aur larkii chiinkaa
>> 0-1 [1] ERGATIVE-LEX-RULE => (larkene)  []
>> 0-1 [4] BARE-NP-PHRASE => (larkene)  [1]
>> 1-2 [5] CONJ-LEX => (aur)  []
>> 1-3 [9] NP1-BOTTOM-COORD-RULE => (aur larkii)  [5 8]
>> 1-3 [10] N1-BOTTOM-COORD-RULE => (aur larkii)  [5 6]
>> 1-3 [15] NP1-BOTTOM-COORD-RULE => (aur larkii)  [5 14]
>> 1-3 [16] N1-BOTTOM-COORD-RULE => (aur larkii)  [5 13]
>> 2-3 [6] SINGFEMDIR-LEX-RULE => (larkii)  []
>> 2-3 [8] BARE-NP-PHRASE => (larkii)  [6]
>> 2-3 [11] SINGFEMOBL-LEX-RULE => (larkii)  []
>> 2-3 [13] NOMINATIVE-LEX-RULE => (larkii)  [11]
>> 2-3 [14] BARE-NP-PHRASE => (larkii)  [13]
>> 3-4 [17] ASP1-LEX-RULE => (chiinkaa)  []
>>
>> > chart dump:  larkene aur larkii chiinkaa
>> 0-1 [1] ERGATIVE-LEX-RULE => (larkene)  []
>> 0-1 [4] BARE-NP-PHRASE => (larkene)  [1]
>> 1-2 [5] CONJ-LEX => (aur)  []
>> 0-3 [13] NP1-TOP-COORD-RULE => (larkene aur larkii)  [4 12]
>> 0-3 [14] NP1-MID-COORD-RULE => (larkene aur larkii)  [4 12]
>> 1-3 [10] NP1-BOTTOM-COORD-RULE => (aur larkii)  [5 9]
>> 1-3 [12] NP1-BOTTOM-COORD-RULE => (aur larkii)  [5 11]
>> 1-3 [18] NP1-BOTTOM-COORD-RULE => (aur larkii)  [5 17]
>> 2-3 [6] SINGFEMOBL-LEX-RULE => (larkii)  []
>> 2-3 [8] NOMINATIVE-LEX-RULE => (larkii)  [6]
>> 2-3 [9] BARE-NP-PHRASE => (larkii)  [8]
>> 2-3 [11] BARE-NP-PHRASE => (larkii)  [6]
>> 2-3 [15] SINGFEMDIR-LEX-RULE => (larkii)  []
>> 2-3 [17] BARE-NP-PHRASE => (larkii)  [15]
>> 0-4 [21] SUBJ-HEAD-PHRASE => (larkene aur larkii chiinkaa)  [13 19]
>> 2-4 [22] SUBJ-HEAD-PHRASE => (larkii chiinkaa)  [11 19]
>> 3-4 [19] ASP1-LEX-RULE => (chiinkaa)  []
>>
>
>