;;; -*- Mode: tdl; Coding: utf-8; -*- ;;; ;;; Copyright (c) 1994-2018 ;;; Dan Flickinger, Rob Malouf, Emily M. Bender ;;; see LICENSE for conditions ;;; ;;; auxverbs.tdl ;;; ;;; The auxiliary verb system for English ;;; ;;; Created: Rob Malouf, 17-Nov-1994 ;;; ;;; $Id$ ;; DPF 2020-05-07 - Moved VFORM fin to will_aux_word, so we can use this ;; type for non-finite (robust) verb types. Same for TAM indic_tam. ;; DPF 2021-06-09 - Push supertype basic_two_arg down to subtypes, to enable ;; robust copula taking base VP with or without gap, to get as robust both ;; "they were arrive" and "they were devour" ;; DPF 2021-06-24 - Removed recently added COMPS..SLASH *arglist* since it ;; blocks "tomorrow we will arise". ;; will_aux_synsem := basic_aux_verb & ssr_subst & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ AUX +, PRD -, MINORS [ MIN #min, ALTMIN #altmin ] ], POSTHD +, VAL [ SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT nomp_cat_nom_min, CONT.HOOK.LTOP #ltop, CONJ cnil ], OPT - ] >, COMPS < synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT vp_cat & [ HEAD verb & [ VFORM fin_or_bse, PRD -, MINORS.ALTMIN #altmin ]], CONT.HOOK.LTOP #ltop, CONJ cnil ], OPT - ] > ] ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL [ LBL #ltop, PRED #min ] ]. will_aux_word := aux_verb_word_super & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ VFORM fin, TAM indic_tam ] ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; basic_will_aux_pos_synsem := will_aux_synsem & basic_two_arg & [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.COMPS < canonical_or_unexpressed & [ LOCAL.CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #hand, INDEX #event ] ] >, CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #hand, INDEX #event ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL.LBL #hand ]. will_aux_pos_synsem := basic_will_aux_pos_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD.TAM.TENSE #tense, VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT vp_bse_unspec_cat ], CONT.HOOK.INDEX.E.TENSE #tense ] ]. will_aux_pos_lex_e := will_aux_word & [ SYNSEM will_aux_pos_synsem ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; will_aux_inv_synsem := basic_two_arg & basic_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ AUX -, VFORM fin, TAM #tam, MINORS.MIN v_event_rel ], VAL [ SUBJ < canonical_synsem & [ --MIN independent_rel, LOCAL [ CAT basic_prd_cat & [ HEAD v_or_a_or_p & [ MOD < anti_synsem & [ --SIND #sind ] >, AUX - ], VAL.SUBJ *olist* ], CONT.HOOK [ INDEX event & #event, XARG #sind & individual_min ] ], OPT - ] >, SPR < anti_synsem_min >, COMPS < canonical_or_unexpressed & [ LOCAL [ CAT vp_bse_unspec_cat & [ VAL.SUBJ < [ LOCAL.CAT basic_prd_cat & [ HEAD.AUX - ]]>], CONJ cnil, CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #hand, XARG #sind ] ], OPT -, --SIND #xarg ] > ] ], CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #hand, INDEX #event & [ E #tam ], XARG #xarg ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ] ]. ; inverted `will': "also included will be cats" v_vp_will-inv_le := aux_verb_word_super & """ Only aux `will', inverted Also included will be C. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM will_aux_inv_synsem ]. will_aux_pos_norm_synsem := will_aux_pos_synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM [ TENSE future, MOOD indicative ], VAL.COMPS < [ LOCAL.CAT vp_bse_unspec_cat & [ HEAD.TAM.MOOD indicative ] ] > ] ]. v_vp_will-p_le := will_aux_pos_lex_e & """ Cmps VP(bse), aux, pos B will sing. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM will_aux_pos_norm_synsem ]. v_vp_will-p-cx_le := will_aux_pos_lex_e & contracted_aux_word & """ Cmps VP(bse), aux, pos contract B'll sing. """ [ SYNSEM will_aux_pos_norm_synsem ]. basic_will_aux_neg_synsem := will_aux_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD.TAM [ MOOD indicative ], VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.TAM.MOOD indicative, CONT.HOOK.LTOP #chand ] ], CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #nevent ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel ]. will_aux_neg_synsem := basic_will_aux_neg_synsem & basic_two_arg & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD.TAM.TENSE #tense & future, VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT vp_bse_unspec_cat & [ HEAD.TAM.TENSE #tense ] ], CONT.HOOK.INDEX.E.TENSE #tense ] ]. va_will_neg_lexent := will_aux_word & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM will_aux_neg_synsem ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; v_vp_will-n_le := va_will_neg_lexent & """ Cmps VP(bse), aux, neg contract B won't sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ]. v_vp_will-n-niv_le := va_will_neg_lexent & aux_not_contr """ Cmps VP(bse), aux, neg c, no inv, no overt complement B'll not. """ . ;;; Modal verbs v_vp_mdl-p_lexent := modal_pos_indic_lexent & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.TENSE present ]. v_vp_mdl-p_le := v_vp_mdl-p_lexent """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, pos B can sing. """ . v_vp_must-p_le := modal_pos_indic_lexent & """ Cmps VP(bse), must, pos B must sing. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.TENSE present, ALTS.ADVADD - ]. v_vp_mdl-p-cx_le := modal_pos_indic_lexent & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps VP(bse), aux, pos contract B'd sing. """ . ; could v_vp_mdl-p-pst_le := modal_pos_lex_ent & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, pos, past B could sing yesterday. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.TENSE past, ALTS.CSAI - ]. ; would - unsp for MOOD ;; DPF 2017-09-27 - Also underspecify for tense. ;; v_vp_mdl-p-unsp_le := modal_pos_lex_ent & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, pos,unsp md B would sing tomorrow. """ [ INFLECTD +, ALTS.CSAI - ]. ; 'd rather v_vp_mdl-p-rather_le := basic_modal_pos_lex_ent & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, pos, rather, non-inv We'd rather not. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CONT.RELS , ALTS.CSAI - ]. v_vp_mdl-p-niv_lexent := modal_pos_indic_lexent & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ TAM.TENSE present, INV - ] ]. v_vp_mdl-p-niv_le := v_vp_mdl-p-niv_lexent """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, pos, no inv B better go. """ . v_vp_mdl-p-sv_le := modal_pos_lex_ent & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, pos, sbjctv B might sing. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.TENSE present ]. v_vp_mdl-p-inv_le := modal_pos_indic_lexent & """ Cmps VP(bse), inverted Need B sing? """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ TAM.TENSE present, INV + ], ALTS.SAI + ]. v_vp_oght-p_le := pos_ought_verb_word & add_cont & """ Cmps VP(inf), modal, pos B ought to sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.TENSE present ]. v_vp_oght-ellip_le := ought_ellip_verb_word & add_cont & """ Unexpressed comp VP(inf), modal, pos B ought (not). """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.TENSE present ]. v_vp_oght-p-pst_le := past_ought_verb_word & add_cont & """ Cmps VP(inf), modal, pos, past B used to sing. """ [ INFLECTD +, ALTS [ SAI -, CSAI - ], SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.TENSE past ]. v_vp_qsmd_le := quasimodal_word & """ Cmps VP(inf), quasi-modal B is going to sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ VFORM prp, PRD + ] ]. v_vp_qsmd-psp_le := quasimodal_psp_word """ Cmps VP(inf), quasi-modal, psp B has got to sing. """ . v_vp_qsmd-psp-bse_le := quasimodal_psp_bse_word """ Cmps VP(bse), quasi-modal, psp B has gotta sing. """ . ;; Block from nom-gerund rule ;; v_vp_qsmd-bse_le := quasimodal_bse_word & """ Cmps VP(bse), quasi-modal B is gonna sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ VFORM prp, PRD + ], ALTS.NGER - ]. ; 'didn't he used to sing?' v_vp_nfin-mod_lexent := nonfin_modal_word. v_vp_nfin-mod_le := v_vp_nfin-mod_lexent """ Cmps VP(inf), s-s-rais, nonfin Didn't C used to sing? """ . generic_modal_neg_basic_synsem := aux_verb_ssr & [ LOCAL [ CONT [ RELS , HCONS ] ], LKEYS [ KEYREL #keyrel & [ PRED modal_rel, ARG0 non_conj_event, ARG1 #arghand ], ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel ] ]. generic_modal_neg_basic := aux_verb_word_super & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM generic_modal_neg_basic_synsem, ALTS.CSAI - ]. generic_modal_neg_super_synsem := generic_modal_neg_basic_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.KCMP.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.LTOP #chand, CONT [ HOOK.LTOP #ltop, RELS , HCONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL.LBL #khand ]. generic_modal_neg_super := generic_modal_neg_basic & [ SYNSEM generic_modal_neg_super_synsem ]. must_modal_neg_synsem := generic_modal_neg_basic_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.KCMP.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.LTOP #chand, CONT [ HOOK.LTOP #khand, RELS , HCONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL.LBL #khand ]. must_modal_neg := generic_modal_neg_basic & [ SYNSEM must_modal_neg_synsem ]. generic_modal_neg := generic_modal_neg_super & aux_verb_word & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.POSTHD + ]. modal_neg_synsem := modal_verb_synsem & generic_modal_neg_super_synsem. va_modal_neg_lexent := modal_verb_word & generic_modal_neg & [ SYNSEM modal_neg_synsem & [ LKEYS.KEYREL.PRED modal_rel ] ]. must_neg_synsem := generic_modal_verb_super_synsem & must_modal_neg_synsem & bse_aux_verb_ssr & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ PRD -, VFORM fin ], POSTHD +, VAL [ SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT nomp_cat_nom_min, CONJ cnil ], --SIND basic_non_event, OPT - ] >, COMPS.FIRST [ LOCAL.CAT vp_bse_cat, --SIND.SF basic-prop ] ] ], CONT psoa ], LKEYS.KEYREL.PRED modal_rel ]. va_must_neg_lexent := generic_modal_verb_word_super & must_modal_neg & bse_aux_verb_word & [ SYNSEM must_neg_synsem ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; v_vp_mdl-n_le := va_modal_neg_lexent & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, neg-cntrct B can't sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM.TENSE present, VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; v_vp_must-n_le := va_must_neg_lexent & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal must, neg-cntrct (idiosyncratic scope) B mustn't sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM.TENSE present, VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; ; couldn't v_vp_mdl-n-pst_le := va_modal_neg_lexent & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, neg-c, past B couldn't sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM.TENSE past, VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ]. v_vp_mdl-n-niv_le := va_modal_neg_lexent & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal,neg-c,no inv, no overt comp B hadn't better leave. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD [ TAM.TENSE present, INV - ], VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ]. modal_neg_verb_synsem := modal_verb_synsem & generic_modal_neg_super_synsem. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; v_vp_mdl-n-sv_le := modal_verb_word & generic_modal_neg & """ Cmps VP(bse), modal, neg-c B shouldn't sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD [ TAM.TENSE present ], VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ]. ought_verb_neg_synsem := ought_verb_synsem & generic_modal_neg_super_synsem. v_vp_oght-n_le := ought_verb_word & generic_modal_neg_super & """ Cmps VP(inf), modal, neg-c B oughtn't to sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ TAM.TENSE present ] ]. ; *** Auxiliary DO *** ; For tag questions we need the MIN of auxiliary _do_ to match all main verbs. ; The supertype for this is v_event_rel. Originally, it had been no_rel, to ; block _do_'s being a complement of other auxiliaries. On the hypothesis ; that auxiliary _do_ in fact lacks a non-finite form all together, the ; do_aux_word type is constrained to VFORM fin. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; ; 2020-12-10 basic_do_aux_synsem := ssr_two_arg_verb & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ AUX +, TAM [ TENSE #tense, ASPECT #aspect, MOOD indicative ], MINORS.MIN nonaux_event_rel ], VAL [ SUBJ < synsem & [ OPT -, LOCAL [ CAT nomp_cat_nom_min & [ HEAD #subjhd & [ MINORS #minors ] ], CONJ cnil ] ] >, COMPS < canonical_or_unexpressed & [ LOCAL [ CAT vp_cat & [ VAL.SUBJ.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ MINORS #minors ], RSUBJHD #subjhd ], CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #cltop, INDEX #index & [ E [ TENSE #tense, ASPECT #aspect ]]], CONJ cnil ], --SIND #index, OPT - ] > ], POSTHD + ], CONT psoa & [ HOOK.INDEX [ E.MOOD indicative ] ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL [ LBL #cltop, PRED mod_role_rel ] ]. do_aux_synsem := basic_do_aux_synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST [ --MIN nonaux_event_rel, LOCAL.CAT vp_bse_unspec_cat & [ HEAD.AUX - ] ] ]. do_aux_word := noncqr-hm & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM basic_do_aux_synsem, ALTS.CSAI - ]. ; Removed raise-cont from parents, to allow ARG0 to not be identified with the ; comp-dtr's ARG0 - is in conflict with collapsing of base and fin-non3rdsg ; forms, given that we encode VIT attributes in the event feature structure. ; Sample problem: "Kim does sleep" ; DPF 6-Feb-02 - Changed MOOD indicative to indicative* in order to support ; coordination of e.g. yes-no questions and modal_subj declaratives. Same in ; type do_aux_neg_pres. ; DPF 13-Mar-02 - But this allowed "want" version of "like" to be complement. ; So instead make do_aux_word stamp indicative* for its own MOOD, and not ; copy it up from complement dtr. Then require complement dtr to be simply ; MOOD indicative. And by the way broke link from "do" to bse_aux_verb_word ; which insists on making the aux verb's TAM identical to its INDEX, which we ; can't have for "do". ; 2020-12-10 basic_do_fin_synsem := basic_do_aux_synsem & [ LOCAL local & [ CAT [ HEAD [ VFORM fin, PRD - ], VAL [ SUBJ < [ OPT -, LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.LTOP #hand ] >, COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #hand, INDEX #event ] ] ], CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #hand, INDEX #event ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ] ]. do_fin_synsem := basic_do_fin_synsem & do_aux_synsem. do_fin := do_aux_word & raise_cont & [ SYNSEM do_fin_synsem ]. ; 2020-12-10 basic_do_aux_neg_synsem := basic_do_aux_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ PRD -, VFORM fin ], VAL [ SUBJ.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.LTOP #chand, COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.LTOP #chand ] ], CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #nevent ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel ]. do_aux_neg_synsem := basic_do_aux_neg_synsem & do_aux_synsem. do_aux_neg_word := do_aux_word & [ SYNSEM do_aux_neg_synsem ]. do_aux_neg_aux_synsem := basic_do_aux_neg_synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT vp_bse_unspec_cat ]. ;; Allow AUX + complements, to get "why don't you be in charge?" do_aux_neg_aux_word := do_aux_word & [ SYNSEM basic_do_aux_neg_synsem ]. ;; DPF 2018-12-04 - Changed identity of concord and agreement, moving ;; SUBJ..--SIND.PNG to SUBJ..AGR.PNG, to allow *the majority of cats sleep*. ;; basic_do_pres_synsem := basic_do_fin_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, ASPECT no_aspect ], VAL.SUBJ < [ LOCAL.AGR.PNG #png ] > ], AGR.PNG #png ] ]. do_pres_synsem := basic_do_pres_synsem & do_fin_synsem. do_pres := do_fin & [ SYNSEM do_pres_synsem ]. ;; DPF 2018-12-04 - Moved SUBJ..PN -3s to AGR since sem.agreement was blocking ;; *the majority of cats sleep*, where AGR does the job of ensuring agreement. ;; v_vp_does_le := do_pres & """ Cmps VP(bse), do, pres 3sg B does not sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ]. v_vp_do-f_le := do_pres & """ Cmps VP(bse), do, pres non3sg We do not sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -3s ] ]. v_vp_did_le := do_fin & """ Cmps VP(bse), do, past B did not sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ TAM past_or_subj_tam ] ]. do_aux_neg_pres := do_aux_neg_word & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, ASPECT no_aspect ] ]. ;; Allow AUX + complements, to get "why don't you be in charge?" do_aux_neg_aux_pres := do_aux_neg_aux_word & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, ASPECT no_aspect ] ]. v_vp_did-n_le := do_aux_neg_word & """ Cmps VP(bse), do, neg-c, past B didn't sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM past_or_subj_tam ]. ; ERB (31-03-97) The agreement on do, but not have and be, was previously ; taken care of in lexicon.tdl. I am making these types to move that ; information here for symmetry. The rest of the do paradigm seems ; to be generated by lexical rules, so these two are the only types. ;; DPF 2024-04-16 - Change parent from do_aux_neg_pres to do_aux_neg_aux_pres ;; so we can also get "why doesn't he be more tolerant?" v_vp_does-n_le := do_aux_neg_aux_pres & """ Cmps VP(bse), do, neg-c, pres3sg B doesn't sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ]. ;; DPF 2024-04-12 - Relax the usual constraint on auxiliary "do" to block ;; aux-VP complements (e.g. "*they do be happy"), in order to get "why don't ;; you be in charge?". ;; v_vp_do-f-n_le := do_aux_neg_aux_pres & """ Cmps VP(bse), do, neg-c,pr n3sg We don't sing. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -3s ] ]. ; *** Perfect HAVE *** ; 2020-12-10 ;; DPF 2024-04-12 - Relaxed parent from aux_verb_ssr to basic_aux_verb_ssr ;; in order to get locative inversion with perfect, as in ;; "in the corner had been standing a broom" basic_have_aux_verb_synsem := basic_aux_verb_ssr & [ LOCAL [ CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #lbl ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL [ PRED have_aux_rel, LBL #lbl ] ]. have_aux_verb_synsem := basic_have_aux_verb_synsem & basic_psp_aux_verb_ssr & [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.ASPECT.PRF + ]. have_aux_word := basic_aux_verb_word & [ SYNSEM have_aux_verb_synsem ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; ; 2020-12-10 have_aux_pos_synsem := have_aux_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.COMPS < canonical_or_unexpressed & [ LOCAL.CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #hand, INDEX #event ] ] >, CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #hand, INDEX #event ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ] ]. have_aux_pos_lex_entry := have_aux_word & [ SYNSEM have_aux_pos_synsem ]. ;; DPF 2022-05-16 - Constrain COMPS.FIRST to non_canonical to allow ;; contracted negated auxiliaries to appear either with no complement (elided) ;; or with gapped complement, to get both "We'll not." and "A genius, he's not." ;; while avoiding redundant analysis of "He's not a cat." ;; aux_not_contr := sign & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.INV -, VAL.COMPS.FIRST non_canonical & [ OPT - ] ] ]. ; 2020-12-10 have_aux_neg_synsem := have_aux_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ VFORM fin, PRD - ], POSTHD +, VAL [ SUBJ < [ OPT - ] >, COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.LTOP #chand ] ], CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #nevent ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel ]. have_aux_neg_lex_entry := have_aux_word & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM have_aux_neg_synsem, ALTS.CSAI - ]. have_fin_synsem := have_aux_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL local & [ CAT [ HEAD [ VFORM fin, PRD - ], POSTHD +, VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL [ CONJ cnil ], OPT - ] > ], CONT psoa ]]. have_fin := have_aux_word & [ SYNSEM have_fin_synsem ]. have_pres := have_fin & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, ASPECT.PRF + ], ALTS.CSAI - ]. have_past := have_fin & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM [ TENSE past, ASPECT.PRF +, MOOD indicative ], ALTS.CSAI - ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; have_subj := have_fin & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM subjnct_tam & [ ASPECT.PRF +, MOOD subjunctive ], VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ]. ;; We make "having" be [PRD -] to block "Kim is having fallen" and (the ;; restrictive reading of) "The book having fallen is red". We will also ;; exclude possibly grammatical examples like "anyone having seen that movie" ;; but there are no attested instances of these in the full BNC. ;; DPF 29-oct-06 - Remove this PRD - constraint, since it also blocks ;; depictives as in "We left, having finished." Instead, block "is having" ;; by adding NORM no_rel. Maybe FIX? v_vp_have-prp_le := have_aux_pos_lex_entry & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, prp Having sung, B left. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ VFORM prp, TAM.ASPECT.PROGR +, MINORS.NORM no_rel ] ]. va_have_bse_lexent := have_aux_pos_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ PRD -, VFORM bse_only, TAM.ASPECT.PRF + ], VAL.SUBJ < unexpressed >, POSTHD + ], CONT psoa ] ]. v_vp_have-bse_le := va_have_bse_lexent & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, bse B will have sung. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_vp_have-bse-cx_le := va_have_bse_lexent & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps VP(psp), have, bse, contr We would've sung. """ . has_aux_lex_ent := have_aux_pos_lex_entry & have_pres & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ] > ]. v_vp_has_le := has_aux_lex_ent & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, 3sg B has sung. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_vp_has-cx_le := has_aux_lex_ent & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps VP(psp), have, 3sg, contr B's sung. """ . have_fin_aux_lex_ent := have_aux_pos_lex_entry & have_pres & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -3s ] ]. v_vp_have-f_le := have_fin_aux_lex_ent & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, n3sg We have sung. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_vp_have-f-cx_le := have_fin_aux_lex_ent & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps VP(psp), have, n3sg, contr We've sung. """ . have_pos_fin_synsem := have_aux_pos_synsem & have_fin_synsem. had_aux_lex_ent := have_aux_pos_lex_entry & have_past & [ SYNSEM have_pos_fin_synsem ]. v_vp_had-sv_le := have_aux_pos_lex_entry & have_subj & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, subjtv If we had sung, B would've """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM have_pos_fin_synsem ]. v_vp_had_le := had_aux_lex_ent & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, past B had sung. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_vp_had-cx_le := had_aux_lex_ent & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps VP(psp), have, past, contr B'd sung already. """ . ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; v_vp_has-n_le := have_aux_neg_lex_entry & have_pres & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, 3sg, neg-c B hasn't sung. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL [ AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ], CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ]. v_vp_has-n-niv_le := have_aux_neg_lex_entry & have_pres & aux_not_contr & """ Cmps VP(psp), have,3sg,ng-c,ninv, no overt comp B's not. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ]. have_aux_neg_fin_synsem := have_aux_neg_synsem & have_fin_synsem. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; v_vp_have-f-n_le := have_aux_neg_lex_entry & have_pres & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, n3sg, neg-c We haven't sung. """ [ SYNSEM have_aux_neg_fin_synsem & [ LOCAL [ AGR.PNG png & [ PN -3s ], CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ] ]. v_vp_have-n-niv_le := have_aux_neg_lex_entry & have_pres & aux_not_contr & """ Cmps VP(psp), have,n3sg,ngc,ninv, no overt comp We've not. """ [ SYNSEM have_aux_neg_fin_synsem & [ LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -3s ] ] ]. ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; v_vp_had-n_le := have_aux_neg_lex_entry & have_past & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, past, neg-c B hadn't sung. """ [ SYNSEM have_aux_neg_fin_synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST canonical_or_unexpressed ] ]. v_vp_had-n-niv_le := have_aux_neg_lex_entry & have_past & aux_not_contr & """ Cmps VP(psp), have,past,ngc,ninv, no overt complement B'd not. """ [ SYNSEM have_aux_neg_fin_synsem ]. v_vp_had-n-sv_le := have_aux_neg_lex_entry & have_subj & """ Cmps VP(psp), have, subjtv,neg-c If we hadn't sung, B'd've """ [ SYNSEM have_aux_neg_fin_synsem ]. ;; British possessive `have' ;; ; 2020-12-10 have_poss_aux_verb_lex := noncqr-hm & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM aux_np_verb & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ PRD -, VFORM fin ], VAL [ SUBJ < [ LOCAL [ CAT nomp_cat_min & [ HEAD.CASE nom ], CONT.HOOK.LTOP #ltop, CONJ cnil ], OPT - ] >, COMPS < synsem & [ OPT -, LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.--BARE -, CONT.HOOK.LTOP #ltop ] ] >, SPCMPS < > ] ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL [ LBL #ltop, PRED "_have_v_1_rel" ] ], DIALECT br ]. ; 2020-12-10 have_poss_aux_pos := have_poss_aux_verb_lex & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.INV +, CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #event ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop ] ] ]. ; 2020-12-10 have_poss_aux_neg := have_poss_aux_verb_lex & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL.CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #nevent ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ], LKEYS [ KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #khand ], ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel & arg01_relation & [ LBL #ltop, PRED neg_rel, ARG0 #nevent & non_conj_event, ARG1 #arghand ] ] ] ]. v_np_has-aux_le := have_poss_aux_pos & """ British possessive `has', inverted Has she a reservation? """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, ASPECT [ PROGR -, PRF - ] ], VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ] > ], ALTS.CSAI - ]. v_np_have-aux_lexent := have_poss_aux_pos & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, ASPECT [ PROGR -, PRF - ] ], VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -3s ] ] > ], ALTS.CSAI - ]. v_np_have-aux_le := v_np_have-aux_lexent """ British possessive `have', inverted Have we a reservation? """ . v_np_had-aux_le := have_poss_aux_pos & """ British possessive `had', inverted Had she a reservation? """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM [ TENSE past, ASPECT [ PROGR -, PRF - ], MOOD indicative ], ALTS.CSAI - ]. v_np_had-aux-sbj_le := have_poss_aux_pos & """ British possessive `had', inverted, subjunctive Had she a reservation, she could be seated. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ TAM [ TENSE past, ASPECT [ PROGR -, PRF - ], MOOD subjunctive ], INV + ] ]. v_np_has-aux-n_le := have_poss_aux_neg & """ British possessive contracted negative `hasn't' He hasn't a clue. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, ASPECT [ PROGR -, PRF - ] ], VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ] > ] ]. v_np_have-aux-n_le := have_poss_aux_neg & """ British possessive contracted negative `haven't' They haven't a clue. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, ASPECT [ PROGR -, PRF - ] ], VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -3s ] ] > ] ]. v_np_had-aux-n_le := have_poss_aux_neg & """ British possessive contracted negative `hadn't' They hadn't a clue. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM [ TENSE past, ASPECT [ PROGR -, PRF - ], MOOD indicative ] ]. ; *** should of *** ;; DPF 2016-12-02 - Generalized COMPS.FIRST from canonical_synsem to ;; canonical_or_unexpressed, so ellipsis rule can require unexpressed ;; modal_of_synsem := psp_aux_verb_ssr & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ VFORM fin, PRD -, TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE past, ASPECT.PRF + ] ], VAL [ SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT nomp_cat_nom_min, CONJ cnil ], OPT - ] >, COMPS < canonical_or_unexpressed & [ LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.LTOP #chand ] > ] ], CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #hand, INDEX #index ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel ]. v_vp_mdl-of_le := psp_aux_verb_word & """ Cmps VP(psp), modal+of B should of sung. B coulda sung. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM modal_of_synsem, ALTS.CSAI - ]. ; *** Generic BE *** ;; DPF 2022-04-23 - SUBJ..CAT nomp_cat_min over-constrains HEAD to supnoun, ;; so pushed down to subtypes, to allow "in the corner was standing a coatrack" be_verb := noncqr-hm & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.VAL [ SUBJ < synsem_min & [ LOCAL [ CONJ cnil ] ] >, COMPS < synsem & [ OPT - ], ... >, SPCMPS < > ] ]. ; DPF 20-Oct-01 - Changed [TAM.ASPECT strict_nonprf] to nonprf, since it was ; blocking coordination of "Kim has arrived and Sandy is happy". This change ; now allows "Kim is being hiring Browne" but we can live with it for now. ;; ;; DPF 2022-04-23 - SUBJ..CAT nomp_cat_nom_min over-constrains HEAD to supnoun, ;; so instead just constrain CASE. be_fin := be_verb & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ VFORM fin, PRD -, TAM.ASPECT.PRF - ], POSTHD +, VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.CASE nom, CONJ cnil ], OPT - ] > ], CONT psoa ] ]. be_pres := be_fin & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE present, MOOD indicative ], ALTS.CSAI - ]. be_past := be_fin & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM indic_tam & [ TENSE past ], ALTS.CSAI - ]. ;; DPF 2022-11-07 - Let's see if we can survive with no extraction from ;; subjunctive copula sentences. ;; be_subj := be_fin & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM subjnct_tam, NONLOC.SLASH.LIST < > ] ]. ; Make be_prespart unmarked for PRD so we can block the identity-copula reading ; for "Kim is being good" while allowing the predicative-copula reading. ; 20-Oct-01 - Added POSTHD + to block pre-noun modification as in "*the being ; Kim person arrived" ; Added SLASH 0-dlist to avoid endless recursion when generating, since we no ; longer block "Kim is being silly", and don't want to use VFORM to block ; "Kim is being arriving" since that would put VFORM on type subst (too high), ; even though we'd like to exclude this example. So we add COMPS..AUX - to ; prevent "*Kim is being being silly", which avoids the worst case. ; DPF 18-oct-03 - Also add COMPS..ASPECT.PROGR - to block *Kim is being singing ; DPF 24-feb-09 - Add NORM norm_rel to prevent N-V compound for "human being" ;; DPF 13-05-09 - Re 20-Oct-01 - Imposing SLASH 0-dlist prevents analysis of ;; e.g. *happily, kim is being admired*, and it seems that we avoid recursion ;; in generation. so removing this constraint. ;; be_prespart := be_verb & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM [ LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD [ VFORM prp, INV -, MINORS.NORM norm_rel ], VAL.COMPS < [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.AUX - ], ... >, POSTHD + ] ] ]. be_pastpart := be_verb & [ ORTH < "been" >, INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ TAM.ASPECT.PRF +, PRD -, INV - ], POSTHD + ], CONT psoa ] ]. ; 2020-12-10 be_neg := sign & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM lex_synsem & [ LOCAL.CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #nevent ], HCONS.LIST < qeq & [ HARG #arghand, LARG #khand ], ... > ], LKEYS [ KEYREL.LBL #khand, ALT2KEYREL arg01_relation & [ LBL #ltop, PRED neg_rel, ARG0 #nevent & non_conj_event, ARG1 #arghand ] ] ] ]. be_be_lex_entry := be_verb & [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD [ PRD -, TAM.ASPECT.PRF -, INV - ], VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ OPT -, LOCAL.CAT nomp_cat_min ] > ] ]. be_being_lex_entry := be_prespart & [ ORTH < "being" > ]. be_been_lex_entry := be_pastpart & [ ORTH < "been" >, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.VFORM psp ]. be_pres_lex_entry := be_pres. be_past_lex_entry := be_past. be_subj_lex_entry := be_subj. be_pres_neg_lex_entry := be_pres & be_neg. be_past_neg_lex_entry := be_past & be_neg. be_subj_neg_lex_entry := be_subj & be_neg & [ ALTS.CSAI - ]. be_am_lex_entry := be_pres_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 1s ] ]. be_is_lex_entry := be_pres_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ]. be_are_lex_entry := be_pres_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -13s ] ]. be_was_lex_entry := be_past_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 13s ] ]. be_were_lex_entry := be_past_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -13s ] ]. be_was_subjnct_lex_entry := be_subj_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 13s ], ALTS.CSAI - ]. be_were_subjnct_lex_entry := be_subj_lex_entry. ; aren't be_am_neg_contr_lex_entry := be_pres_neg_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD.INV +, VAL.SUBJ < [ --SIND.PNG #png ] > ], AGR.PNG png & #png & [ PN 1s ] ] ]. ; 'm not be_am_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry := be_pres_neg_lex_entry & aux_not_contr & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 1s ] ]. ; isn't be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry := be_pres_neg_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ]. ; 's not be_is_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry := be_pres_neg_lex_entry & aux_not_contr & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ]. ; aren't be_are_neg_contr_lex_entry := be_pres_neg_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -13s ] ]. ; 're not be_are_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry := be_pres_neg_lex_entry & aux_not_contr & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -13s ] ]. be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry := be_past_neg_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 13s ] ]. be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry := be_subj_neg_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 13s ] ]. be_were_neg_contr_lex_entry := be_past_neg_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN -13s ] ]. be_were_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry := be_subj_neg_lex_entry & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM subjnct_tam ]. ; *** Copula BE *** ; DPF 27-Nov-99 - Made KEYREL.LBL identified with COMPS..KEYREL.LBL, ; to avoid assymetry of LBL for VM, which was causing errors ; for e.g. "it is really going to be". This used to lose a possible ambiguity ; for e.g. "kim is not sleeping", since the support_rel will always be in ; the scope of the negation, regardless of whether the "not" attaches to ; "be" or to the complement phrase. ; DPF 01-Mar-00 - But now that we've eliminated support_rels, it may work ok. be_copula := prd_aux_verb_word & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.TAM #tam, VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM #tam ], LKEYS.KEYREL.PRED be_v_prd-or-id_rel ] ]. ; 2020-12-10 be_cop_pos_generic := be_copula & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #index ], CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #index ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ] ]. be_cop_pos := be_cop_pos_generic. be_cop_neg := be_copula & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CONT [ HOOK.LTOP #ltop, RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel & [ LBL #ltop ] ] ]. vc_prd_be_lexent := be_be_lex_entry & be_cop_pos_generic. v_prd_be_le := vc_prd_be_lexent & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, bse B will be ready. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.VFORM bse ]. ; DPF 18-oct-03 - Added COMPS..ALTMIN no_rel to block "being arriving" while ; still allowing "being hired", "being happy", "being in Berlin" ; DPF 03-oct-06 - But now using ALTMIN to control application of partitive ; rule to superlative adjectives, so need to make this COMPS..ALTMIN more ; specific, to include prd adjs and PPs, but exclude pres-participle verbs, ; so use event_dim_rel. ;; DPF 2017-11-07 - Re 03-oct-06: But this ALTMIN is identified with the ;; copula's own, and hence has to be compatible with e.g. place_n_rel for ;; "being here". So instead constrain compl to be compatible with INV +, ;; since present participles are INV -, while passives and non-verb ;; predicatives are unmarked for INV. ;; v_prd_being_le := be_being_lex_entry & be_cop_pos & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, prp B is being silly. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD [ PRD +, TAM.ASPECT.PROGR + ], VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.INV + ] ]. ; For robust variants vc_prd_been_lexent := be_pastpart & be_cop_pos_generic. vc_np_been_lexent := be_pastpart & be_id_pos. v_prd_been_le := be_been_lex_entry & be_cop_pos_generic & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, psp B has been ready. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_prd_am_le := be_am_lex_entry & be_cop_pos & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pr1sg I am ready. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_prd_am-cx_le := be_am_lex_entry & be_cop_pos & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pr1sg, contr I'm ready. """ . vc_prd_is_lexent := be_is_lex_entry & be_cop_pos. v_prd_is_le := vc_prd_is_lexent & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pr3sg B is ready. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_prd_is-cx_le := vc_prd_is_lexent & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pr3sg, contr B's ready. """ . vc_prd_are_lexent := be_are_lex_entry & be_cop_pos. v_prd_are_le := vc_prd_are_lexent & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pr n3sg We are ready. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_prd_are-cx_le := vc_prd_are_lexent & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pr n3sg,contr We're ready. """ . vc_prd_was_lexent := be_was_lex_entry & be_cop_pos. v_prd_was_le := vc_prd_was_lexent & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, past, sg B was ready. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_prd_was-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_lex_entry & be_cop_pos """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, subjcv, sg If B was ready, C would be """ . vc_prd_were_lexent := be_were_lex_entry & be_cop_pos. v_prd_wre_le := vc_prd_were_lexent & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, past, plural We were ready. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_prd_wre-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_lex_entry & be_cop_pos & """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, subjcv, plur If we were ready, C'd be. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_prd_am-n_le := be_am_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pr1sg,ngc,inv Aren't I ready? """ . v_prd_am-n-niv_le := be_am_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be,pr1sg,ngc,ninv I'm not. """ . v_prd_am-aint_le := be_pres_neg_lex_entry & be_cop_neg & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 1s ] ]. v_prd_is-n_le := be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pr3sg, contr B's not ready. """ . v_prd_is-n-niv_le := be_is_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be,pr3s,cntr,ninv B isn't ready. """ . v_prd_are-n_le := be_are_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, prn3sg, contr We're not ready. """ . v_prd_are-n-niv_le := be_are_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be,prn3s,ctr,ninv We aren't ready. """ . v_prd_was-n_le := be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pastsg, ngc B wasn't ready. """ . v_prd_was-n-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, subjcv,sg,ngc If B wasn't ready, C'd be. """ . v_prd_wre-n_le := be_were_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, pastpl, ngc We weren't ready. """ . v_prd_wre-n-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_cop_neg """ Cmps Pred-phr, be, subjcv,pl,ngc If we weren't, C'd be. """ . ; *** Identity BE *** ; For now, exclude gerundive complements, to avoid semantically anomalous ; reading for "Kim is sleeping" ; DPF 08-Jan-00 Made COMP be nom_rel instead of reg_nom_rel, to allow "Tuesday ; is my last day" and "that's him". ; DPF 22-Feb-01 - Added ALTMIN restriction on SUBJ to prevent free relatives ; from appearing in subject position, to get the contrast of "I admire what ; you are" vs. "*I admire what are you" (and cf. "I admire what is best"). ; DPF 26-Aug-01 - Added MIN nom_rel to SUBJ, like for COMP, to avoid having ; measure_nps in subject position. ; DPF 19-Oct-02 - Removed identification of PT on SUBJ and COMP, since ; this blocks "it is I/me" "that's me" etc. ; DPF 27-Apr-03 - Removed [COMPS..PRD -] since this prevents 'today is December ; third', and it's not clear what it was blocking. (Nor is it clear why ; 'third' has to be [PRD +].) ; DPF 10-Jun-03 - Try identifying SORT values of subj and comp. ; DPF 5-Sep-03 - Don't understand comment of 22-Feb-02 above, but clearly ; free relatives can be subjects of identity copula: "What he does is your ; problem". So removed this constraint. ; DPF 18-dec-03 - Keeping identity of SORT values is too hard - e.g. "The ; cabin is a good place to stay". ; DPF 30-aug-04 - Removed PT real_pron from SUBJ, since it ; prevented "consultant hiring is a disadvantage" with N-N-cmpnd subject NP. ; Leave on COMPS for now, to continue to block spurious analysis for ; "the boy is fishing." ; DPF 19-nov-04 - Removed identification of SUBJ..AGR with SUBJ..--SIND since ; want "three kilometers" measure-NP to be syntactically singular, even though ; semantic index comes from "kilometers" which is plural. ; DPF 05-nov-05 - Added CASE non_obliq to COMPS to block idiomatic detless NPs ; as in 'on top' from giving "*Kim is top." ; DPF 13-nov-05 - But sadly this also blocks "This is why we suffer". So ; instead try requiring non-empty SPEC, where detless NPs have SPEC < >. ; DPF 28-oct-06 - Removed PT real_pron from COMPS, since we want to ; allow "The reason is the fishing." No longer getting as much spurious ; ambiguity, for example with "The boy is fishing." See if too much remains. ; DPF 25-may-10 - Re 13-nov-05: No longer necessary, and SPEC *cons* was ; blocking "the cost is $100." ; DPF 04-jun-10 - Added COMPS..CASE non_obliq to prevent bare-sg nouns in PET, ; as in "*Kim is being in Paris" ; DPF 2010-sept-08 - Re 04-jun-10: But we also want to use CASE to exclude ; spurious analysis for "Where is Kim". So change CASE to nom_or_obliq, and ; instead use HEAD mobile to exclude bare-sg nouns in PET (which does not ; currently attend to constraints in idioms.tdl). ;; DPF 2018-06-01 - Constrained COMPS..INDEX to non_expl_ind, to avoid mostly ;; spurious ambiguity with elided copula *be*, which can only be syntactically ;; resolved in tag questions. To still get *he is Browne, isn't he*, changed ;; the MIN value of predicative copula to be_v_prd-or-id_rel, so it will also ;; unify with id-copula requirement of main clause in *he is Browne, isn't he*. ;; DPF 2020-04-01 - Re 18-dec-03: We have managed to keep this identity for ;; a good while, but note that it also blocks ;; *the cuts were a streamlining of operations*. FIX someday. ;; DPF 2022-05-19 - Re 2020-04-01: Requiring SORT identity loses us some ;; examples, such as "The retrofitting was part of a planned reinforcement". ;; But removing SORT is costly, since it opens up the ambiguity of ;; "Kim is reading a book". So let's live with slightly reduced coverage ;; for a significant gain in efficiency. ;; aux_np_verb := aux_verb & basic_two_arg & two_arg_subst & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD.MINORS [ MIN be_v_id_rel, ALTMIN nonpass_rel ], VAL [ SUBJ < [ --MIN nom_or_mnp_rel, --SIND #id1ind & basic_non_expl & [ SORT #sort ], NONLOC non-local_norel ] >, COMPS < [ --MIN nom_or_mnp_rel, LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD supnoun & mobile & [ POSS -, MOD *anti_list*, CASE nom_or_obliq ], VAL [ SUBJ *olist*, SPR *olist*, COMPS < > ], MC na_or_- ], CONJ cnil ], --SIND #id2ind & non_expl-ind & [ SORT #sort ], NONLOC.REL.LIST < > ] > ] ], CONT.HOOK.XARG #id1ind ], LKEYS.KEYREL arg12_relation & [ ARG0 non_conj_event, ARG1 #id1ind, ARG2 #id2ind ] ]. ; Note: redefined in lextypes-epgy.tdl ; 2020-12-10 be_id := be_verb & [ SYNSEM aux_np_verb & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ VAL [ SUBJ.FIRST.LOCAL [ CAT nomp_cat_min, CONT.HOOK.LTOP #ltop ], COMPS < [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.--BARE -, CONT.HOOK.LTOP #ltop ]] >]]], LKEYS.KEYREL [ LBL #ltop, PRED _be_v_id_rel ] ] ]. ; 2020-12-10 ;; DPF 2022-05-20 - Pushed [PROGR -] down to subtype, since we need it still ;; unmarked for |He denied having been the source| ;; basic_be_id_pos := be_id & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #event ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop, ARG0 #event ] ] ]. be_id_pos := basic_be_id_pos & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.TAM.ASPECT.PROGR - ]. be_id_neg_synsem := aux_np_verb & [ LKEYS.KEYREL.PRED _be_v_id_rel, LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS < [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.--BARE - ] > ]. ; 2020-12-10 be_id_neg := be_id & [ SYNSEM be_id_neg_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.TAM.ASPECT.PROGR -, CONT [ HOOK.INDEX #nevent & non_conj_event, RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS [ KEYREL #keyrel, ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel & [ ARG0 #nevent ] ] ] ]. vc_np_be_lexent := be_be_lex_entry & be_id & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.TAM.ASPECT.PROGR -, CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #index ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop, ARG0 #index ] ] ]. v_np_be_lexent := vc_np_be_lexent & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.VFORM bse ]. v_np_be_le := v_np_be_lexent """ Cmps NP, be, bse B will be C. """ . v_np_being_le := be_being_lex_entry & be_id & """ Cmps NP, be, prp B is being C. """ [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.TAM.ASPECT.PROGR +, CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #index ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop, ARG0 #index ] ] ]. v_np_been_le := be_been_lex_entry & basic_be_id_pos """ Cmps NP, be, psp B has been C. """ . v_np_am_le := be_am_lex_entry & be_id_pos & """ Cmps NP, be, pr1sg I am C. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_np_am-cx_le := be_am_lex_entry & be_id_pos & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps NP, be, pr1sg, contr I'm C. """ . v_np_is_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_id_pos & """ Cmps NP, be, pr3sg B is C. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_np_is-cx_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_id_pos & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps NP, be, pr3sg, contr B's C. """ . v_np_are_le := be_are_lex_entry & be_id_pos & """ Cmps NP, be, pr n3sg We are C """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_np_are-cx_le := be_are_lex_entry & be_id_pos & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps NP, be, pr n3sg,contr We're C. """ . v_np_was_le := be_was_lex_entry & be_id_pos """ Cmps NP, be, past, sg B was C. """ . v_np_was-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_lex_entry & be_id_pos """ Cmps NP, be, subjct, sg If B was C, D would be. """ . v_np_wre_le := be_were_lex_entry & be_id_pos """ Cmps NP, be, past, plural We were C. """ . v_np_wre-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_lex_entry & be_id_pos """ Cmps NP, be, subjct, plur If we were C, D'd be. """ . v_np_am-n_le := be_am_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_id_neg """ Cmps NP, be, pr1sg,ngc,inv Aren't I C? """ . v_np_am-n-niv_le := be_am_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry & be_id_neg """ Cmps NP, be,pr1sg,ngc,ninv I'm not C. """ . v_np_is-n_lexent := be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_id_neg. v_np_is-n_le := v_np_is-n_lexent """ Cmps NP, be, pr3sg, contr B isn't C. """ . v_np_is-n-niv_le := be_is_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry & be_id_neg """ Cmps NP, be,pr3s,cntr,ninv, elided or gap complement B's not. A genius, he's not. """ . v_np_are-n_lexent := be_are_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_id_neg. v_np_are-n_le := v_np_are-n_lexent """ Cmps NP, be, prn3sg, contr We aren't C. """ . v_np_are-n-niv_le := be_are_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry & be_id_neg """ Cmps NP, be,prn3s,ctr,ninv We're not C. """ . v_np_was-n_lexent := be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_id_neg. v_np_was-n_le := v_np_was-n_lexent """ Cmps NP, be, pastsg, ngc B wasn't C. """ . v_np_was-n-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_id_neg """ Cmps NP, be, subjct,sg,ngc If B wasn't C, D'd be. """ . v_np_wre-n_lexent := be_were_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_id_neg. v_np_wre-n_le := v_np_wre-n_lexent """ Cmps NP, be, pastpl, ngc We weren't C. """ . v_np_wre-n-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_id_neg """ Cmps NP, be, subjct,pl,ngc If we weren't, C'd be.xo """ . ; Note that for "it's because Kim arrived." the ARG1 of the subord_rel is ; incorrectly not bound to any lbl. Awkward to get right, since no handle ; for "the reason is because Kim arrived". FIX... ; DPF 13-may-08 - Removed --COMPHD comp_or_p because we also want to ; get "The short answer is nobody wins." So far this was the only use of ; the feature, so maybe discard. ; DPF 27-may-08 - Added POSTHD + to block spurious analysis for ; "Kim is of programmers." ; DPF 23-apr-09 - Added ALTMIN aux_event_rel to prevent *being* from ; undergoing adj_attr_verb_tr_part lexical rule as in *the being six* ;; DPF 2012-11-09 - Added COMPS..LEX - to prevent spurious reading of ;; *that was so.* ;; DPF 2016-09-12 - Removed COMPS..INDEX.--TPC - because we also want ;; *the idea is that in Paris we eat well*. FIX? whatever the consequences are. ;; DPF 2016-12-14 - Removed SUBJ..SORT nom-event, since we also want to allow ;; *what Kim said was that he disappeared* where the CP-WH NP now has sort ;; q-event. If this is too permissive, we can define a new supertype for ;; nom-or-q-event, but we also get more robustness for subject-heading nouns ;; that are not explicitly neutral about their SORT type, as in ;; *the best hint was that Kim disappeared* ;; DPF 2017-05-10 - Removed COMPS..SUBJ *anti_list* so we can get the desired ;; second reading for *the plan is to leave early* contrasted with the most ;; likely and already available reading for *Kim is to leave early*. ;; DPF 2017-10-02 - Constrain SUBJ..MIN to non_proper_rel (was nom_or_mnp_rel), ;; to avoid *Kim is we arise* ;; DPF 2017-10-03 - Restrict these to subj NPs underspec for SORT, so we can ;; avoid *Kids are [[on their cell phones][they disrupt class]]* ;; DPF 2017-10-31 - Re 2017-10-02: Need to also allow pronoun "it" here, as in ;; *if there's a problem, it is that we are too busy* ;; DPF 2020-04-01 - Removed COMPS..MODIFD notmod_or_rmod since we want ;; *the belief is [if we try, we will succeed]*. CHECK. ;; DPF 2020-04-29 - Remove comp's NONLOC non-local_none and subj's identif of ;; NONLOC with mother, to get analysis for *how is it that he disappeared?* ;; but need to also constrain SLASH to only adjuncts, to avoid spurious ;; analysis for e.g. *We arrive every time the ad is arises* with subj ;; extracted from *arises* ;; DPF 2020-04-29 - Tempting to add MOOD ind_or_modal_subj to COMPS, to avoid ;; ambiguity with *that they arrive*, but we need subjunctive for e.g. ;; *the idea is that he be spared the embarrassment* ;; DPF 2021-06-24 - Tried making XARG of complement reentrant with own XARG, ;; but of course this fails for e.g. "the problem is that he arrived",so remove. ;; DPF 2024-05-03 - Constrain subj to be --SIND non_expl-ind to avoid spurious ;; analysis for e.g. "there were windows open" ;; basic_nv_cop_verb := aux_verb & two_arg_subst & basic_two_arg & cp_addin_tam_pn & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD.MINORS [ MIN be_v_nv_rel, ALTMIN aux_event_rel ], VAL [ SUBJ < synsem_min & [ LOCAL [ CAT nomp_cat_min, CONT.HOOK.LTOP #ltop ], --MIN non_proper_rel, --SIND #idind & non_expl-ind ] >, COMPS < canonical_synsem & [ --MIN verb_or_subord_rel, LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD verbal_or_p & [ MINORS.NORM norm_rel, PRD -, TAM #tam, --ADDIN [ ADDPN #pn, ADDTAM #tam ] ], VAL [ COMPS < > ], MC na_or_- ], AGR.PNG.PN #pn, CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #cltop, INDEX.SF prop-or-ques, XARG.SORT basic-entity-or-event ], CONJ cnil ], LEX -, NONLOC non-local_none ] > ] ], CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, XARG #idind ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL arg12_relation & [ PRED _be_v_nv_rel, ARG0 non_conj_event, ARG1 #idind, ARG2 #cltop ] ]. ;; DPF 2024-04-25 - Allow MC na modifiee for v-vp verbs as in ;;"the idea is never to quit" nv_cop_verb := basic_nv_cop_verb & [ LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS < [ LOCAL.CAT.MC - ] > ]. basic_be_nv := be_verb & [ SYNSEM basic_nv_cop_verb, ALTS.VPELLIP - ]. be_nv := basic_be_nv & [ SYNSEM nv_cop_verb ]. basic_be_nv_pos := basic_be_nv & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.TAM.ASPECT.PROGR -, CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #event ], RELS.LIST.FIRST #keyrel & [ ARG0 #event ], HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop ] ] ]. be_nv_pos := basic_be_nv_pos & be_nv & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CONT.RELS ]. be_sc_pos := basic_be_nv_pos & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.XARG #lbl, CONT.RELS ], LKEYS [ --COMPKEY #cmin & subord_rel, --+COMPKEY #cmin ] ] ]. ; 2020-12-10 basic_be_nv_neg := basic_be_nv & [ SYNSEM basic_nv_cop_verb & [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.TAM.ASPECT.PROGR -, CONT [ HOOK.INDEX #nevent, RELS.LIST < #keyrel, #alt2keyrel, ... >, HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS [ KEYREL #keyrel, ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel & [ ARG0 #nevent ] ] ] ]. be_nv_neg := basic_be_nv_neg & be_nv & [ SYNSEM nv_cop_verb & [ LOCAL.CONT.RELS ] ]. be_sc_neg := basic_be_nv_neg & be_nv & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.XARG #lbl, CONT.RELS ], LKEYS [ --COMPKEY #cmin & subord_rel, --+COMPKEY #cmin ] ] ]. ;; *The idea is that Kim wins* cp_cop_verb := nv_cop_verb & [ LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD verbal, VAL.SUBJ *anti_list* ] ]. ;; subord_clause, where RELS adds a placeholder EP for the subord's missing ARG1 ;; *the reason is because Kim lost* sc_cop_verb := nv_cop_verb & [ LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD prep, VAL.SUBJ *anti_list* ] ]. ;; *the idea is to win* vp_cop_verb := basic_nv_cop_verb & [ LOCAL.CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.VFORM inf, VAL.SUBJ.FIRST synsem ] ]. vp_cop_verb_pos := vp_cop_verb & [ LOCAL.CONT.RELS ]. vp_cop_verb_neg := vp_cop_verb & [ LOCAL.CONT.RELS ]. basic_v_cpvp_be_lexent := be_be_lex_entry & basic_be_nv & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD [ TAM.ASPECT.PROGR -, VFORM bse ], CONT [ HOOK.LTOP #ltop, RELS.LIST.FIRST #keyrel, HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop ] ] ]. v_cpvp_be_lexent := basic_v_cpvp_be_lexent & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CONT.RELS ]. v_cp_be_lexent := v_cpvp_be_lexent & [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_be_le := v_cp_be_lexent """ Cmps S, be, bse The plan'll be that C wins """ . ;; Subord clause complement v_sc_be_le := basic_v_cpvp_be_lexent & """ Cmps SC, be, bse The reason'll be because C wins """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb & [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.XARG #lbl, CONT.RELS ], LKEYS [ --COMPKEY #cmin & subord_rel, --+COMPKEY #cmin ] ] ]. basic_v_cpvp_being_lexent := be_being_lex_entry & basic_be_nv & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.TAM.ASPECT.PROGR +, CONT [ HOOK.LTOP #ltop, RELS.LIST.FIRST #keyrel, HCONS , ICONS ] ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop ] ] ]. v_cpvp_being_lexent := basic_v_cpvp_being_lexent & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CONT.RELS ]. v_cp_being_le := v_cpvp_being_lexent & """ Cmps S, be, prp The plan being C won, I do """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. ;; Subord clause complement v_sc_being_le := basic_v_cpvp_being_lexent & """ Cmps SC, be, prp The reason being because C won, I do """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb & [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.XARG #lbl, CONT.RELS ], LKEYS [ --COMPKEY #cmin & subord_rel, --+COMPKEY #cmin ] ] ]. v_cp_been_le := be_been_lex_entry & be_nv_pos & """ Cmps S, be, psp The plan'd been that C won """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_is_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_nv_pos & """ Cmps S, be, pr3sg The plan is that C won. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_is-cx_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_nv_pos & contracted_aux_word & """ Cmps S, be, pr3sg, contr The plan's that C won. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_are_le := be_are_lex_entry & be_nv_pos & """ Cmps S, be, pr n3sg The plans are that C wins. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_was_le := be_was_lex_entry & be_nv_pos & """ Cmps S, be, past, sg The plan was that C won. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_was-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_lex_entry & be_nv_pos & """ Cmps S, be, subjct, sg If the plan was S, D would """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_wre_le := be_were_lex_entry & be_nv_pos & """ Cmps S, be, past, subjunctive We prefer that the plan were that C won. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_wre-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_lex_entry & be_nv_pos & """ Cmps S, be, subjct, plur If plans were S, D'd be. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_is-n_le := be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_nv_neg & """ Cmps S, be, pr3sg, contr The plan isn't that S. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_are-n_le := be_are_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_nv_neg & """ Cmps S, be, prn3sg, contr The plans aren't that S. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_was-n_le := be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_nv_neg & """ Cmps S, be, pastsg, ngc The plan wasn't that S. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_was-n-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_nv_neg & """ Cmps S, be, subjct,sg,ngc If the plan wasn't S, C is """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_wre-n_le := be_were_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_nv_neg & """ Cmps S, be, pastpl, ngc The plans weren't that S. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. v_cp_wre-n-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_nv_neg & """ Cmps S, be, subjct,pl,ngc If plans weren't, C'd go. """ [ SYNSEM cp_cop_verb ]. ;; Next, subord clause complement variants v_sc_been_le := be_been_lex_entry & be_sc_pos & """ Cmps SC, be, psp The reason'd been because C won """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_is_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_sc_pos & """ Cmps SC, be, pr3sg The reason is because C won. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_is-cx_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_sc_pos & contracted_aux_word & """ Cmps SC, be, pr3sg, contr The reason's because C won. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_are_le := be_are_lex_entry & be_sc_pos & """ Cmps SC, be, pr n3sg The reasons are because C wins. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_was_le := be_was_lex_entry & be_sc_pos & """ Cmps SC, be, past, sg The reason was because C won. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_was-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_lex_entry & be_sc_pos & """ Cmps SC, be, subjct, sg If the reason was because C won, D would """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_wre_le := be_were_lex_entry & be_sc_pos & """ Cmps SC, be, past, subjunctive We prefer that the reason were because C won. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_wre-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_lex_entry & be_sc_pos & """ Cmps SC, be, subjct, plur If reasons were because C won, D'd be. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_is-n_le := be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_sc_neg & """ Cmps SC, be, pr3sg, contr The reason isn't because S. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_are-n_le := be_are_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_sc_neg & """ Cmps SC, be, prn3sg, contr The reasons aren't because S. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_was-n_le := be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_sc_neg & """ Cmps SC, be, pastsg, ngc The reason wasn't because S. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_was-n-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_sc_neg & """ Cmps SC, be, subjct,sg,ngc If the reason wasn't because S, C is """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_wre-n_le := be_were_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_sc_neg & """ Cmps SC, be, pastpl, ngc The reasons weren't because S. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. v_sc_wre-n-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_sc_neg & """ Cmps SC, be, subjct,pl,ngc If reasons weren't because D, C'd go. """ [ SYNSEM sc_cop_verb ]. ;; Now the VP complement variants as in *the idea is to win* v_vp_be_le := v_cpvp_be_lexent & """ Cmps VP, be, bse The plan'll be to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb ]. v_vp_being_le := v_cpvp_being_lexent & """ Cmps VP, be, prp The plan being to win, I do """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb ]. v_vp_been_le := be_been_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_pos & """ Cmps VP, be, psp The plan'd been to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_pos ]. v_vp_is_le := be_is_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_pos & """ Cmps VP, be, pr3sg The plan is to win """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_pos ]. v_vp_is-cx_le := be_is_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_pos & contracted_aux_word & """ Cmps VP, be, pr3sg, contr The plan's to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_pos ]. v_vp_are_le := be_are_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_pos & """ Cmps VP, be, pr n3sg The plans are to win """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_pos ]. v_vp_was_le := be_was_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_pos & """ Cmps VP, be, past, sg The plan was to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_pos ]. v_vp_was-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_pos & """ Cmps VP, be, subjct, sg If the plan was to win, D would. """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_pos ]. v_vp_wre_le := be_were_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_pos & """ Cmps VP, be, past, subjunctive We prefer that the plan were to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_pos ]. v_vp_wre-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_pos & """ Cmps VP, be, subjct, plur If plans were to win, D'd be. """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_pos ]. v_vp_is-n_le := be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_neg & """ Cmps VP, be, pr3sg, contr The plan isn't to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_neg ]. v_vp_are-n_le := be_are_neg_contr_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_neg & """ Cmps VP, be, prn3sg, contr The plans aren't to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_neg ]. v_vp_was-n_le := be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_neg & """ Cmps VP, be, pastsg, ngc The plan wasn't to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_neg ]. v_vp_was-n-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_neg & """ Cmps VP, be, subjct,sg,ngc If the plan wasn't to win, C is """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_neg ]. v_vp_wre-n_le := be_were_neg_contr_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_neg & """ Cmps VP, be, pastpl, ngc The plans weren't to win """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_neg ]. v_vp_wre-n-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & basic_be_nv_neg & """ Cmps VP, be, subjct,pl,ngc If plans weren't, C'd go. """ [ SYNSEM vp_cop_verb_neg ]. ; *** There Copula BE *** ;; The relationship between the first COMP and the second cannot be one of ;; raising (since if the first is extracted its SLASH will be non-empty, and ;; that non-empty SLASH would also erroneously appear on the VP. So the ;; control relation must be equi rather than raising. ;; DPF 2-May-01 - HACK: To avoid spurious ambiguity temporarily, block second ;; arg by changing its MIN from independent_rel to no_rel. ;; DPF 29-may-07 - Removed AUX + to allow extraction of modifiers, as for ;; "occasionally there are unicorns in the garden". FIX? there_cop_verb := there_verb_synsem & aux_verb & [ LOCAL.CAT [ HEAD.MINORS.MIN be_v_there_rel, VAL.SUBJ.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT nomp_cat_min ], LKEYS [ KEYREL.PRED _be_v_there_rel, --+ARGIND there-ind ] ]. be_th_cop := be_verb & [ SYNSEM there_cop_verb & [ LOCAL.CAT [ VAL.COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.LTOP #ltop ], LKEYS.KEYREL.LBL #ltop ] ]. be_th_cop_pos := be_th_cop & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL.CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #event ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ], LKEYS.KEYREL #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop, ARG0 #event ] ] ]. ; 2020-12-10 be_th_cop_neg := be_th_cop & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL.CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #nevent ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ], LKEYS [ KEYREL #keyrel, ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel & [ LBL #ltop, ARG0 #nevent ] ] ] ]. v_np-xp_be_lexent := be_be_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.VFORM bse_only ]. v_np-xp_be_le := v_np-xp_be_lexent """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,bse There will be music. """ . ;; DPF 2022-05-25 - Not clear why this was [PRD -], but that blocked verbal ;; gerunds such as "he relied on there being a quick solution". So remove, ;; and check. v_np-xp_being_le := be_being_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,prp There being music, C went. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ TAM.ASPECT.PROGR - ] ]. v_np-xp_been_le := be_been_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,psp There has been music. """ . vc_there_is_lexent := be_is_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos. v_np-xp_is_le := vc_there_is_lexent & """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,prsg There is music. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. vc_there_are_lexent := be_are_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos. v_np-xp_are_le := vc_there_are_lexent & """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,prpl There are songs. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_np-xp_is-pl_le := vc_there_are_lexent & """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s ispl There is music and food. """ [ INFLECTD +, ALTS.VPELLIP -, GENRE nonformal ]. ; DPF 04mar10 - Returned to using parent be_was_lex_entry rather than ; be_past_lex_entry, to block "there was cats in the garden". vc_there_was_lexent := be_was_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos. v_np-xp_was_le := vc_there_was_lexent """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,ptsg There was music. """ . v_np-xp_was-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,svsg If there was food, we'd go """ . vc_there_were_lexent := be_were_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos. v_np-xp_wre_le := vc_there_were_lexent """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,ptpl There were songs. """ . v_np-xp_wre-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,svpl If there were ice, we'd go """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ]. v_np-xp_was-pl_le := be_were_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s ispl There is music and food. """ . v_np-xp_is-cx_le := be_pres_lex_entry & be_th_cop_pos & contracted_aux_word """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,prsg,cntr There's music. """ . v_np-xp_is-n_le := be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_th_cop_neg """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,prsg,n-cr There isn't music. """ . v_np-xp_is-n-niv_le := be_is_neg_contr_noinv_lex_entry & be_th_cop_neg """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,prsg,n,nv There's not any music. """ . v_np-xp_are-n_le := be_are_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_th_cop_neg """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,prpl,n-cr There aren't songs. """ . v_np-xp_was-n_le := be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_th_cop_neg """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,ptsg,n-cr There wasn't music. """ . v_np-xp_was-n-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_th_cop_neg """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,sbsg,n-cr If there wasn't C, we'd go """ . v_np-xp_wre-n_le := be_were_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_th_cop_neg """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,ptpl,n-cr There weren't any songs. """ . v_np-xp_wre-n-sv_le := be_were_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_th_cop_neg & """ Cmps NP,Prd-p, be,ex-s,sbpl,n-cr If there weren't C, B'd go """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.AGR.PNG png & [ PN 3s ] ]. ; *** It-cleft Copula BE *** be_it_cop := be_verb & [ SYNSEM basic_itcleft_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT.VAL [ SUBJ.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT nomp_cat_min, COMPS < [ LOCAL.CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #nhind ] ], [ LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.INDEX #vind ] > ], CONT [ ICONS ] ], LKEYS [ KEYREL.LBL #ltop, --+ARGIND it-ind ] ] ]. be_it_cop_pos := be_it_cop & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL.CONT [ HOOK.LTOP #ltop, RELS , HCONS ], LKEYS.KEYREL.LBL #ltop ] ]. be_it_cop_neg := be_it_cop & [ SYNSEM [ LOCAL.CONT [ RELS , HCONS ], LKEYS.ALT2KEYREL #alt2keyrel ] ]. ;; non-scopal v_np-rc_be_lexent := be_be_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.VFORM bse_only ] ]. ;; scopal v_np-rc_be-scop_lexent := be_be_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.VFORM bse_only ] ]. v_np-rc_be_le := v_np-rc_be_lexent """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,bse, nonscopal It will be C who wins. """ . v_np-rc_be-scop_le := v_np-rc_be-scop_lexent """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,bse, scopal It will be becuase Kim arrived that we left. """ . v_np-rc_being_le := be_being_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,prp, nonscopal It being C who won, D lost """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ PRD -, TAM.ASPECT.PROGR - ] ] ]. v_np-rc_being-scop_le := be_being_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,prp, scopal It being because we arrived that Kim left, D lost """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD [ PRD -, TAM.ASPECT.PROGR - ] ] ]. v_np-rc_been_le := be_been_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,psp, nonscopal It has been C who wins. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_been-scop_le := be_been_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,psp It has been because Kim arrived that we left. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_is_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,prsg, nonscopal It is C who wins. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_is-scop_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,prsg, scopal It is because Kim arrived that we left. """ [ INFLECTD +, SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_was_le := be_was_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,ptsg, nonscopal It was C who won. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_was-scop_le := be_was_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,ptsg, scopal It was because Kim arrived that we left. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_was-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,sbsg, nonscopal If it was C who is, B'd go """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_was-sv-scop_le := be_was_subjnct_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,sbsg, scopal If it was because Kim arrived that we left, B'd go """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_is-cx_le := be_pres_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & contracted_aux_word & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,pr,cntr, nonscopal It's C who wins. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_is-cx-scop_le := be_pres_lex_entry & be_it_cop_pos & contracted_aux_word & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,pr,cntr, scopal It's because Kim arrived that we left. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_is-n_le := be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_it_cop_neg & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,pr,n-cr, nonscopal It isn't C who wins. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_is-n-scop_le := be_is_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_it_cop_neg & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,pr,n-cr, scopal It isn't because Kim arrived that we left. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_was-n_le := be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_it_cop_neg & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,pt,n-cr, nonscopal It wasn't C who won. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_was-n-scop_le := be_was_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_it_cop_neg & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,pt,n-cr, scopal It wasn't because Kim arrived that we left. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_was-n-sv_le := be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_it_cop_neg & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,sbsg,n-cr, nonscopal If it wasn't C who is, B'd """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_nonscopal_verb_synsem ]. v_np-rc_was-n-sv-scop_le := be_was_subjnct_neg_contr_lex_entry & be_it_cop_neg & """ Cmps NP,Relcl, be,ex-s,sbsg,n-cr, scopal If it wasn't because Kim arrived that we left, B would leave. """ [ SYNSEM itcleft_scopal_verb_synsem ]. ;; do-be copula ;; be_do_verb_synsem := aux_verb & basic_two_arg & [ LOCAL [ CAT [ HEAD [ MINORS [ MIN _be_v_do_rel, ALTMIN nonpass_rel ], INV - ], VAL [ SUBJ < [ LOCAL [ CAT np_cat_nom, CONT.HOOK [ INDEX #id1ind & [ SORT do-event, IFORM #iform ], XARG #xarg ] ], NONLOC non-local_none, LEX - ] >, COMPS < expressed_synsem & [ LOCAL [ CAT vp_cat & [ HEAD [ MINORS.MIN v_event_rel, VFORM fin_or_bse_or_part & #iform ], VAL.SUBJ < synsem & [ LOCAL.CAT.HEAD basic_noun ] > ], AGR.PNG.PN #pn, CONT.HOOK [ LTOP #vltop, INDEX #id2ind, XARG #xarg & [ PNG.PN #pn ] ] ], --SIND #id2ind, NONLOC non-local_none, OPT - ] > ] ], CONT [ HOOK [ LTOP #ltop, INDEX #event, XARG #id1ind ], RELS , HCONS , ICONS ] ], LEX +, LKEYS [ KEYREL arg12_relation & #keyrel & [ LBL #ltop, PRED _be_v_do_rel, ARG0 #event & non_conj_event, ARG1 #id1ind, ARG2 #arg2 ], --+COMPKEY _do_v_be_rel ] ]. be_do_verb_lexent := be_verb & [ SYNSEM be_do_verb_synsem ]. v_vp_do-be_le := be_be_lex_entry & be_do_verb_lexent & """ Cmps: base VP, do-be only What we'll do will be hire a manager. """ [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.VFORM bse_only ]. v_vp_do-been_le := be_been_lex_entry & be_do_verb_lexent """ Cmps: base VP, do-be only What he's done has been hire a manager. """ . v_vp_do-is_le := be_is_lex_entry & be_do_verb_lexent & """ Cmps: base VP, do-be only What he's done is hire a manager. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_vp_do-are_le := be_are_lex_entry & be_do_verb_lexent & """ Cmps: base VP, do-be only The things we do are arrive and leave. """ [ INFLECTD + ]. v_vp_do-was_le := be_was_lex_entry & be_do_verb_lexent """ Cmps: base VP, do-be only What we did was hire a manager. """ . v_vp_do-wre_le := be_were_lex_entry & be_do_verb_lexent """ Cmps: base VP, do-be only The things we did were arrive and leave. """ . ;; DPF 2018-08-24 - For some reason, PET's flop will not compile this file ;; without the following 99-character line preceded by a semicolon: ;; (and similarly for letypes.tdl but not lextypes.tdl) ;xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx