TODO: simplify {Interrogative,Indefinite,...}/{Cardinal,Multiplicative,...}Quantifier dichothomies In subsequent versions, however, orthographical definitions should be handled with existing ontologies specializing on the description on language, e.g., lexvo check gerundive vs. gerund update GOLD linking
Ontology of Linguistic Annotation (OLiA)
OLiA Reference Model for Morphology, Morphosyntax and Syntax (originally based on the EAGLES recommendations, with modifications in accordance to DCR (ISOcat, June 2013), TDS ontology, GOLD v.03, the SFB 632 annotation guidelines, the MULTEXT-East ontology and various annotation schemes)
EAGLES top-level category Residual (R) with the exception of its subclass "Unclassified". Unclassified is not represented in the OLiA ontology, as it does not represent information, but the absence of information.
From a linguistic point of view, Residuals are a heterogeneous class and so, Residual may overlap with every linguistically motivate annotation concept. Also between subconcepts, overlap may occur (e.g. \LaTeX which is a symbol which can be read as an Acronym or acronyms which are related to Abbreviations, e.g. GNU "Gnu is not Unix")
The residual value (R) is assigned to classes of text words which lie outside the traditionally accepted range of grammatical classes, although they occur quite commonly in many texts and very commonly in some. For example: foreign words, or mathematical formulae. It can be argued that these are on the fringes of the grammar or lexicon of the language in which the text is written. Nevertheless, they need to be tagged. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node16.html#mr 19.09.06) Although words in the Residual category are on the periphery of the lexicon, they may take some of the grammatical characteristics, e.g., of nouns. Acronyms such as IBM are similar to proper nouns; symbols such as alphabetic characters can vary for singular and plural (e.g. How many Ps are there in `psychopath'?), and are in this respect like common nouns. In some languages (e.g. Portuguese) such symbols also have gender. It is quite reasonable that in some tagging schemes some of these classes of word will be classified under other parts of speech. (The Unclassified category applies to word-like text segments which do not easily fit into any of the foregoing values. For example: incomplete words and pause fillers such as er and erm in transcriptions of speech, or written representations of singing such as dum-de-dum. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recr 19.09.06)
A word that does not carry its own meaning but generalizes the meaning of a neighboring word, adding the "etc." sense.
Bambara Reference Corpus "Onomatopée", http://cormand.huma-num.fr
onomatopoetic word
onomatopée
A lexical unit formed by a shortening of a word, syllable, or word group by omission of a sound or letter. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-354)
EAGLES top-level category Adposition (AP).
An adposition is a cover term for prepositions, postpositions and circumpositions. It expresses a grammatical and semantic relation to another unit within a clause. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnAdposition.htm, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adposition 19.09.06) The majority of cases of adpositions we have to consider in European languages are prepositions. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#SECTION00062200000000000000 19.09.06)
A noun, or noun substantive, is a part of speech (a word or phrase) which can co-occur with (in)definite articles and attributive adjectives, and function as the head of a noun phrase. The word "noun" derives from the Latin 'nomen' meaning "name", and a traditional definition of nouns is that they are all and only those expressions that refer to a person, place, thing, event, substance, quality, idea or an appointment. They serve as the subject or object of a verb, and the object of a preposition. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noun 19.09.06)
noun
nom
A verb is a part of speech that usually denotes action ("bring", "read"), occurrence ("decompose", "glitter"), or a state of being ("exist", "stand"). Depending on the language, a verb may vary in form according to many factors, possibly including its tense, aspect, mood and voice. It may also agree with the person, gender, and/or number of some of its arguments (subject, object, etc.). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verb 19.09.06)
verb
verbe
pronoun or determiner
pronom / determinatif
EAGLES top-level category PronounOrDeterminer (PD). The existence of this class is, however, controversial. In EAGLES, it has been introduced for reasons of lexical ambiguity in European languages thus it could be described by the joint of Pronoun and Determiner rather than as an independent class. Indeed, at least one fundamental difference is blurred here: Determiners are purely modifiers whereas pronouns contribute independent meaning. This could be adopted here as a criterion for higher-level organization of the OLiA Reference Model. The original EAGLES definition is not very specific about the difference between Pronouns and Determiners. Here, we assume two definitions: * semantic definition of pronouns: Pronouns are bound variables. They are referential. * syntactic definition of determiners: Determiners turn nominal expressions (of type <e,t>) into noun phrases (of type <e>). Note that these definitions are not exclusive (which is why annotation schemes differ in this aspect). Attributive possessive pronouns ('my book', 'their article') are semantically pronouns (they have an independent reference), but syntactically determiners. For the sub-classes, no exclusivity is required as Olia allows a hybrid ("both") category by multiple inheritance.
The parts of speech Pronoun, Determiner and Article heavily overlap in their formal and functional characteristics, and different analyses for different languages entail separating them out in different ways. In Eagles, Pronouns and Determiners are placed in one `super-category'. For some descriptions it may be thought best to treat them as totally different parts of speech. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recp 19.09.06)
EAGLES top-level category Punctuation (PU). For subconcepts, Wilson and Leech (1996) propose two alternative classifications: Here, we implement the more interesting, i.e. position (the alternative is just enumeration of possible signs)
Punctuation marks (PU) are treated here as a part of morphosyntactic annotation, as it is very common for punctuation marks to be tagged and to be treated as equivalent to words for the purposes of automatic tag assignment. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node16.html#mp 19.09.06)
A category "Quantifier" is missing in EAGLES, but seems to be conflated with IndefiniteDeterminer. Added as top-level concept in accordance with the SFB632 annotation guidelines. Against the original (and meanwhile corrected) modelling in GOLD, Quantifier is not a subconcept of Determiner.
A quantifier is a determiner that expresses a referent's definite or indefinite number or amount. A quantifier functions as a modifier of a noun, or pronoun. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAQuantifier.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES top-level category Adjective (AJ).
An Adjective is a noun-modifying expression that specifies the properties or attributes of the nominal referent. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnAdjective.htm 18.9.06)
EAGLES top-level category Adverb (AV). Skipped subconcepts ParticleAdverb and GeneralAdverb: ParticleAdverb is better described by the join of particles or adverbs rather than positing an independent category; GeneralAdverb is merely the complement of DegreeAdverb.
An adverb is a part of speech that serves to modify non-nominal parts of speech, i.e., verbs, adjectives (including numbers), clauses, sentences and other adverbs. Modifiers of nouns are primarily determiners and adjectives. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverbs 18.09.06)
adverb
adverbe
Word that is both an adverb and a particle.
merely a shorthand for the intersection of Adverb and Particle, hence deprecated
adverb which is very similar in its form to a preposition
EAGLES top-level category Interjection (I).
An interjection is a form, typically brief, such as one syllable or word, which is used most often as an exclamation or part of an exclamation. It typically expresses an emotional reaction, often with respect to an accompanying sentence and may include a combination of sounds not otherwise found in the language, e.g. in English: psst; ugh; well, well (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnInterjection.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES top-level category Unique (U). "The unique value (U) is applied to categories with a unique or very small membership, such as negative particle, which are ‘unassigned’ to any of the standard part-of-speech categories. The value unique cannot always be strictly applied, since (for example) Greek has three negative particles ... No subcategories are recommended, although it is expected that tagsets for individual languages will need to identify such one-member word-classes as Negative particle, Existential particle, Infinitive marker, etc" (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node16.html) According to the EAGLES definition and examples, this seems to be closely related to "particle". Particles are uninflected function words, in a broader sense, everything which is not inflected is a particle, i.e. including interjections, in GOLD, uninflected items such as adpositions, conjunctions and interjections are excluded: "A particle is a partOfSpeech whose members do not belong to one of the main classes of words, is invariable, and typically has grammatical or pragmatic meaning." The EAGLES definition emphasizes the invariability of particles.
Unique approximates the linguistic concept "Particle". It covers categories with unique or very small membership, such as negative particle, which are `unassigned' to any of the standard part-of-speech categories. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node16.html#mp 19.09.06) Unique elements are uninflected (hence the name) and can be used to mark uninflectable function words in OLiA, even if they are not conventionally referred to as "particles" (e.g., the common [non-inflected] relative pronoun in opposition to the specific [inflectable] relative pronoun in Arabic). OLiA particles are a sub-class of Unique.
EAGLES top-level concept Conjunction (C).
A conjunction is a word that syntactically links words or larger constituents, and expresses a semantic relationship between them. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAConjunction.htm 19.09.06)
conjunction
conjonction
adopted from Sajjad (2007, for Urdu, cf. http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#Date)
Date is a stretch of text that specifies a specific point in time and that is not further linguistically analysed. (Chiarcos)
An abbreviation formed by truncating a part of a simple term. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-335)
EAGLES Category Abbreviations with Type="Abbreviation".
Abbreviation (from Latin brevis "short") is strictly speaking a shorter form of a word, but more particularly, an abbreviation is a letter or group of letters, taken from a word or words, and employed to represent them for the sake of brevity. For example, the word "abbreviation" can be abbreviated as "abbr." or "abbrev." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abbreviation 19.09.06)
abbreviation
abreviation
A pronoun that refers to all elements of a set.
pronoun that identify the current locative or temporal situation
Abbreviation/Syntactic_Type="pronominal" (Romanian), e.g., d-ta/dumneata, d-tale/dumitale, d-voastră/dumneavoastră, dv./dumneavoastră, dvs./dumneavoastră (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Pronominal)
EAGLES Category Residuals with Type="ForeignWord".
A foreign word is a text word which lies outside the traditionally accepted range of grammatical classes, it occurs quite commonly in many texts and very commonly in some. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node16.html#mr 19.09.06)
foreign word
mot etranger
EAGLES Category Residual with Type="Symbol".
In morphosyntactic annotation schemes, a symbol is a single graphical sign that occurs in a written text with a conventionalized meaning but that does not represent a phoneme (like ordinary characters), an orthogaphic sign (punctuation), or a number. (Christian Chiarcos) Symbols such as alphabetic characters can vary for singular and plural (e.g. How many Ps are there in `psychopath'?), and are in this respect like common nouns. In some languages (e.g. Portuguese) such symbols also have gender. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recr)
EAGLES category Residual with the attribute Type="Formula".
A formula (mathematical formulae) is a text word which lies outside the traditionally accepted range of grammatical classes, it occurs quite commonly in many texts and very commonly in some. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node16.html#mr 19.09.06)
EAGLES category Residual with Type="Acronym".
An acronym is an abbreviation, such as NATO, laser, and ABC, written as the initial letter or letters of words, and pronounced on the basis of this abbreviated written form. Acronyms are used most often to abbreviate names of organizations and long or frequently referenced terms. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acronym 19.09.06)
Introduced to account for Bullet http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1438
Sign used to mark an item in a list. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1438)
subClassOf partOfSpeech (dcif:conceptualDomain)
PTB bracketing guidelines, Bies et al. 1995)
graphical representation (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2249)
EAGLES adposition with the optional attribute Type="Preposition".
A postposition is an adposition that occurs after its complement. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAPostposition.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES adposition with Type="Preposition".
A preposition is an adposition that occurs before its complement. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAPreposition.htm 19.09.06)
preposition
préposition
word resulting from the aggregation of a pronoun and an auxiliary
Preposition that is the result of a morphological merge from at least two words. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1901)
word resulting from the aggregation of a preposition and a pronoun
Preposition that is a pure simple word in contrast with the notion of fused preposition. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1900)
Preposition that is a aggregation of words (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1934)
EAGLES adposition with optional attribute Type="Circumposition". The relationship between circumpositions and pre-/postpositions in EAGLES is not clear. We do not prohibit Circumpositions from being Prepositions or Postpositions, though the EAGLES feature assignment (with all optional values implemented) would possibly rule this out. (Chiarcos)
A circumposition is an adposition with a part before the noun phrase and a part after. It is much less common than prepositions or postpositions. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumposition 19.09.06)
A mass noun (also uncountable noun or non-count noun) can't be modified by a numeral, occur in singular/plural or co-occur with the relevant kind of determiner. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_noun 19.09.06)
introduced as generalization over http://purl.org/olia/ubyPos.owl#nounProperFirstName
In most European cultures, a given name designates an individual person throughout her/his life span. To distinguish people with the same name but from different families, additional elements have been introduced into name formulas that identify a person's family or ancestry. (CC)
introduced as generalization over http://purl.org/olia/ubyPos.owl#nounProperSecondName
In most European cultures, family names have been introduced into name formulas to identify a person's family, so that individuals with the same given name can be distinguished. (CC)
Proper nouns (also called proper names) are the names of unique entities. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noun 19.09.06)
proper noun
nom propre
proper name
A common noun is a noun that signifies a non-specific member of a group. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsACommonNoun.htm 19.09.06)
adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010)
Dzongkha uses honorific forms: ན་བཟའ་/nam za/ (cloths) is the honorific form of the noun གོ་ ལ་/gola/(cloths), གསངས་/sung/(tell) the honorific form of the verb སབ་/lab/(tell). We opted to mark them by adding the tag NNH (honorific common noun) and VBH (honorific verb) to enable future research on this specific usage of Dzongkha language. A number of tags were added to the set, of which we describe four in more detail: two of the additional tags are subclasses of verbs: VBH (honorific verb form), and VBN which describes past participle forms, like, e.g. བངམ་/jun/(created), the past particle form of བང་/jung/(create). (Chungku et al. 2010) A noun, which indicates respect for the person being addressed, e.g., Miwang Gel-poi Yab “A king's father” [Though father=Apa, but colloquially we say YAB in Dzongkha] (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
added in accordance with Sajjad (2007, for Urdu, http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#Title)
A title designates the function or the social status of an individual. Often, it accompanies a proper noun, but it can also be used in place of a proper noun (if the bearer of the title is contextually unambiguous). E.g. "The/Det German/Adj Chancellor/Title Angela/Name Merkel/Name said ..." can be used besides "the German Chancellor said ...". Accordingly, some schemes (e.g., Chungku et al. 2010, for Dzongkha) group titles together with proper names (http://purl.org/olia/dzongkha.owl#ParticularPersonNoun). However, if multiple people hold the same title, they can be referred to as a group, e.g., "Since WWII, the politics of the German chancellors always followed ...", and in this usage, titles are more comparable to common nouns. Functionally, titles are thus an intermediate category between CommonNoun and ProperNoun (cf. also Mulkern 1996). Titles do, however, share important characteristics with common nouns. In English, for example, titles generally require a definite determiner (unlike proper nouns), even if unambiguous ("the pope"). They are thus classified here as a subtype of CommonNoun. (Ann E. Mulkern. The name of the game. In Jeanette Gundel and Thorstein Fretheim, editors. Reference and Referent Accessibility: Pragmatics and Beyond. John Benjamins, Amsterdam and Philadelphia, 1996, pages 235–250.)
adopted from Sajjad (2007), http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#MeasuringUnit, TOCHECK: are units in Urdu Nouns ?
Measuring units are frequently used with numerals. However, they have a different syntactic structure than numerals (Sajjad 2007). In European languages, Units are generally expressed as nouns, e.g., English "ten/Numeral kilogram/Unit". "Kilogram" can also be used as a common noun: "The kilogram is losing weight" (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12276822) Hassan Sajjad (2007), Urdu Part of Speech Tagset, version 1.0.0.0, 07-12-2007, Center for research in Urdu Language Processing. National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, Lahore, Pakistan, http://www.crulp.org/Downloads/langproc/UrduPOStagger/UrduPOStagset.pdf
adopted from Ancorra, http://purl.org/olia/ancorra.owl#SpatiotemporalNoun
NLOC Noun Location This is an entirely new tag introduced to cover an important phenomenon of Indian Languages. Words like 'Age', 'upara', 'pahele', 'bAda', etc. are used in various ways in Hindi. 1. They act as a postposition along with 'ke' e.g. ghade ke upara thAlI rakhI HE. ("pot" "on" "plate" "kept" "is") Here 'ke upara' is a post position which is the direct equivalent of the English preposition 'on'. 2. They also act as adverbs. e.g. tuma upara jAo. ("You" "up" "go") Here 'upara' is an adverbial of place. 3. These words also take post positions themselves and so in some sense behave like nouns. e.g. vaHa upara se AyA. ("He" "above" "from" "came") 4. As pointed out in 3. above, these words take postpositions and act as arguments of the verb in the sentence. And they also take a post position to join with a another noun. So in that sense also they behave like nouns. e.g. upara kA HissA ("above" "of" "portion") To tag such words one option is to tag them according to the category to which they belong in the given sentence. For example in 1. above, the word is occurring as a postposition so can be marked as a postposition. In example 2. above, it is an adverb so can be marked as an adverb and so on. But we feel that these words are more like nouns as is evident from 3. and 4. above, and also if we consider for examples, 'aage', 'upara', etc. as places which are in front, up, etc then we can tag them as nouns. But these are not pure nouns. They are nouns which indicate a location or time. These also function as adverbs or prepositions in a context. So a new tag NLOC is introduced for such words. This tag will cater to a finite set of such words. set: (Age, piche, upara, nIce, bAda, pahele) ("front", "behind", "above", "below", "before") Such words if tagged according to their syntactic function, it will hamper machine learning. So a single tag, NLOC has been devised for such words which indicate location and time. e.g., (upara, Age, pahele, bAda) (IIIT (2007), A Part of Speech Tagger for Indian Languages (POS tagger), Tagset developed at IIIT - Hyderabad after consultations with several institutions through two workshops. available under http://shiva.iiit.ac.in/SPSAL2007/iiit_tagset_guidelines.pdf)
Noun denoting spatial and temporal expressions "A tag NST has been included to cover an important phenomenon of Indian languages. Certain expressions such as 'Upara' (above/up), 'nIce' (below) 'pahale' (before), 'Age' (front) etc are content words denoting time and space. These expressions, however, are used in various ways. For example, 5.1.2.1 These words often occur as temporal or spatial arguments of a verb in a given sentence taking the appropriate vibhakti (case marker): h3. vaha Upara so rahA thA . 'he' 'upstairs' 'sleep' 'PROG' 'was' “He was sleepign upstairs”. h4. vaha pahale se kamare meM bEThA thA . 'he' 'beforehand' 'from' ' room' 'in' 'sitting' 'was' “He was sitting in the room from beforehand” h5. tuma bAhara bETho 'you' 'outside' 'sit' “You sit outside”. Apart from functioning like an argument of a verb, these elements also modify another noun taking postposition 'kA'. h6. usakA baDZA bhAI Upara ke hisse meM rahatA hE 'his' 'elder' 'brother' 'upstairs' 'of' 'portion' 'in' 'live' 'PRES' “His elder brother lives in the upper portion of the house”. 5.1.2.2 Apart from occuring as a nominal expression, they also occur as a part of a postposition along with 'ke'. For example, h7. ghaDZe ke Upara thAlI rakhI hE. 'pot' 'of' 'above' 'plate' 'kept' 'is' The plate is kept on the pot”. h8. tuma ghara ke bAhara bETho 'you' 'home' 'of' 'outside' 'sit' “You sit outside the house”. 'Upara' and 'bAhara' are parts of complex postpositions 'ke Upara' and 'ke bAhara' in (h6) and (h7) respectively which can be translated into English prepositions 'on' and 'outside'. For tagging such words, one possible option is to tag them according to their syntactic function in the given context. For example in 5.2.2 (h7) above, the word 'Upara' is occurring as part of a postposition or a relation marker. It can, therefore, be marked as a postposition. Similarly, in 5.2.1. (h3) and (h6) above, it is a noun, therefore, mark it as a noun and so on. Alternatively, since these words are more like nouns, as is evident from 5.2.1 above they can be tagged as nouns in all there occurrences. The same would apply to 'bAhAra' (outside) in examples examples (h4), (h5) and (h8). However, if we follow any of the above approaches we miss out on the fact that this class of words is slightly different from other nouns. These are nouns which indicate 'location' or 'time'. At the same time, they also function as postpositions in certain contexts. Moreover, such words, if tagged according to their syntactic function, will hamper machine learning. Considering their special status, it was considered whether to introduce a new tag, NST, for such expressions. The following five possibilities were discussed : a) Tag both (h5) & (h8) as NN b) Tag both (h5) & (h8) as NST c) Tag (h5) as NN & (h8) as NST d) Tag (h5) as NST & (h8) as PSP e) Tag (h5) as NN & (h8) as PSP After considering all the above, the decision was taken in favour of (b). The decision was primarily based on the following observations: (i) 'bAhara' in both (h5) and (h8) denotes the same expression (place expression 'outside') (ii) In both (h5) and (h8), 'bAhara' can take a vibhakti like a noun ( bAhara ko bETho, ghara ke bAhara ko bETho) (iii) If a single tag is kept for both the usages, the decision making for annotators would also be easier. Therefore, a new tag NST is introduced for such expressions. The tag NST will be used for a finite set of such words in any language. For example, Hindi has Age (front), pIche (behind), Upara (above/upstairs), nIce (below/down), bAda (after), pahale (before), andara (inside), bAhara (outside) etc." (Akshar Bharati, Dipti Misra Sharma, Lakshmi Bai, Rajeev Sangal (2006), AnnCorra : Annotating Corpora. Guidelines For POS And Chunk Annotation For Indian Languages, Tech. Rep., L anguage Technologies Research Centre IIIT, Hyderabad, version of 15-12-2006, http://ltrc.iiit.ac.in/tr031/posguidelines.pdf)
EAGLES Noun with Countability="Countable".
A countable noun (also count noun) is a noun which can be modified by a numeral and occur in both singular and plural form, as well as co-occurring with quantificational determiners like every, each, several, most, etc.. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countable_noun 19.09.06)
relation noun (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2226)
diminutive noun (MIRACL LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2225)
subClassOf noun (dcif:isA); can be proper name (German Julchen from Julia, Russian Olichka from Olga) or common noun (German Blümchen from Blume "flower", Russian yozhik from yozh "hedgehock")
noun of a voice (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2253)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3004 (plainVerb)
to be renamed to LexicalVerb ("main verb" can also mean "head of a finite clause")
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1400 (main verb)
Main verb in contrast to a modal or an auxiliary. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1400) verb which has its own semantics (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3004, plainVerb)
This is an ill-defined concept originating from ISOcat. It is however, not possible to circumscribe it in OLiA as it lacks an established concept of deficiency. Despite the unsatisfactory definition, this was thus adopted in OLiA for compatibility with ISOcat, but marked as deprecated.
verb lacking certain morphosyntactic properties
adopted from the Bambara Reference Corpus (BRC, http://cormand.huma-num.fr/gloses.html)
qualitative verb
verbe qualitatif
An agentive verb marks the semantic role of agent or the doer of an action. Example: ་ ་ ས་ ་ ་ བསད་ ག། Dorji-gi jele sänu 'Dorji killed the cat' (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010, http://purl.org/olia/dzongkha.owl#HonorificVerb)
Dzongkha uses honorific forms: ན་བཟའ་/nam za/ (cloths) is the honorific form of the noun གོ་ ལ་/gola/(cloths), གསངས་/sung/(tell) the honorific form of the verb སབ་/lab/(tell). We opted to mark them by adding the tag NNH (honorific common noun) and VBH (honorific verb) to enable future research on this specific usage of Dzongkha language. A number of tags were added to the set, of which we describe four in more detail: two of the additional tags are subclasses of verbs: VBH (honorific verb form), and VBN which describes past participle forms, like, e.g. བངམ་/jun/(created), the past particle form of བང་/jung/(create).
adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010, http://purl.org/olia/dzongkha.owl#AspirationalVerb)
It is a verb, which indicates a strong desire to achieve something, without the doer. དག་པ ་ ང་ ་ ་བར་ ག། dag-pai zhing-lu kewa shÔ 'May i be born in pure land' (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
A non-agentive verb is a type of verb, which indicates an action without the doer. Example: ང་མ་ འ ར་ ས། 'lungma phur-dä 'A wind is blowing' (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010, http://purl.org/olia/dzongkha.owl#NonAgentiveVerb
An impersonal verb is a verb that - occurs only in third person singular forms - has no specified agent , and - has a dummy subject or no subject. (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnImpersonalVerb.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1306)
(of a verb) having no logical subject. Usually in English the pronoun it is used in such cases as a grammatical subject, as for example in It is raining. (of a pronoun) not denoting a person (www.wordreference.com/English/definition.asp?en=impersonal; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1306)
EAGLES Verb with Finiteness="Non-finite".
Verb forms occurring on their own only in dependent clauses and lacking tense and mood contrasts. (adapted from Crystal 2003; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1332) A non-finite verb is a verb that is not fully inflected for categories that are marked inflectionally in a language, such as the following: Tense, Aspect, Modality, Number, Person. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsANonfiniteVerb.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES NonFiniteVerbs with VerbForm="Infinitive"
An infinitive is the base form of a verb. It is unmarked for inflectional categories such as the following: Aspect, Modality, Number, Person and Tense. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnInfinitive.htm 19.09.06)
Missing in EAGLES, added as subclass of Verb and Noun in accordance with the SFB632 annotation guidelines: VN verbal noun (§4.3.12.2): Some of the Chadic languages have morphologically opaque verbal noun stems in the progresive aspect, i.e. it is not obvious from the morphology that we deal with a deverbal noun, instead of a verb proper. In such cases, use the tag VN.
A verbal noun is a noun formed directly as an inflexion of a verb or a verb stem, sharing at least in part its constructions. This term is applied especially to gerunds, and sometimes also to infinitives and supines. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verbal_noun 19.09.06)
property that expresses a verbal idea under an abstract form. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2224) the verbal noun present in Arabic and various Caucasian languages, such as Georgian and North-Caucasian languages. This grammatical term is an Arabic word, used later as a specialized, technical term to name the verbal noun in Arabic and Caucasian grammar. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masdar)
Introduced to account for Converbs in Armenian and other languages, a generalization over деепричастие
TODO: clarify terminological relation between Converb, Supine and AdverbialParticiple
A converb is "[...] a nonfinite verb form whose main function is to mark adverbial subordination. Another way of putting it is that converbs are verbal adverbs, just like participles are verbal adjectives." Haspelmath, M., & König, E. (1995). Converbs in cross-linguistic perspective, p. 3
EAGLES NonFiniteVerb with VerbForm="Supine".
Supine is a nonfinite form of motion verbs with functions similar to that of an infinitive (Angelika Adams)
EAGLES NonFinite with VerbForm="Participle".
A participle is a lexical item, derived from a verb that has some of the characteristics and functions of both verbs and adjectives. In English, participles may be used as adjectives, and in non-finite forms of verbs. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAParticiple.htm 19.09.06) Non-finite form of a verb other than the infinitive that is used in many languages possibly in conjunction with an auxiliary and that functions attributively, predicatively or adverbially. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1341)
participle
participe
adopted from ILPOSTS for Indian languages
e.g. Bengali বুঝলে (bujhle) from বোঝা (bojha) "to understand" (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E0%A6%AC%E0%A7%8B%E0%A6%9D%E0%A6%BE)
[In Bengali, t]he Conditional Participle is widely used to convey "if a certain action [pertaining to the parent verb] is done,...". The logic is: "in the case or condition of a certain action being done". Being impersonal, without regard for the doer of the action that caused the condition, it is not declined to suit number or gender. If this doer is not defined in the Bengali condition clause but needs to be stated in a natural-sounding English translation, this is identified and drawn from the second clause. For example:- Student: Teaching Truth in Bengali If you pay attention,* you will learn. manoyog kar-*le* tumi shikh-be. * [or, If attention is paid] (http://www.jaspell.co.uk/bengalicourse2007/wb149study49.pdf)
TODO: check whether this could be modelled as Participle and hasMood some ConditionalMood
introduced as a shorthand for Participle and hasTense some Present
introduced as a shorthand for Participle and hasTense some Past
EAGLES NonFiniteVerb with VerbForm="Gerund"; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2243 (gerundive)
property for a non-finite form of a verb other than the infinitive. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2243) A gerund is a kind of verbal noun that exists in some languages. In today's English, gerunds are nouns built from a verb with an '-ing' suffix. They can be used as the subject of a sentence, an object, or an object of preposition. They can also be used to complement a subject. Often, gerunds exist side-by-side with nouns that come from the same root but the gerund and the common noun have different shades of meaning. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerund, http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/English:Gerund 19.09.06) The term _gerund_ is ambiguous: with respect to Latin, in whose grammatical tradition it originates, it refers to a deverbal noun, and is needed in this function for Polish as well; in descriptions of some other languages, however, it has been used for an adverbial participle. The two meanings have nothing in common, except that the English _ing_-form can translate both. (Ivan A Derzhanski, email 2010/06/09) Here, it is assumed that Gerund refers only to deverbal nouns, cf. NominalNonfiniteVerb in the IIIT tagset (http://purl.org/olia/iiit.owl#NominalNonFiniteVerb)
cf. ILPOSTS NominalParticiple, for Indian languages, there in contrast with AdjectivalParticiple, AdverbialParticiple and ConditionalParticiple, but no definition provided. (http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#NominalParticiple)
Introduced in accordance with EAGLES, where 'Ing' is suggested as a cover term for the Gerund-Participle-Merger in English. This is, however, a language-specific phenomenon and should instead be represented by multiple inheritance from OLiA Reference Model concepts.
English verb forms ending in '-ing' that represent either Gerunds or Participles.
http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#LightVerb, for Farsi
In linguistics, a light verb is a verb participating in complex predication that has little semantic content of its own, but provides through inflection some details on the event semantics, such as aspect, mood, or tense. The semantics of the compound, as well as its argument structure, are determined by the head or primary component of the compound, which may be a verb or noun (V+V or V+N compounds). Other names for "light verb" include: vector verb or explicator verb, emphasising its role within the compound; or thin verb or semantically weak verb, emphasising (as with "light") its lack of semantics. A "semantically weak" verb is not to be confused with a "weak verb" as in the Germanic weak inflection. Light verbs are similar to auxiliary verbs in some ways. Most English light verbs occur in V+N forms sometimes called "stretched verbs": for example, take in take a nap, where the primary sense is provided by "nap", and "take" is the light verb. The light verbs most common in these constructions are also common in phrasal verbs. A verb which is "light" in one context may be "heavy" in another: as with "take" in I will take a book to read. Examples in other languages include the Yiddish geb in geb a helf (literally give a help, "help"); the French faire in faire semblant (lit. make seeming, "pretend"); the Hindi nikal paRA (lit. leave fall, "start to leave"); and the bǎ construction in Chinese.[1] Some verbs are found in many such expressions; to reuse an earlier example, take is found in take a nap, take a shower, take a sip, take a bow, take turns, and so on. Light verbs are extremely common in Indo-Iranian languages, Japanese, and other languages in which verb compounding is a primary mechanism for marking aspectual distinctions. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light_verb)
auxiliary verb
auxiliary
auxiliaire
EAGLES Verbs with Status="Auxiliary", http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1244
An auxiliary verb is a verb which accompanies the lexical verb of a verb phrase, and expresses grammatical distinctions not carried by the lexical verb, such as person, number, tense aspect, and voice. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnAuxiliaryVerb.htm 19.09.06) Besides modal verbs ("semiauxiliary") and "strict" auxiliary verbs, also copulas are classified under auxiliary verbs here, as this is a praxis applied in practically every EAGLES-conformant morphosyntactic annotation scheme. Part of speech referring to the set of verbs, subordinate to the main lexical verb which help to make distinction in mood, aspect, voice etc. (Crystal 2003; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1244)
Added for compatibility with the SFB632 annotation guidelines. May correspond to the (optional, French-only) EAGLES feature value "semiauxiliary". http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1329
TODO: rename to semiauxiliary, this seems to be a more language-independent term
Verb form that is usually used with another verb to express ideas such as possibilities, permission, or intention. (Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1329) A modal verb (also modal, modal auxiliary verb, modal auxiliary) is a type of auxiliary verb that is used to indicate modality. The use of auxiliary verbs to express modality is characteristic of Germanic languages. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modal_verb 19.09.06) In addition to main and auxiliary verbs, it may be useful (e.g. in English) to recognise an intermediate category of semi-auxiliary for such verbs as be going to, have got to, ought to. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1v 20.09.06) The auxiliaries in English subdivide into the primary verbs `be', `have', and `do', which can also function as main verbs, and the modal auxiliaries such as `can', `will', and `would', which are uninflected, and always function as auxiliaries. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/morphsyn/node158.html#SECTION00054800000000000000)
Definition in accordance with the SFB632 definition of "auxiliary verb" as non-copular and non-modal verb. In EAGLES, auxiliary verb also seems to be non-modal: In addition to main and auxiliary verbs, it may be useful (e.g. in English) to recognise an intermediate category of semi-auxiliary for such verbs as be going to, have got to, ought to. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1v 20.09.06)
The verb have as an auxiliary. (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnAuxiliaryVerb.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1299)
Verb used to link the subject of a sentence and its noun or adjective complement or complementing phrase in certain languages. This verb could be used also to form the passive voice. (www.wordreference.com/English/definition.asp?en=be -> 4); http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1246)
adopted from Sajjad (2007) for Urdu, cf. http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#AspectualAuxiliary
An auxiliary that marks exclusively aspect, e.g., in Urdu: Auxiliaries: Based on the syntactic nature of Urdu, auxiliaries are divided into two categories. Aspectual auxiliaries always occur after main verb of the sentence. Tense auxiliaries are used to show the time of the action. They occurred at the end of the verb phrase (Sajjad 2007). E.g., Urdu rahā, an auxiliary element is used to mark the durative aspect. (Hardie 2004, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#RahaAuxiliary)
adopted from Sajjad (2007) for Urdu, cf. http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#TenseAuxiliary
An auxiliary that marks exclusively tense, e.g., in Urdu: Auxiliaries: Based on the syntactic nature of Urdu, auxiliaries are divided into two categories. Aspectual auxiliaries always occur after main verb of the sentence. Tense auxiliaries are used to show the time of the action. They occurred at the end of the verb phrase. (Sajjad 2007). In Urdu, the auxiliary gā indicates future tense when it follows a verb in the subjunctive form. (http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#GaAuxiliary)
Adopted from the SFB632 annotation guidelines. In EAGLES, copulas are not distinguished from auxiliaries, hence represented as such here.
A copula is an intransitivity verb which links a subject to a noun phrase, an adjective or an other constituent which expresses the predicate. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsACopula.htm 19.09.06)
copula
copule
A finite verb is a verb form that occurs in an independent clause, and is fully inflected according to the inflectional categories marked on verbs in the language. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAFiniteVerb.htm 19.09.06) Property applied to a verb form that can occur on its own in an independent sentence. (Crystal 2003; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1287)
EAGLES finite verbs with VerbForm="Subjunctive".
A subjunctive verb is typically used to expresses wishes, commands (in subordinate clauses), emotion, possibility, judgment, necessity, and statements that are contrary to fact at present. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subjunctive_mood 19.09.06)
EAGLES finite verb with VerbForm="Conditional".
A conditional verb is a verb form in many languages. It is used to express degrees of certainty or uncertainty and hypothesis about past, present, or future. Such forms often occur in conditional sentences. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_mood 19.09.06)
EAGLES FiniteVerb with VerbForm="Imperative"
An imperative verb is used to express commands, direct requests, and prohibitions. Often, direct use of the imperative mood may appear blunt or even rude, so it is often used with care. Example: "Paul, read that book". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_mood#Imperative_mood 19.09.06)
http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Quotative, MTE VForm="quotative" (Estonian)
A quotative is grammatical device to mark reported speech in some languages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotative), e.g., in Estonian. ‘Reportedly, while he was going (in his boat), he turned over.’ Ta olevat oma paadiga ümber läinud He was_QUOTATIVE his_own boat_WITH over gone. (Estonian translation of an example given under http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAQuotativeEvidential.htm) (Heiki-Jaan Kaalep, email 2010/06/22)
EAGLES FiniteVerb with VerbForm="Indicative"
Indicative mood is used in factual statements. All intentions in speaking that a particular language does not put into another mood use the indicative. It is the most commonly used mood and is found in all languages. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_mood#Indicative_mood 19.09.06)
introduced AttributivePronoun as subclass of Determiner (Article is no AttributivePronoun)
EAGLES PronounOrDeterminer with category="Determiner"
Note that "Determiner" in OLiA also covers determiner-like elements in languages without grammaticalized determiner category. This is because AttributePronoun is defined as being in the intersection of Determiner and Pronoun. In languages without grammaticalized determiners, attributive pronouns are, howevetr, not characterized as determiners, but rather as adjectives. In order to provide a uniform modeling of attributive pronouns, they are defined here as being the intersection of Determiner and Pronoun. (Chiarcos)
A determiner is a noun modifier that expresses the reference of a noun or noun phrase in the context, including quantity, rather than attributes expressed by adjectives. This part of speech is defined in some languages, such as in English, as it is distinct from adjectives grammatically, though most English dictionaries still identify the determiners as adjectives. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Determiner 19.09.06)
determiner
determinatif
An attributive pronoun is a pronoun that modifies an NP.
In languages with grammaticalized determiners, attributive pronouns are determiners. In languages without grammaticalized determiners, attributive pronouns are described as adjectives. In order to provide a uniform modeling of attributive pronouns, they are defined here as being the intersection of Determiner and Pronoun. Note that this entails that the definition of "Determiner" is broadened to include determiner-like elements in languages without grammatical determiners. (Chiarcos)
Determiner/Type="emphatic" (Romanian) In Romanian, there are specific forms for the so-called emphatic determiner, which may accompany both a noun and a personal pronoun: fata însăşi (the girl herself), also ea însăşi (she herself). e.g., însele/însumi, însemi/însumi, însene/însumi, însevă/însumi, înseşi/însumi, înseţi/însumi, însumi, însuşi/însumi, însuţi/însumi (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#EmphaticDeterminer)
deprecated: merely shorthand for Determiner and hasEmphasis some Emphatic
EAGLES Determiner with DetType="Demonstrative".
Demonstratives are deictic expressions (they depend on an external frame of reference) which indicate entities a speaker refers to, and distinguishes those entities from others. Demonstratives are usually employed for spatial deixis (using the context of the physical surroundings), but in many languages they double as discourse deictics, referring not to concrete objects but to words, phrases and propositions mentioned in speech. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonstrative 19.09.06)
EAGLES Determiner with DetType="Indefinite"
An indefinite determiner is a determiner that expresses a referent's indefinite number or amount, i.e. "some", "any", "many". (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAQuantifier.htm 22.09.06) Note that here, a separate top-level class Quantifier has been introduced that covers expressions of number and amount as *semantic* concepts. Plural indefinite determiners are thus to be modeled as IndefiniteDeteriner and Quantifier.
Determiner/Type="negative" (Romanian) In Romanian the negative determiner is expressed by the unit nici + indefinite article (e.g. nici un, nici o). (MTE v4) e.g., nici-o/nici_un, nici_o/nici_un, nici_un, nici_unei/nici_un, nici_unii/nici_un, nici_unor/nici_un, nici_unui/nici_un (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#NegativeDeterminer)
EAGLES Determiner with DetType="Possessive".
A possessive determiner is a part of speech that modifies a noun by attributing ownership to someone or something. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Possessive_adjective 19.09.06)
shorthand for ReflexiveDeterminer and PossessiveDeterminer, relevant for MULTEXT-East (Slavic) and EMILLE (Urdu), http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ReflexivePossessiveAdjective
Attributive possessive pronoun form of the reflexive pronoun, e.g., Russian свой: Обама на свой день рождения угощал гостей стейками и хот-догами. Obama on his day of.birth entertained guests with.steaks and hot.dogs "On his birthday, Obama entertained his guests with steaks and hot dogs." (http://ua.rian.ru/world_news/20110805/78815136.html) The antecedent of a possessive reflexive is not determined by its gender, but by its syntactic prominence.
A relative pronoun whose antecedent is the possessor of the subject or object in the relative clause.
here "Pronoun" seems to refer to attributive pronoun, as the corresponding possessiverelativeDeterminer is not found in ISOcat (substitutive possessive relative pronouns [without accompanying noun] do exist, but are comparably marked, cf. "I remember whose lines these are." vs. "I remember certain lines and whose they are." In this example, the latter is actually an elliptical construction with an elided head noun)
EAGLES Determiner with DetType="Partitive".
TODO: Check the relationship between PartitiveDeterminer and PartitiveCase: The partitive case is a grammatical case which denotes "partialness", "without result", or "without specific identity" (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#partitiveCase, with reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partitive). PartitiveCase expresses the partial nature of the referent of the noun it marks, as opposed to expressing the whole unit or class of which the referent is a part. This case may be found in items such as the following: existential clauses, nouns that are accompanied by numerals or units of measure, or predications of material from which something is made. It often has a meaning similar to the English word 'some'. (GOLD, "Partitive"; see there for references)
A partitive determiner indicates an indefinite quantity of a mass noun; there is no partitive article in English, though the words some or any often have that function. (Wilson and Leech 1996)
TOCHECK: Are there non-possessive reflexive determiners ?
Determiner that refers to the same entity. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1377)
Determiner/Type="exceptional" is applied to the Persian uniquitive determiner تنها i.e., "the only" (MTE v4; Hamidreza Kobdani, email 2010/06/15, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#UniquitiveDeterminer)
TODO: This class is based on surface criteria of Indo-European languages. In other (and even IE) languages, relative pronouns are partly also derived from non-interrogatives, but rather from demonstratives, cf. English "that". Should be abandoned unless language-independent evidence for its existence is provided. DEPRECATED: to be replaced by InterrogativeDeterminer or RelativeDeterminer
EAGLES Determiner with Det.-Type="Int./Rel.".
EAGLES Determiner with optional attribute WhType="Exclamatory"
A exclamatory determiner is used in combination with a Nominal Phrase in order to create an exclamation (a more emphatic form of statement), e.g. "What a lovely colour!", "What a wonderful day this is!" (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/pub/eagles/lexicons/elm_en.ps.gz, p.27, 07.05.07; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics), 07.05.07)
EAGLES Determiner with Wh-Type="Relative".
The relative determiner describes a attributive relative pronoun. In German "wessen" in "Ich weiss nicht, wessen Auto das ist." or the English "whose" in "The man whose daughter became ill.". The relative determiner needs a noun to complete a NP (Nominal Phrase). (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/pub/eagles/lexicons/elm_en.ps.gz, p.28, 07.05.07)
EAGLES Determiner with WhType="Interrogative"
A interrogative is a function word used to introduce an interrogative clause. E.g. "which", "what", "whose" (interrogative possessive determiner) are interrogative determiner in English. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrogative_word 02.05.07)
EAGLE top-level category "Article" (AT): In Eagles articles are subsumed under determiners and kept as a separate class. It is a sub-class of determiners which is disjoint with the other determiner classes. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recn 18.09.06) Modelled here as sub-class of Determiner because of its syntactic function.
An article is a member of a small class of determiners that identify a noun's definite or indefinite reference, and the new or given status. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnArticle.htm 02.05.07)
not to be confused with PoessiveDeterminer
In Romanian, the possessive article (also called genitival article) is an element in the structure of the possessive pronoun, of the ordinal numeral (e.g. al meu (mine) and al treilea (the third)), and of the indefinite genitive forms of the nouns (e.g. capitol al cărţii (chapter of the book)), e.g., -al/al, a/al, ai/al, al, ale/al, alor/al (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#PossessiveArticle)
EAGLES Article with Article-Type="Definite".
A definite article is used before singular and plural nouns that refer to a particular member of a group. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_%28grammar%29 18.09.06)
introduced to account for the specific determiner in Farsi (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CliticSpecificDeterminer)
specific determiner
specific article
"By ʻspecificʼ and ʻnon-specificʼ I intend the difference between the two readings of English indefinites like (3): (3) Iʼm looking for a deer. In the specific reading there is a particular deer, say Bambi, that I am looking for. In the non-specific reading I will be happy to find any deer. Von Heusinger (2002) likes the test in English of inserting ʻcertainʼ after the ʻaʼ to fix the specific reading. In either reading of (3) a deer is being introduced as a new discourse referent. This is opposed to ʻdefiniteʼ which requires a previous pragmatic instantiation as in ʻIʼm looking for the deer.ʼ In English both the readings of (3) are indefinite. In Klallam, the specific demonstratives are neither definite nor indefinite." (Montler, Timothy. 2007. Klallam demonstratives. Papers ICSNL XLVII. The 42nd International Conference on Salish and Neighbouring Language, pp. 409-425. University of British Columbia Working Papers in Linguistics, Volume 20; on specific vs. nonspecific determiners in Klallam, a Salish language, http://montler.net/papers/KlallamDemons.pdf)
Persian does have an article, but it marks specificity rather than definiteness. The Persian article is similar to the Balkan one (a clitic of pronominal origin that's written together with the word), except that it isn't exactly definite (you can even see it described as an indefinite article). (Ivan A. Derzhanski, p.c. 2010/06/18)
introduced in analogy with SpecificArticle
nonspecific determiner
nonspecific article
For definiteness, when a specific form is the syntactic subject of the clause. (DFKI; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1928)
DCR: "full article" in dcif:conceptualDomain definiteness, remodelled as a property of DefiniteArticles here
cf. http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CliticDistalDeterminer
clitic definite determiner, e.g., in Macedonian, Bulgarian, and Romanian (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CliticDeterminerType)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1927 (short article)
For definiteness, when a specific form is not the syntactic subject of the clause. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1927)
DCR: subClassOf definiteness (dcif:conceptualDomain)
TODO: Check relationship with PartitiveDeterminer
EAGLES Article with Article-Type="Partitive". (optional for French)
A partitive article indicates an indefinite quantity of a mass noun; there is no partitive article in English, though the words some or any often have that function. An example is French du / de la / des, as in Voulez-vous du café? ("Do you want some coffee?" or "Do you want coffee"). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_(grammar) 19.09.06)
EAGLES Article with Article-Type="Indefinite".
An indefinite article is used before singular nouns that refer to any member of a group. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_%28grammar%29 18.09.06)
EAGLES Adposition with Type="FusedPrepArt"
The additional value Fused prep-art is for the benefit of those who do not find it practical to split fused words such as French au (= à + le) into two text words. This very common phenomenon of a fused preposition + article in West European languages should preferably, however, be handled by assigning two tags to the same orthographic word (one for the preposition and one for the article). (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1ap 19.09.06)
EAGLES PronounOrDeterminer with Category="Pronoun".
A pronoun is a pro-form which functions like a noun and substitutes for a noun or a noun-phrase. A language may have several classes of pronouns. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAPronoun.htm 19.09.06) A pronominal is a phrase that functions as a pronoun (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAPronominal.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1369)
A pronoun, which classifies or differentiates(pronoun) by a single basis, like everybody; each; individual etc. འ ག་པ ་ ་ ར་ ག་ར་ ན་ ང་ ང་ཁ་ ས་ད ། Drupai Miser Gara Enrung Dzongkha ShegÔ 'Every Bhutanese must know Dzongkha' (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
adopted from ILPOSTS (for Indian languages), http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#Distributivity is a property of Pronominals
When the subject is conjoined, the reflexive cannot refer to only one of them. The proform has to be a distributive pronoun, i.e., the reduplicated form, when it has coreference to respective subjects, e.g., *kumaarum_i/Kumar.and umaavum_j/Uma.and tan_i+j/self-poss puunekki/cat.to paalu/milk kuDuttaanaanga/give-pst-aggr. "*Kumar_i and Uma gave milk to his_i/her_j cat." (Annamalai 2000, p. 189, on Tamil) Unlike reciprocals, the two parts of a distributive pronoun cannot be considered as two full, independent NPs. In "awar/1 awar/2", only "awar/2" is case marked; "awar/1" is its citation form. Also, the two parts cannot be separated by intervening material (cf. English "one another"). (Jayaseelan 2000, p. 149, on Malayalam) (K.A. Jayaseelan, 2000, Lexical anaphors and pronouns in Malayalam, In: Barbara C. Lust, Kashi Wali, James W. Gair, K.V.Subharao (eds.), Lexical Anaphors and Pronouns in Selected South Asian Languages. A Principled Typology, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, p. 113-168) (E. Annamalai, 2000, Lexical anaphors and pronouns in Tamil, , In: Barbara C. Lust, Kashi Wali, James W. Gair, K.V.Subharao (eds.), Lexical Anaphors and Pronouns in Selected South Asian Languages. A Principled Typology, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, p. 169-216)
A Locative pronoun is a pronoun, which locates the object of a noun or place of anything. ་ ན་ གས་ ང་ ་ ག། Nâ[LP] PhÜntsho'ling-lu ShÔ 'Come here at Phuntsholing' (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
TODO: clarify relationship with pronominal adverb
introduced to account for non-attributive pronouns, see olia:AttributivePronoun
EAGLES Pronoun with Pron.-Type="Demonstrative".
TODO: This definition is nonsatisfactory, cf. Ehlich (1982) for intra-textual ("anadeictic") uses of demonstratives.
Demonstrative pronouns are deictic words (they depend on an external frame of reference). They indicate which entities a speaker refers to, and distinguishes those entities from others. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demonstrative_pronoun 19.09.06)
EAGLES Pronoun with Pron.-Type="Possessive".
TODO: Check regrouping possibilities, as it is covered by the GOLD definition of PersonalPronoun (i.e., person marking, although no person congruency). PossessivePronoun isn't disjoint with IndefinitePronoun (German: "jemandes" nach jemandes Pfeife tanzen), DemonstrativePronoun (German:"dessen" Zähne alle exakt gleich waren), WHPronoun (German: "wessen" Bedürfnissen soll sie genügen), ReflexivePronoun (Old English "sin" his/her/its).
A possessive pronoun is a pronoun that expresses relationships like ownership, such as kinship, and other forms of association. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAPossessivePronoun.htm 19.09.06)
conditional pronoun (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2222)
Pronoun marked to show its importance. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1941)
DEPRECATED: shorthand for Pronoun and hasEmphasis some Emphatic
pronoun that have reference to something characterized by allusions. (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2223) an invariable pronoun expressing a specific intention by means of unclear term (Khemakhem Aida, 2010-05-10 via isocat-morpho@loria.fr) examples from Arabic (Monica Monachini 2010-05-06 via isocat-morpho@loria.fr): "kam nahaituhu" (how often I forbade him, Hans Wehr), "baas Saar `amra `ashr isniin, gam (= kam) yriid paysikil" (He just turned ten, and here [how] he wants a bicycle, Georgetown University Iraqi Arabic-English Dictionary), "gam (= kam) yurguS imnil-faraH" ([how] he jumped for joy, Georgetown University Iraqi Arabic-English Dictionary)
In the Russian MTE v4 specs, Pronoun/Type="nonspecific" marks the following Russian words: весь 'all', всякий 'any, every', сам 'oneself', самый 'the very', каждый 'every, each', иной 'other', любой 'any', другой 'other'. The name "nonspecific" follows Halliday (1985, Section 6.2.1.1). (MTE v4) A nonspecific pronoun refers to an unidentified or general entity (e.g., "I saw *someone*", "I saw *everyone*"). A nonspecific pronoun is not, therefore, a personal pronoun, but an indefinite one. (Andrews 2003). Andrews, Richard J. (2003), Introduction to Classical Nahuatl. University of Oklahoma Press. Halliday, M.A.K. (1985), An introduction to Functional Grammar, London: Edward Arnold (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#NonspecificPronoun)
Pronoun lacking person referent. (Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1426) More precisely, a form of pronoun that denotes the absence of a concrete or specific referent, e.g., German "man". As opposed to IndefinitePronoun, this referent is not just discourse-new, but generic or hypothetical.
EAGLES Pronoun with Pron.-Type="Indefinite".
An indefinite pronoun is a pronoun that belongs to a class whose members indicate indefinite reference. Examples in English are "anybody", "one", "somebody". (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnIndefinitePronoun.htm 19.09.06)
Pronoun used in a context of a negation or for expressing a negation. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1925)
subClassOf pronoun (dcif:isA), reclassification as IndefinitePronoun follows EAGLES and STTS praxis
TODO: Check cross-linguistic validity of this class. This class is based on surface criteria of Indo-European languages. In other (and even IE) languages, relative pronouns are partly also derived from non-interrogatives, but rather from demonstratives, cf. English "that". Should be abandoned unless language-independent evidence for its existence is provided. DEPRECATED: to be replaced with InterrogativePronoun or RelativePronoun
EAGLES Pronoun with Pron.-Type="Int./Rel.".
EAGLES WHPronoun with Wh-Type="Exclamatory".
An exclamative pronoun is a word which marks an exclamation. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnExclamative.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES WHPronoun with Wh-Type="Relative".
A relative pronoun is a pronoun that marks a relative clause, functions grammatically within the relative clause, and is coreferential to the word modified by the relative clause. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsARelativePronoun.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES WHPronoun with Wh-Type="Interrogative".
A interrogative pronoun is a pro-form that is used in questions in place of the item questioned for. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnInterrogativeProForm.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES Pronoun with Pron.-Type="Pers/Ref".
TODO: This class should be renamed to PersonalPronoun, as it corresponds to the definition of PersonalPronoun in GOLD. Subclasses then should be renamed to ReflexivePronoun and NonreflexivePersonalPronoun.
In Eagles personal and reflexive pronouns are brought together as a single value Pers./Refl. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recp 19.09.06)
EAGLES PersReflPronoun with SpecialPronounType="Reflexive".
A reflexive pronoun is a pronoun that has coreference with the subject. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAReflexivePronoun.htm 19.09.06)
Not to be confused with pronominal determiners
The Estonian determinal pronouns _ise_, _end(a)_ `(one)self'." combine aspects of emphatic pronouns and reflexive pronouns. It could also be described as an intensifier that is formally identical with the reflexive pronoun or as an emphatic reflexive pronoun. (Ivan A. Derzhanski, Heiki-Jaan Kaalep, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#DeterminalPronoun; Insa Gülzow (2006), The acquisition of intensifiers: Emphatic reflexives in English and German child language, Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, p. 258)
pronom personnel
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3013 (irreflexive personal pronoun)
EAGLES PersReflPronoun with "Special PronounType"="Personal".
TODO: the SIL definition (also used in GOLD) is nonsatisfactory. German reflexive pronouns have person distinction, so this definition actually applies to EAGLES PersReflPronoun rather than EAGLES PersonalPronoun.
A personal pronoun is a pronoun that expresses a distinction of person deixis. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAPersonalPronoun.htm 19.09.06) Note that (despite the SIL definition), an olia:PersonalPronoun refers to irreflexive personal pronouns. Personal pronoun categories without reflexivity sensitivity should be mapped onto olia:PersReflPronoun. (CC)
EAGLES PersReflPronoun with "Special PronounType"="Reciprocal".
A reciprocal pronoun is a pronoun that expresses a mutual feeling or action among the referents of a plural subject. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAReciprocalPronoun.htm 19.09.06)
Missing in the EAGLES recommendations, added in accordance with the TIGER annotation scheme (for German). As expletive pronouns often (e.g., in German or English) have the form of 3.sg personal pronouns, expletives are modelled here as subclass of ThirdPersonPronoun.
TODO: compare with GOLD, modeled as a PartOfSpeechProperty there
TODO: revise definition, the GOLD definition applies to copula, too.
An expletive (also known as a dummy word) is a part of speech whose members have no meaning, but complete a sentence to make it grammatical [Crystal 1997, 127] (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Expletive) In European languages, expletives are pronouns. A verbal part of speech that "has no meaning, but complete a sentence to make it grammatical" is a copula (see AuxiliaryVerb).
Three different expletive usages [of the German expletive pronoun es] are traditionally distinguished: formal subject or object (expletive argument), correlate of an extraposed clausal argument (expletive correlate), and Vorfeld-es (structural expletive) (cf. (Eisenberg 1999 2001), (Pütz 1986)). ... The formal subject obligatorily occurs with weather verbs, e.g. "Es regnet" and unpersonal or agentless constructions such as "Es gibt so eine Buchung" or "Es geht um populäre Unterhaltung." Some verbs optionally permit an expletive subject but also occur with referential subjects such as "Max/Es kopft an der Tür." A formal object is found in constructions like "jmd. legt es an auf etw." or "jmd. verdirbt es mit jmdm." In all examples mentioned, es functions as a grammatical argument without semantic contribution, i.e. it does not refer to a person, object, or event. (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.60f)
Three different expletive usages [of the German expletive pronoun es] are traditionally distinguished: formal subject or object (expletive argument), correlate of an extraposed clausal argument (expletive correlate), and Vorfeld-es (structural expletive) (cf. (Eisenberg 1999 2001), (Pütz 1986)). (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.60) Extraposed clausal arguments: "Aber [es] ist übertrieben zu sagen, damit bekäme die FU erst eine Identität." (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.62)
Three different expletive usages [of the German expletive pronoun es] are traditionally distinguished: formal subject or object (expletive argument), correlate of an extraposed clausal argument (expletive correlate), and Vorfeld-es (structural expletive) (cf. (Eisenberg 1999 2001), (Pütz 1986)). (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.60) In German, a purely structural dummy element ... occurs in Vorfeld position only and is not correlated with any argument of the clause. It does not agree with the verb which becomes evident if there is a plural subject in the Mittelfeld: "es zahlen ihn die Völker, deren Menschenrechte angeblich verteidigt werden." It is ungrammatical in the Mittelfeld, e.g. *". . . dass es ihn die Völker zahlen".
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2221, modelled as a subClassOf PersonalPronoun, clitic pronouns are weak personal pronouns
Personnal pronoun that is affixed. (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2221)
Personal pronoun that cannot occupy the position after a preposition and/or reinforce a strong personal pronoun. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1414)
Personal pronoun that can occupy the position after a preposition and/or reinforce a weak personal pronoun. (Eagles; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1390)
EAGLES Pronoun with Person="Second". According to Mish et al. (1990:878), this pertains to PersonalPronoun only (and ReflexivePronoun as German "dich"), so SecondPersonPronoun is modelled as a PersReflPronoun here.
Second person deixis means deictic reference to a person or persons identified as addressee. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsSecondPersonDeixis.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES PersonalPronoun with Politeness="Polite". The EAGLES attribute politeness (polite/ familiar) is limited to second-person pronouns. In French, for example, it is possible to treat Polite simply as pragmatic values encoded through other attributes - especially person and number. In languages where there are special polite pronoun forms (e.g. Dutch u and Spanish usted), the additional Politeness attribute is required. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1p 19.09.06)
TODO: Politeness as feature rather than a concept.
In several European languages exist special forms of pronouns for polite or respectful reference, e.g. Dutch u and Spanish usted. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1p 19.09.06)
EAGLES PersonalPronoun with Politeness="Familiar". The EAGLES attribute politeness (polite/ familiar) is limited to second-person pronouns.
In several European languages exist special forms of pronouns for polite or respectful reference, e.g. Dutch u and Spanish usted. The concept FamiliarSecondPersonPronoun applies to the corresponding unmarked forms for informal conversiation in such languages. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1p 19.09.06)
EAGLES Pronoun with Person="Third". As only personal and reflexive pronouns show person differentiation, ThirdPersonPronoun is modelled as a subclass of PersReflConcept here.
Third person reference is a deictic reference to a referent(s) not identified as the speaker or addressee. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsThirdPersonDeixis.htm 19.09.06)
EAGLES Pronoun with Person="First". As only personal and reflexive pronouns show person differentiation, FirstPersonPronoun is modelled as a subclass of PersReflConcept here.
A FirstPersonPronoun refers to the speaker, or to both the speaker and referents grouped with the speaker. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsFirstPersonDeixis.htm 19.09.06)
Punctuation that is more important than a secondary punctuation with regards to sentence splitting in a text. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2075)
added in accordance with http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recv
SentenceFinalPunctuation are . ? !. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recv 19.09.06)
Sign used to express a question. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1444)
Punctuation used at the end a declarative sentence.
Sign (.) used to expresses the end of a sentence or an abbreviation. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1445)
Special sign (!) usually used in writing to mark exclamation. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1441)
MainPunctuation, not SentenceFinalPunctuation because of the Spanish inverted exclamation point (Chiarcos)
Punctuation used when the sentence is interrogative. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2087)
Parenthetical elements are dominated by a node labeled PRN. Punctuation marks that set off a parenthetical (i.e., commas, dashes, parentheses (-LRB- and -RRB-)) are contained within the PRN node. Use of PRN is determined ultimately by individual annotator intuition, though the presence of dashes or parentheses strongly suggests a parenthetical. (Bies et al. 1995)
added in conformance with Penn Treebank Bracketing Guidelines (Bies et al. 1995)
TODO: rename to ClosePunctuation to support scripts running from left to right
added in accordance with EAGLES suggestions (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recv)
End of a paired punctuation. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2079) RightParentheticalPunctuation is a punctuation mark which concludes a constituent whose the opening is marked by a LeftParentheticalPunctuation, e.g. ), ] and Spanish ?. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recv 19.09.06)
Punctuation that is graphically represented by ] (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2083)
End of a parenthesis pair. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1440)
Punctuation that is graphically represented by } (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2085)
PTB bracketing guidelines, Santorini 1991
> *RAB* Right angle bracket (Santorini 1991)
] *RSB* Right square bracket (Santorini 1991)
TODO: rename to OpeningPerentheticalPunctuation to support scripts running from left to right.
added in accordance with a suggestion by Wilson and Leech (1996); http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2078 (open punctuation)
Beginning of a paired punctuation. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2078)
< *LAB* Left angle bracket (Santorini 1991)
[ *LSB* Left square bracket (Santorini 1991)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1443, used as left-parenthetical punctuation in German single quotes
Inverted comma. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1443)
Punctuation used in certain languages at the beginning of an interrogative sentence. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2088)
Punctuation that is graphically represented as { (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2084)
Beginning of a pair of parenthesis. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1442)
Punctuation that is represented graphically as [ (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2082)
Punctuation that is not very important with regards to sentence splitting in a text. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2076)
added in accordance with a suggestion by Wilson and Leech (1996)
SentenceMedialPunctuation are , ; : - . (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recv 19.09.06)
Sign with two vertical points that is used in writing and printing to introduce an explanation, example or quotation. (Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1439)
Mark (,) used in writing to show a short pause or to separate items in a list. (Longman DCE 2005; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1448)
Sign (;) usually used to separate phrases. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1446)
Punctuation that is graphically presented as "-". (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2077)
Punctuation usually used to surround a quotation. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2081)
The punctuation sign / (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1437)
Parenthetical in Russian (instead of "(", ")"), sentence medial in English
Sequence of three dots having the same meaning as "et cetera" (full form) or "etc" (abbreviated form). (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1447)
adopted from EMILLE, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#CloseQuotationMark
adopted from EMILLE, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#OpenQuotationMark
shorthand for Quantifier and Noun, adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010)
A noun which quantifies one or more things, regardless of subject and an object. ང་གིས་ བམོ་ ལ་ དང་ ཕད་ཅི། NGAGI BUM 'NGA 'DA CHECI I girl five with met “I met with five girls.” (Jurmey Rabgay, email Sep 20, 2010)
EAGLES top-level category Numeral (NU). Modelled as subclass of Quantifier (a concept that is absent in EAGLES) in accordance with GOLD. DCR subclassification (numberBoth, numeralRoman) ignored
Subclassification combines syntactic (Ordinal/CardinalNumeral) and morphological (Fraction, ApproximateNumeral) criteria. To be resolved. In the MULTEXT-East ontology, the latter aspect is represented as http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#MorphologicalFormOfNumeral
A numeral is a word, functioning most typically as an adjective or pronoun, that expresses a number, and relation to the number, such as one of the following: Quantity, Sequence, Frequency, Fraction. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsANumeral.htm 19.09.06)
numeral
numératif
adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chunkgu et al. 2010, http://purl.org/olia/dzongkha.owl#NominalNumber)
Nominal numbers are used to identify or refer the things. It does not show the quantity or rank. Example: ངེ་གི་ འགལ་འཕིན་ ཨང་གངས་ འདི་ ༡༧༦༤༩༠༣༧ ཨིན། NGIGI DRUELTHRIN ANGDRANG 'DI 17649037 INN my mobile number is 17649037 be “ My mobile number is 17649037.” (Jurmey Rabgay, email Sep 20, 2010, http://purl.org/olia/dzongkha.owl#NominalNumber)
A numeral used to indicate the number of sets/kinds of objects. (Dan Zeman, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3022)
A cardinal numeral is a numeral of the class whose members are considered basic in form, used in counting, and used in expressing how many objects are referred to. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsACardinalNumeral.htm 19.09.06)
An ordinal number is a number belonging to a class whose members designate positions in a sequence, e.g. in English "First", "Second", "Third". (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAOrdinalNumeral.htm 19.09.06)
Numeral/Type="collect" (Romanian) In traditional Romanian grammars, expressions like amândoi "both", toţi trei "all three" are referred to as collective numerals. (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CollectiveNumeral)
e.g., czworga/czworo, czworgiem/czworo, czworgu/czworo, czworo/czworo, dwoje/dwoje, dwojga/dwoje, dwojgiem/dwoje, dwojgu/dwoje, jedenaścioro/jedenaścioro (pl, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CollectiveNumeral)
e.g., обата, обајцата, обете, шеесетминава/шеесетмина, шеесетминана/шеесетмина, шеесетмината/шеесетмина, шеснаесетминава/шеснаесетмина, шеснаесетминана/шеснаесетмина, шеснаесетмината/шеснаесетмина (mk, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CollectiveNumeral)
e.g., dvadesetora/dvadesetoro, dvoja/dvoje, dvoje, dvoji/dvoje, dvojih/dvoje, dvojim/dvoje, oboje, tridesetora/tridesetoro, troja/troje (sr, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CollectiveNumeral)
e.g., ambelor/ambii, ambilor/ambii, amânduror/amândoi, amândurora/amândoi, câteşipatru, tuspatru (ro, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CollectiveNumeral)
The ISOcat definition entails that this just represents the value of "2". I guess, this is not true, but that this Numeral is actually a DualQuantifier (and should be renamed as such), otherwise, it should be eliminated
http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#FractalNumeral, http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#FractionalNumeral
Numeral/Form="fractional" (Romanian) In traditional Romanian grammars, FractionalNumeral refers to expressions like treime-one third. (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#FractalNumeral)
e.g., treisprezecimea/treisprezecime, treisprezecimi/treisprezecime, treisprezecimii/treisprezecime, treisprezecimile/treisprezecime, treisprezecimilor/treisprezecime, unsprezecimea/unsprezecime, unsprezecimi/unsprezecime, unsprezecimii/unsprezecime, unsprezecimile/unsprezecime (ro, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#FractalNumeral)
e.g., يک‌چهارمِ/يک‌چهار يک‌پنجمِ/يک‌پنج (fa, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#FractalNumeral)
Bulgarian has Numeral/Form=approx(a), used for approximate numerals (десетина /about a ten/, стотина /about a hundred/) (Dimitrova et al. 2009, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#ApproximateNumeral)
http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#MultipleNumeral, http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#MultiplicativeNumeral; As "manyfold" fits Ghostwick's definition, MultipleNumeral is modelled as a subclass of Quantifier rather than Numeral. In MULTEXT-East, "Numeral" was extended to coover non-numerical quantifiers, hence the name.
A Multiple Numeral serves to define a complex whole, with respect to the number of its parts, e.g., English "twofold", "twice" or "manyfold". Used in morphosyntactic descriptions of, e.g., Romanian, Slovak and Czech. (Joseph Ghostwick [1878], English language -- Grammar, Historical, London, Longmans, Green, and Co.; http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#MultipleNumeral)
A ProQuantifier is a quantifier derived from a pronominal element. ProQuantifiers thus partly characterized as pronouns (e.g., as pronominal adverbs) or quantifiers (e.g., "indefinite numeral" as in MTE v.4). (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#ProQuantifier)
In the Czech and Slovak MTE v4 pecs, Numeral/Class="interrogative" are items meaning `how many/much', etc. Strictly speaking, they are pronumerals (pro-quantifiers), but traditional descriptions don't recognise such a category, so they are described variously as pronouns or as numerals (because their syntactic distribution is that of numerals, or very close)." (Ivan A Derzhanski, email 2010/06/11, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#InterrogativeQuantifier)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3021 (InterrogativeMultiplicativeNumeral)
An interrogative/relative word used to ask about the number of times something happened.
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3018 (interrogativeCardinalNumeral)
interrogativeCardinalNumeral: An interrogative/relative word used to ask about quantity.
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3024 (IndefiniteMultiplicativeNumeral)
A word indicating imprecise number of times something happened.
In the Czech and Slovak MTE v4 specs, Numeral/Class="indefinite" are items meaning `several/some', etc. Strictly speaking, they are pronumerals (pro-quantifiers), but traditional descriptions don't recognise such a category, so they are described variously as pronouns or as numerals (because their syntactic distribution is that of numerals, or very close)." (Ivan A Derzhanski, email 2010/06/11, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#IndefiniteQuantifier)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3023 (indefiniteCardinalNumeral)
ndefiniteCardinalNumeral: A word used to express imprecise quantity.
In the Czech MTE v4 specs, Numeral/Class="relative" are items meaning `how many/much', `as many/much' etc. Strictly speaking, they are pronumerals (pro-quantifiers), but traditional descriptions don't recognise such a category, so they are described variously as pronouns or as numerals (because their syntactic distribution is that of numerals, or very close)." (Ivan A Derzhanski, email 2010/06/11, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#RelativeQuantifier)
In the Czech and Slovak MTE v4 specs, Numeral/Class="demonstrative" are items meaning `this many/much', etc. Strictly speaking, they are pronumerals (pro-quantifiers), but traditional descriptions don't recognise such a category, so they are described variously as pronouns (because they contain a demonstrative element) or as numerals (because their syntactic distribution is that of numerals, or very close)." (Ivan A Derzhanski, email 2010/06/11, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#DemonstrativeQuantifier)
the subclassification of Adjective currently conflates syntactic (PredicativeAdjective), morphological (DeverbalAdjective) and semantic (QualifierAdjective, RelativeAdjective) criteria. to be resolved
adjectif
adjective
It is an adjective, which expresses the character and feature of subject or an object, while modifying a noun. ང་འ ་ ང ་ འ ག། Shing-di rim du 'The tree is tall' (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010, http://purl.org/olia/dzongkha.owl#CharacteristicAdjective)
It is an adjective, which expresses the time or period of the circumstances, while modifying a noun. ན་ ང་ ང་ ་ ལ་ ་ འ ་ ། Nahing Nga chigyel-lu joyi 'I went abroad last year' (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
adopted from EMILLE for Urdu, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#RelativeAdjective
Relative adjectives express similarity or a comparison. (Schmidt 1999, p.218, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#RelativeAdjective)
EAGLES Adjective with Use="Predicative".
A predicative adjective is one which functions as part of the predicate of a sentence. This means that it is linked to the noun by a verb, often a copula (such as to be). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjective 18.09.06)
EAGLES Adjective with Use="Attributive".
An attributive adjective is an adjective that qualifies or modifies a noun and that precedes the noun, e.g."a delicious apple", "a short letter". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjective 18.09.06)
Denominal adjective, formed from a noun (Chiarcos, based on lexinfo:adjective-na)
An adjective that modifies an implied, but not expressed, noun. When translating such an adjective into English, you must supply the missing noun. (www.southwestern.edu/~carlg/Latin_Web/glossary.html; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1394) (Chiarcos: this seems to pertain to nominalization)
Adjective based on a verb (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1598). Note that these are not necessarily grammaticalized as participles.
(Chiarcos, introduced to account for lexinfo:participleAdjective along with lexinfo:adjective-i)
Adjective based on a verb. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1598)
Adjective based on a past participle. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1596)
subClassOf participleAdjective (dcif:isA)
Adjective based on a present participle. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1597)
DEPRECATED: The DCR definition and this term are incorrect. "Ordinal adjective" entered ISOcat from MULTEXT-East, where it was originally applied to relational adjectives (Slovene, Resian, Ukrainian, Czech). "Ordinal adjective" is a mistranslation from Slovene _vrstni pridevniki_ that should be properly rendered in English as "relational adjective" (Derzhanski and Kotsyba 2009). However, the Macedonian MULTEXT v.4 guidelines use this category for ordinal numerals. Due to its inherent ambiguity, this category is to be avoided.
Adjective expressing a numeric ranking. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1338) Cf. "second", "next", "last"
The Slovene adjective expresses three main ideas: quality (qualitative adjectives, kakovostni pridevniki), relation (relational adjectives, vrstni pridevniki) and possession (possessive adjectives, svojilni pridevniki). Relational adjectives express type, class or numerical sequence of a noun. For instance: kemijska in fizikalna sprememba (chemical and physical change), fotografski aparat (photographic device (=camera)). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slovene_grammar)
A PossessiveAdjective is an denominal adjective, often derived from a ProperNoun, that serves to indicate possession in most Slavic languages. Unlike a genitival construction, a possessive adjective shows agreement with its head noun. (Chiarcos)
Adjective/Type="possessive" are denominal, not pronominal expressions of possession (Ivan A Derzhanski, email 2010/06/09). Therefore not to be confused with Pronoun/Type=adjectival(a) (Bulgarian only), for words like умно /cleverly, wisely, sensibly/, which are derived from adjectives. (Dimitrova et al. 2009) e.g., Slovene dušikovima/dušikov, Marsovi/Marsov, Slovak vojvodova/vojvodov, vojvodove/vojvodov, vojvodovej/vojvodov, vojvodovho/vojvodov, vojvodovi/vojvodov, vojvodovmu/vojvodov, vojvodovo/vojvodov, vojvodovom/vojvodov, vojvodovou/vojvodov, Serbian evroazijske/evroazijska, evroazijskih/evroazijski, Goldštajnov, govornikov, Jehovine/Jehovin, malabarskom/malabarski, O'Brajenov, O'Brajenovog/O'Brajenov, oficirov, Czech Riegrovými/Riegrův, Stradellovými/Stradellův, Tristanovou/Tristanův, Wagnerových/Wagnerův, Wagnerovým/Wagnerův, Weberovi/Weberův, Weberových/Weberův, Wertherovi/Wertherův, Winstonovi/Winstonův (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#PossessiveAdjective)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1477, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#QualificativeAdjective
Adjective used to qualify. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1477)
DCR general adverb (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1435) ignored
TODO: currently, different criteria are employed to characterize Adverbs, including lexical criteria (e.g., AdjectivalAdverb) and semantic criteria (e.g., CausalAdverb). The subclassification according to semantic criteria is to be expressed with hasSemanticRole, the classes are thus deprecated.
Adverb/Type="modifier" is used in the English, Romanian and Hungarian MTE v4 specs. For Romanian, Adverb/Type="modifier" applies to adverbs which can have predicative role, that is they can govern a subordinate sentence (ex. Fireşte că o ştiu -- Certainly I know it). Here (for uniformity within a multilingual environment), they are squeezed into the modifier class. (MTE v4) e.g., better (en) (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#ModifierAdverb)
An adjectival adverb is an adverb that is formally identical to an adjective. MULTEXT-East Adverb/Type="adjectival" (Serbian, Macedonian, Bulgarian) Bulgarian AdjectivalAdverbs have the same form as adjectives in Gender = neuter, Person = 3, Number = singular. (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#AdjectivalAdverb)
Adverb/Type="verbal" applies to adverbs derived from from verbs (verbal adverbs) in the Serbian, Macedonian and Hungarian MTE v4 specs. Macedonian verbal adverbs (gerunds) like odejkji are thus not considered as verbal forms, but as Adverb/Type="verbal". (MTE v4) (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#VerbalAdverb)
Adverb/Type="participle" is used in the Slovene MTE v4 specs, e.g., 'leže' / lying. Slovenian adverbial participles are, however, not attested for Resian. (MTE v4)(http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#AdverbialParticiple)
to be modelled as SemanticRole (cf. CausalAdverb) ?
Adverb/Type="negative" are used in the Serbian and Romanian MTE v4 specs, e.g., for Romanian nicăieri - nowhere, niciodată - never. (MTE v4) (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#NegativeAdverb)
DEPRECATED: equivalent to Adverb and hasSemanticRole some CauseRole
Adverb/Type="causal" is used in the Hungarian MTE v4, but no examples are provided. (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CausalAdverb)
introduced for http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#NegativeModalAdverb in the EMILLE tagset (Hardie 2003) for Urdu
A modality-marking adverb is a verbal particle that serves to indicate mood, aspect and/or tense (cf. Schmidt 1999). Note that this is not to be confused with the conventional meaning of "modal adverb" in the sense of "manner adverb" (cf. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_modal_adverbs), hence the uncommon name. Ruth Laila Schmidt (1999) Urdu, an essential grammar, Routledge, London.
despite the deviating terminology, this seems to be a subconcept of VerbalParticle, and maybe, it corresponds to ModalParticle (but only if the DCR definition is incorrect)
DEPRECATED: equivalent to Adverb and hasSemanticRole some MannerRole from ILPOSTS, http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#MannerAdverb
ILPOSTS, http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#LocationAdverb DEPRECATED: equivalent to Adverb and hasSemanticRole some LocationRole
EAGLES Adverb with Adverb-Type="Degree".
Any adverb which modifies an adjective, an adverb, a verbal particle, a preposition, a conjunction or a determiner is a degree adverb. (http://xlex.uni-muenster.de/Portal/MTPE/tagsetDescriptionEN.doc, p. 113, 8.1 Degree Adverbs 23.09.06) Also known as specifier adverb (http://www.unlweb.net/unlarium/dictionary/export_tagset.php)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3011 (adverbialPronoun)
EAGLES Adverb with Adverb-Type="Pronominal". Against the EAGLES definition given below, pronominal adverbs can but don't have to be used for pronominal references, thus this special and diachronically important case is better described by the join of this with personal pronoun.
Pronominal adverbs substitute for a preposition (which is incorporated into them) and an NP, cf. English therefore lit. "for this (reason, ...)", German deswegen lit. "because of this (reason, ...)". (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/elm_de/node235.html 21.09.06, examples Ch. Chiarcos)
http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#AdverbialDemonstrative, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#DistalDemonstrativeAdverb
Pronominal adverb derived from a demonstrative stem (Ch. Chiarcos)
See remarks on WHPronoun, this is actually a language-specific trait and should probably be removed.
Adverb that serves to express interrogativity, exclamation or that serves to link a subordinate clause to the matrix clause. (Ch. Chiarcos)
EAGLES WHAdverb with Wh-Type="Exclamatory".
An ExclamatoryAdverb seves to express exclamation, cf. how in "How well everyone played!" Exclamative sentences or exclamatives An exclamatory sentence or exclamation is generally a more emphatic form of statement, in particular, they are used are used to express strong feelings (Latin exclamare : "to call out, to cry out"). (http://english.unitecnology.ac.nz/resources/resources/exp_lang/sentence.html 07.05.07, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentence_(linguistics) 07.05.07)
EAGLES Adverb with Wh-Type="Interrogative".
Interrogative adverbs are used to introduce questions, e.g. "When are you coming?" (Angelika Adam)
The value relative is used for adverbs in clear relative cases as in: "The place 'where' I met you.", "The reason 'why' I did it." (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/pub/eagles/lexicons/elm_en.ps.gz, p.33, 07.05.07)
introduced for Urdu wala, as used in the tagset by Sajjad (2007, http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#Wala)
In Urdu, wālā can be added to substantives to derive nouns implying possession or general relationships, e.g., go-wāl, or go-wālā, s.m. cow-keeper, cow-herd (from go, 'cow'), or ghar-wālā, s.m. master or owner of the house (from ghar, 'house') (Plats 1884, cf. http://purl.org/olia/urdu.owl#Wala)
adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010). If its tradition of grammar description is influenced by the Indian, these case markers are variously described as case morphemes or as postpositions. Therefore introduced as a shorthand for Adposition or MorphologicalParticle
from the EMILLE tagset for Urdu, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#Izafat, cf. http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#GenitiveCase for the modelling of the Izafat in the Farsi MULTEXT-East.
The izāfat (pronounced as a shorter form of –ē–) is an enclitic of Persian origin which is used in Farsi and neighboring languages. In Urdu, it can be considered a preposition under certain circumstances: it links two nouns in a possessive relationship, although the phrase thus produced may often have a different meaning to a phrase produced with the native Urdu postposition kā. However, the izāfat may also join a noun to an adjective, in which case it is not so clearly accurate to describe it as a preposition parallel to the prepositions in European languages for which the EAGLES guidelines were compiled. A better way to treat izāfat is in the context of the Unique category of miscellaneous one-member wordclasses, discussed below. (Hardie 2003, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#Izafat) enclitic morpheme used to form noun phrases and that can denote possession, can form apposition or can join adjectives to nouns. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2999)
introduced for Urdu gunâ (http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#MultiplicativeMarker)
In Urdu, multiplicative numerals are formed by adding the suffix gunâ (Schmidt 1999, p. 260,http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#MultiplicativeMarker)
synonym of Unique, to be avoided because of its divergent definitions, applies to every category that *contains* the expression "Particle" in its name
synonym of Unique, to be avoided because of its divergent definitions (Chiarcos)
adopted from Ancorra, http://purl.org/olia/ancorra.owl#Intensifier
For Hindi, words like 'bahuta', 'kama', etc. when intensifying adjectives or adverbs will be annotated as INTF. Example, h37. hEdarAbAda meM aMgUra bahuta_INTF acche milate hEM 'HyderabAd' 'in' 'grapes' 'very' 'good' 'available' 'are' “Very good grapes are available in Hyderabad” (Bharati et al. 2006) Akshar Bharati, Dipti Misra Sharma, Lakshmi Bai, Rajeev Sangal (2006), AnnCorra : Annotating Corpora. Guidelines For POS And Chunk Annotation For Indian Languages, Tech. Rep., L anguage Technologies Research Centre IIIT, Hyderabad, version of 15-12-2006, http://ltrc.iiit.ac.in/tr031/posguidelines.pdf
adopted from EMILLE, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ContrastiveEmphaticParticle, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ExclusiveEmphaticParticle, etc. From a logical point of view, emphasis is closely related to intensification, hence, subconcept of Intensifier
Emphatic particle, e.g., (one of the uses of) Urdu tô: vo urdû parhê gâ "He will study Urdu." (simple statement) vo urdû parhê gâ tô lêkin imtihân nahîm dê gâ "He will STUDY Urdu, OF COURSE, but he won't take the examination." (Schmidt 1999, p. 232, see http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ContrastiveEmphaticParticle)
adopted from EMILLE for Urdu, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ExclusiveEmphaticParticle
In Urdu, the exclusive emphatic particle hî emphasizes the preceding word and excludes something else (which may not be expressed). (Schmidt 1999, p.233, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ExclusiveEmphaticParticle) Compare with the inclusive emphatic particle bhî: maim *bhî* faisalâ karûm gâ "I'll *also* make a decision" maim *hî* faisalâ karûm gâ "*I'm the one who* will make the decision." (Schmidt 1999, p.237, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#InclusiveEmphaticParticle)
adopted from EMILLE for Urdu, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#InclusiveEmphaticParticle
In Urdu, bhî is an emphatic particle meaning 'even'. In opposition to contrastive tô and exclusive hî, bhî is inclusive: maim *bhî* faisalâ karûm gâ "I'll *also* make a decision" maim *hî* faisalâ karûm gâ "*I'm the one who* will make the decision." (Schmidt 1999, p.237, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#InclusiveEmphaticParticle)
adopted from EMILLE, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ContrastiveEmphaticParticle, shorthand for ContrastiveParticle and EmphaticParticle
adopted from EMILLE, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ContrastiveEmphaticParticle, note: there may be contrastive particles that are not emphatic
Contrastive particle, e.g., (one of the uses of) Urdu tô: vo urdû parhê gâ "He will study Urdu." (simple statement) vo tô urdû parhê gâ "HE will study Urdu." (Contrast: the other students may not.) (Schmidt 1999, p. 232, see http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#ContrastiveEmphaticParticle)
English existential there is specified as a subtype of pronoun in MTE v4, i.e., Pronoun/Type="ex-there" (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#ExistentialThere)
merely a shorthand for ExistentialParticle and Pronoun, hence deprecated
pronoun that indicates the existence of something or someone
A verbal particle modifies the verb and carries information on the verb form (e.g., finiteness, tense and aspect). (Dimitrova et al. 2009, Dan Tufis, email 2010/06/09). In the Bulgarian MTE specs, Particle/Type=verbal(v) is used to form different type of verbal syntactical relationships, e.g. to create future tense (ще говориш), or particles like се, да. (Dimitrova et al. 2009) The Romanian MTE v4 specs provide a more fine-grained subclassification of (verbal) particles (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#VerbalParticle)
adopted from Bambara Reference Corpus, http://cormand.huma-num.fr/gloses.html
predicative marker
marque predicative
adopted from Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010, http://purl.org/olia/dzongkha.owl#TenseMarker)
Dzongkha has also a tense marker, which is not complicated like in other languages. It has got only six tense markers and can be used in a very simple and effective way. They are: ('Ni'+'Wong') for future, ('D'o'+'D'ä') for present and ('Ci'+'Yi') for past tense. ང་ ནངས་པ་ འ ་ ། Nga naba jo-ni[past tense] I tomorrow go-will-[past] 'I am going tomorrow' (http://panl10n.net/english/Outputs%20Phase%202/CCs/Bhutan/Papers/2007/0701/PartOfSpeech.pdf)
In the Romanian MULTEXT-East scheme, a verbal particle with Particle/Type="aspect" modifies the verbs and carries information on the verb form, i.e., on its aspect (Dan Tufis, email 2010/06/09, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#AspectParticle)
generalization over EAGLES: http://purl.org/olia/eagles.owl#MediopassiveVoiceParticle
E.g., the mediopassive (middle) voice marker se in the Portuguese EAGLES scheme. (Leech and Wilson 1996)
In the Romanian MULTEXT-East scheme, a verbal particle with Particle/Type="future" modifies the verbs and marks the verb as being subjunctive, e.g., s-/să, să (Dan Tufis, email 2010/06/09, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#SubjunctiveParticle)
Introduced in accordance with the TIGER and TüBa-D/Z annotation schemes (syntactic edge label)
Generally, discourse markers are expressions or phrases of greeting, apologizing, thanking, short emotional utterances, and interjections. Their node label is DM. ... Typical discourse markers are: ja, nein, hallo, oh, aha, pst, nunja, gewiß, toll, nun ja, etc. (Telljohann et al. 2009, p. 136)
Added for compatibility with the SFB632 annotation guidelines.
A classifier is a word or affix that expresses the classification of a noun. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAClassifier.htm 19.09.06) Classifiers are a very typical feature of sign languages. In some Asian languages, classifiers are used as particles to combine a noun with a numeral, e.g. chin. _san ge ren_ 'three pieces of people', 'three people' (Bußmann 2002, under Klassifikator) Bharati et al. (2006, for Indian languages) group Classifiers together with Quantifiers and Numerals, but they do not provide a detailed characterization of this class. Akshar Bharati, Dipti Misra Sharma, Lakshmi Bai, Rajeev Sangal (2006), AnnCorra : Annotating Corpora. Guidelines For POS And Chunk Annotation For Indian Languages, Tech. Rep., L anguage Technologies Research Centre IIIT, Hyderabad, version of 15-12-2006, http://ltrc.iiit.ac.in/tr031/posguidelines.pdf
Word which serves no grammatical function, but which fills up a sentence or gives emphasis. (www.southwestern.edu/~carlg/Latin_Web/glossary.html; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1283)
modelled as a Unique concept here, although normally not considered a Particle
conditional particule (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2230)
distinctive particle (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2228)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1896, taxonomic organization follows http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#InfinitiveParticle
Particle used to express infinitive. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1896)
Particle used to express negation. (Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1894)
Particle used to express affirmation. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1918)
Particle expressing ownship. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1895)
Particle used to compare. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1922)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1919, taxonomic organization (under VerbalParticle) follows http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#FutureParticle, regrouped under TenseMarkingParticle
Particle used in order to express future. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1919)
TOCHECK: is this definition correct ? Could it be that ModalParticle actually means "VerbalParticle marking mood" ? (Cf. ModalityMarkingAdverb)
Particle which functions as a modal. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1920)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1455 (preverbalParticleLmf)
Particle expressing superlative degree. Superlative is the comparison between more than two entities and contrasts with comparative where only two entities are involved and positive where no comparison is implied. (Crystal 2003; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1923)
relative particle (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2229)
particle for coordination (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2227)
TODO: check relationship with interrogative adverb
Particle used to express a question. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1921)
adopted from the EMILLE Urdu tagset (Hardie 2003, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#AdjectivalParticle)
Particle that serves to form adjective phrases, e.g., Urdu sā (http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#AdjectivalParticle)
EAGLES Conjunction with Type="Subordinating". The language- (German-) specific EAGLES feature "subord-type" was originally modelled as MorphosyntacticFeature, when integrating the MULTEXT-East ontology, it was remodelled within the taxonomy
Subordinating conjunctions, also called subordinators, are conjunctions that introduce a dependent clause. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_conjunction 19.09.06)
EAGLES Conjunction with Type="Coordinating". EAGLES' optional CoordType attribute subclassifies coordinating conjunctions, with respect to positional characteristics (repetition/pairing of expressions forming complex conjunctions). (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1av 17.11.06) CoordType was originally implemented as MorphosyntacticFeature, the new modelling follows the MULTEXT-East ontology (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CoordinatingConjunction_PositionalType)
Coordinating conjunctions, also called coordinators, are conjunctions that join two items of equal syntactic importance. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_conjunction 19.09.06)
EAGLES, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#SimpleCoordinatingConjunction
Simple applies to the regular type of coordinator occurring between conjuncts: German und, for example. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1av 17.11.06)
In the Romanian MTE v4 specs, Conjunction/Coord_Type="simple" is defined in contrast to repetitive and correlative coordinating conjunctions. In Romanian, there are three kinds of conjunctions depending on their usage: as such or together with other conjunctions or adverbs: (1) simple, between conjuncts: Ion ori Maria (John or Mary); (2) repetitive, before each conjunct: fie Ion fie Maria fie... (either John or Mary or...) (3) correlative, before a conjoined phrase, it requires specific coordinators between conjuncts: atât mama cât şi tata (both mother and father). (MTE v4), e.g., aşa_că, va_să_zică (ro) (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#SimpleCoordinatingConjunction)
EAGLES, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CorrelativeCoordinatingConjunction
Conjunction/Coord_Type="correlat" (Romanian). In Romanian, there are three kinds of conjunctions depending on their usage: as such or together with other conjunctions or adverbs: (1) simple, between conjuncts: Ion ori Maria (John or Mary); (2) repetitive, before each conjunct: fie Ion fie Maria fie... (either John or Mary or...) (3) correlative, before a conjoined phrase, it requires specific coordinators between conjuncts: atât mama cât şi tata (both mother and father). (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CorrelativeCoordinatingConjunction)
When the same word is also placed before the first conjunct, as in French "ou...ou...", the former occurrence is given the Correlative value and the latter the Simple value. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1av 17.11.06)
When two distinct words occur, as in German weder...noch..., then the second is given the Non-initial value. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1av 17.11.06)
When two distinct words occur, as in German "weder...noch...", then the first is given the Initial value. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1av 17.11.06)
Conjunction/Coord_Type="repetit" (Romanian). In Romanian, there are three kinds of conjunctions depending on their usage: as such or together with other conjunctions or adverbs: (1) simple, between conjuncts: Ion ori Maria (John or Mary); (2) repetitive, before each conjunct: fie Ion fie Maria fie... (either John or Mary or...) (3) correlative, before a conjoined phrase, it requires specific coordinators between conjuncts: atât mama cât şi tata (both mother and father). (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#RepetitiveCoordinatingConjunction)
Following EAGLES and MULTEXT-East, the subclassification of SubordinatingConjunction reflects constraints on MorphosyntacticFeatures of verbal and nominal arguments of subordinating conjunctions, in these cases verbal inflection (finiteness, negation) and Degree
For example, in German the subordinating conjunction "weil" introduces a clause with a finite verb. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node19.html#oav2u 17.11.06)
For example, in German the subordinating conjunction "als" is followed by various kinds of comparative clause (including clauses without finite verbs). (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node19.html#oav2u 17.11.06)
For example, in German the subordinating conjunction "ohne" ("zu"...) is followed by an infinitive. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node19.html#oav2u 17.11.06)
Conjunction/Sub_Type="negative" (Romanian, Serbian, Russian) In Romanian, each conjunction requires another mood, so that the diversity may be controlled by subcategorisation rules. The attribute Sub_Type distinguishes among the positive and negative conjunctions, providing means to control verbal double negation, (as in case of the negative pronouns, determiners and adverbs): nici NU am venit, nimeni NU vorbeşte, nici_un tren N-a trecut, nicăieri N-am văzut (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#NegativeSubordinatingConjunction)
Conjunction/Sub_Type="negative" (Romanian, Serbian, Russian) In Romanian, each conjunction requires another mood, so that the diversity may be controlled by subcategorisation rules. The attribute Sub_Type distinguishes among the positive and negative conjunctions, providing means to control verbal double negation, (as in case of the negative pronouns, determiners and adverbs): nici NU am venit, nimeni NU vorbeşte, nici_un tren N-a trecut, nicăieri N-am văzut (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#PositiveSubordinatingConjunction)
Quantifiers that enforce dual agreement (i.e., as with the numeral "2"). Some feminine and neuter body parts in Czech have preserved dual forms, and if the noun is dual, so are its attributes (adjectives, pronouns). So the agreement of the numeral 2 differs formally from 3-4 (Ivan A. Derzhanski, email 2010/06/16, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#DualQuantifier) Numeral/Class="definite", Numeral/Class="definite1", Numeral/Class="definite234" etc. refer to specific patterns of congruency with Slavic numerals that originate from the difference between Old Slavic singular (definite1), dual (definite2, definite234) and plural (definite). (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#DualQuantifier)
Quantifiers that enforce paucal agreement. In many Slavic languages, numerals between 2 and 4 (and some quantifiers) involve a specific agreement patterns that is different from that of smaller and greater numbers. In Russian, for example, genitive singular is requires. These numerals and quantifiers with the same characteristics are referred to here as "paucal quantifiers". (cf. David Pesetsky, http://www.uni-leipzig.de/~jtrommer/Harvard/pesetsky.pdf)
http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#SingularQuantifier (MTE v4 Numeral/Class="definite1", http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#SingularQuantifier) Numeral/Class="definite", Numeral/Class="definite1", Numeral/Class="definite234" etc. refer to specific patterns of congruency with Slavic numerals that originate from the difference between Old Slavic singular (definite1), dual (definite2, definite234) and plural (definite).
A singular quantifier is a quantifier or a numeral that specifies a single referent from a set. (Chiarcos) In Czech and Slovak MTE v4 specs, the corresponding category Numeral/Class="definite1" is applied to the numeral "one". (MTE v4)
http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#PluralQuantifier Numeral/Class="definite", Numeral/Class="definite1", Numeral/Class="definite234" etc. refer to specific patterns of congruency with Slavic numerals that originate from the difference between Old Slavic singular (definite1), dual (definite2, definite234) and plural (definite).
A PluralQuantifier is a Quantifier (or Numeral) that specifies a large multitude of entities. The agreement pattern of a plural quantifier is different from that or an singular quantifier, but as opposed to DualQuantifier and PaucalQuantifier, PluralQuantifier includes quantifiers that denote arbitrarily large sets of entities. (Chiarcos) The corresponding category in Czech, Polish and Slovak MTE v4 specs is Numeral/Class="definite", that refers to numerals larger than four. (MTE v4)
added in accordance with http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CliticDistalDeterminer
The referent denoted by a distal demonstrative pronoun (e.g., English that) is usually spatially more remote or discoursally less salient as compared to a referent denoted by a proximal demonstrative pronoun (e.g., English this) (Chiarcos)
added in accordance with http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CliticProximalDeterminer
added in accordance with ILPOSTS (for Indian languages), http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#Sequel
Adopted from ILPOSTS for Indian languages. No definition or examples provided: Distance=Sequel (http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#Sequel)
a form denoting that the addressee (addressees) are not included into the set of their referents which contain also the speaker
the form denoting that the addressee (addressees) are included into the set of their referents which contain also the speaker
see olia:NonspecificArticle, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#NonspecificPronoun
"By ʻspecificʼ and ʻnon-specificʼ I intend the difference between the two readings of English indefinites like (3): (3) Iʼm looking for a deer. In the specific reading there is a particular deer, say Bambi, that I am looking for. In the non-specific reading I will be happy to find any deer. Von Heusinger (2002) likes the test in English of inserting ʻcertainʼ after the ʻaʼ to fix the specific reading. In either reading of (3) a deer is being introduced as a new discourse referent. This is opposed to ʻdefiniteʼ which requires a previous pragmatic instantiation as in ʻIʼm looking for the deer.ʼ In English both the readings of (3) are indefinite. In Klallam, the specific demonstratives are neither definite nor indefinite." (Montler, Timothy. 2007. Klallam demonstratives. Papers ICSNL XLVII. The 42nd International Conference on Salish and Neighbouring Language, pp. 409-425. University of British Columbia Working Papers in Linguistics, Volume 20; on specific vs. nonspecific determiners in Klallam, a Salish language, http://montler.net/papers/KlallamDemons.pdf) A nonspecific pronoun refers to an unidentified or general entity (e.g., "I saw *someone*", "I saw *everyone*"). A nonspecific pronoun is not, therefore, a personal pronoun, but an indefinite one. (Andrews 2003). Andrews, Richard J. (2003), Introduction to Classical Nahuatl. University of Oklahoma Press. Halliday, M.A.K. (1985), An introduction to Functional Grammar, London: Edward Arnold (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#NonspecificPronoun)
TODO: extend with TDS numberProperty and GOLD NumberValue
Multal is a number property that refers to a large number of individuals.
Plural is a grammatical number, typically referring to more than one of the referent in the real world. In English, nouns, pronouns, and demonstratives inflect for plurality. In many other languages, for example German and the various Romance languages, articles and adjectives also inflect for plurality. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plural 17.11.06)
Internal plural that do not have any inflection. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2218)
Singular is a grammatical number denoting a unit quantity (as opposed to the plural and other forms). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singular 17.11.06)
MULTEXT-East feature Number="count" (Nouns in Serbian, Macedonian, Bulgarian), e.g., Bulgarian яка/як, язовира/язовир, яда/яд, юргана/юрган, юбилея/юбилей, ъгъла/ъгъл (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CountNumber)
A collective number is a number referring to 'a set of things'. Languages that have this feature can use it to get a phrase like 'flock of sheeps' by using 'sheep' in collective number. (en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_number; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1254)
subClassOf grammaticalNumber (dcif:conceptualDomain)
Form used in some languages to designate two persons or things. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1879)
TODO: rename to PaucalNumber, because of the existence of PaucalQuantifier in MULTEXT-East
Number that specifies 'a few' things. (en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paucal_number; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1350)
Property related to four elements. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2000)
Grammatical number referring to 'three things', as opposed to 'singular' and 'plural'. (en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_number; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1407)
DEPRECATED: reimplemented as class hierarchy
from EAGLES, reimplemented as subhierarchy of CoordinatingConjunction
EAGLES, reimplemented as subhierarchy of CoordinatingConjunction
EAGLES, reimplemented within SubordinatingConjunction taxonomy
TODO: integrate with VoiceFeature (as in the TDS Ontology) implementation
A non-reflexive verb is a verb whose semantic agent and patient (typically represented syntactically by the subject and the direct object) are not the same. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexive_verbs 20.11.06)
TODO: integrate with Voice, rename to ReflexiveVoice
A reflexive verb is a verb whose semantic agent and patient (typically represented syntactically by the subject and the direct object) are the same. In many languages, reflexive constructions are rendered by transitive verbs followed by a reflexive pronoun, as in English -self (e. g., She threw herself to the floor.). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflexive_verbs 20.11.06)
Aspect that expresses the beginning of an event or state.
To do something thoroughly and to completion.
ILPOSTS, http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#SimpleAspect
TODO: check whether this is properly defined
non-progressive, non-purposive aspect (for Indian languages defined by http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#SimpleAspect)
Aspect that expresses the cessation of an event or state. (SIL; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2001)
subClassOf aspect (dcif:conceptualDomain)
Similar to progressive, however an aspect is continuous versus progressive when it is anchored to non-punctual time reference (Salaberry 2002:264). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Continuous)
Events which involve some duration (Bhat 1999:58). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Durative)
dynamic aspect (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#dynamicityAspect)
Events which are frequently repeated, differs from habitual in that it can only be based upon the observation of several occurrences of the event concerned, whereas habitual can be based upon the observation of a single occurrence (Bhat 1999: 53). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Frequentive)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Habitual (as Aspect), http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#habitualTense (as Tense), modelled as an aspect here (temporally unmarked Habitual should be modelled as NotTemporallyAnchored)
Habitual tense pertains to verbs which refer to an action that occurs repeatedly. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#habitualTense) Refers to the internal temporal contour of a situation — a repeated situation that occupies a large slice of time. Can be based on the observation of a single occurrence. (Bhat 1999:177) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Habitual)
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#imperfectiveAspect, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Imperfective
The Imperfective aspect is an aspect that expresses an event or state, with respect to its internal structure, instead of expressing it as a simple whole. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsImperfectiveAspect.htm 17.11.06) The imperfective aspects ... do not view the situation as bounded, but rather as ongoing in either a durative, continuative or habitual sense (Bybee 1985:21) (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#imperfectiveAspect) A viewpoint aspect which encodes the speaker’s lack of attention to the endpoints of the situation referred to. Imperfective aspect is the prototypical mode of presentation for states (Michaelis 1998:xiv). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Imperfective)
InceptiveAspect, also called the ingressive, encodes the beginning portion of some event (Bybee 1985: 147, 149; Payne 1997: 240; Bhat 1999:176). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Inceptive)
IterativeAspect, also called repetitives, encodes a number of events of the same type that are repeated on a particular occasion. The time interval which is relevant to the iterative is relatively shorter than in the case of the habitual (Bybee 1985: 150; Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 127). Portrays events repeated on the same occasion (like the iterative knocking on the door) (Bhat 1999: 53) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Iterative)
EAGLES, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Perfective
The perfective aspects (inceptive, punctual and completive) view the situation as a bounded entity, and often put an emphasis on its beginning or end. (Bybee 1985:21) (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#perfectiveAspect) The Perfective aspect is an aspect that expresses a temporal view of an event or state as a simple whole, apart from the consideration of the internal structure of the time in which it occurs. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsPerfectiveAspect.htm 17.11.06) A viewpoint aspect which encodes the speaker’s willingness to attend to the endpoints of the situation referred to. Perfective aspect is the canonical mode of presentation for events (Michaelis 1998: xv). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Perfective)
http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#phaseAspect, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Phasal
A set of aspectual distinctions involving relations between a background situation (the reference situation) and a situation located relative to the reference situation (the denoted situation). In English, phasal distinctions are expressed by auxiliary-headed constructions, like the inceptive, progressive, and perfect constructions, whose head verbs express the aspectual class of the denoted situation. The aspectual class of the denoted situation differs from that of the reference situation (Michaelis 1998:xv). An event may have a beginning and an end, a middle portion (continuing or changing), and also an ensuing result or an altered state. These are considered to be the various “phases‽ of an event. A speaker may talk about an event from the point of view of any of these individual phases, and his language may have inflectional (or other type of) markers for representing these distinctions. Since such markers indicate distinctions in the temporal structure of an event, we may regard them as belonging to the category of aspect. It has been suggested (Dik 1989: 186) that these may be grouped under a subcategory (or “level") of aspect called “phasal aspect". (Bhat 1999:49) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Phasal)
point of view aspect (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#viewPointAspect)
ProgressiveAspect, also called the continuative or the durative, encodes a single event as an ongoing process. Thus, states cannot generally be encoded with the progressive (Comrie 1976: 32-35; Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 127-139; Payne 1997: 240). An exponent of phasal aspect which expresses a stative situation that holds during the time at which an event is occurring (e. g., He is fixing the fence) (Michaelis 1998:xv). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Progressive)
adapted from ILPOSTS (for Indian languages), http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#PurposiveAspect
The purposive aspect appears to add the notion of intention or probability, both negative and positive. (Steckley, 2007, p. 14, about Huron) (John Steckley, 2007, Words of the Huron, Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Quantificational, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#quantitativeAspect
A speaker may report an event as occurring once only (semelfactive) or several times (iterative); he may view it as a specific event or as part of a general habit of carrying out similar events; he may also differentiate between different degrees of frequency with which the event occurs. The markers that a given language provides for one or more of these meaning distinctions can be grouped under a subcategory called “quantificational aspect", as all of them refer to the quantitative aspect of the event concerned (Bhat 1999:53). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Quantificational)
relevance aspect (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#relevanceAspect)
Momentaneous, without an inherent end-point, as sneeze (Michaelis 1998:xvi). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Semelfactive)
Denotes the termination of an event (Bhat 1999: 92). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Terminative)
aspect that expresses an event or state that is not finished. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2217)
Mood feature pertains to grammaticalized moods (as expressed in verbal inflection), Modality refers to the underlying concept that can also be manifested by other grammatical or orthographic markers. Every Mood concept however, entails the corresponding Modality, hence modelled as subsmption between these.
Adopted from ILPOSTS (for Indian languages), http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#AbilitativeMood
Abilitative is a mood that indicates ability, comparable to the use of "can" in English. (http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=34901)
Mood to express reported speech (or indirect speech) as opposed to direct speech.
Mood to express necessity or requirement
In Inuktitut, causality is expressed by verbal inflection. Causal mood signifies causal relationships in a sentence. (Nowak 1996, p.39) Elke Nowak (1996), Transforming the images: Ergativity and transitivity in Inuktitut (Eskimo). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
Pertaining to the mood or mode of a verb form or clause such that it predicates a type of (formal) assertion (OED). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#declarativeModality) Unlike DeclarativeModality, a DeclarativeMood is morphologically marked.
DubitiveMood indicates a speaker's doubt or uncertainty about a proposition (Palmer 2001). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Dubitive)
adopted from ILPOSTS, http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#HabitualMood, I assume that HabitualMood is equivalent with HabitualAspect, hence no corresponding HabitualModality has been introduced
"Habitual" is normally considered to be an aspect. Occasionally, it is, however, also described as a mood, e.g., by Bittner (2008, p. 354) for Kalaalisut (Greenlandic). Maria Bittner (2008), Aspectual universals of temporal anaphora, In: Susan Deborah Rothstein (ed.), Theoretical and crosslinguistic approaches to the semantics of aspect, John Benjamins, Amsterdam, p. 349-386.
Pertaining to the mood or mode of a verb form or clause such that it predicates a command, request, or exhortation (OED). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#imperativeModality)
postulated by Khoja, S, Garside, R, and Knowles, G (2001) A tagset for the morphosyntactic tagging of Arabic. Paper given at the Corpus Linguistics 2001 conference, Lancaster, http://zeus.cs.pacificu.edu/shereen/CL2001.pdf
The jussive is needed to express a command in the first and third person. This mood is realised in Arabic by rejecting the final vowel and is sometimes called the apocopated imperfect. The purpose of the jussive is to express a command in the first or third person as in ‘heena yahduru yalbas thiyaban nazyfatan’ which means “when he attends, let him (he must) wear clean clothes”, where the jussive is the word ‘yalbas’ “wear”. Also, there is no negative imperative in Arabic, so the negative particle followed by the jussive is used in its place, such as ‘la taktub’ “do not write”, where the jussive is the word ‘taktub’ “write”. Khoja, S, Garside, R, and Knowles, G (2001) A tagset for the morphosyntactic tagging of Arabic. Paper given at the Corpus Linguistics 2001 conference, Lancaster, http://zeus.cs.pacificu.edu/shereen/CL2001.pdf
A quotative is grammatical device to mark reported speech in some languages (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotative), e.g., in Estonian. ‘Reportedly, while he was going (in his boat), he turned over.’ Ta olevat oma paadiga ümber läinud He was_QUOTATIVE his_own boat_WITH over gone. (Estonian translation of an example given under http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAQuotativeEvidential.htm) (Heiki-Jaan.Kaalep, email 2010/06/22)
TODO: check relationship with DeclarativeMood
The indicative is the unmarked mood. It is used when no special modal nuance in the clause or sentence is intended. It is the default mood of independent declarative and often also of interrogative sentences. (http://www.uni-erfurt.de/sprachwissenschaft/proxy.php?port=8080&file=lido/servlet/Lido_Servlet Indikativ 18.06.07) Expression of assertion. (Bybee 1985:22) Pertaining to the mood or mode of a verb form or clause such that it predicates a stated relation of objective fact (OED). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#indicativeModality)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Indicative, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#indicativeModality
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Optative, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#optativeModality
Optative indicates that the speaker wishes or hopes that the expressed proposition be the case (Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca 1994: 179; Palmer 2001: 204). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Optative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Subjunctive, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#subjunctiveModality
The subjunctive is the mood that is minimally marked as opposed to the indicative and that marks a clause as not directly representing an assertion of the speaker. (http://www.uni-erfurt.de/sprachwissenschaft/proxy.php?port=8080&file=lido/servlet/Lido_Servlet Subjunktiv 18.06.07)
TimitiveMood expresses that the speaker fears something expressed in what is said (Palmer 2001: 13, 22). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Timitive)
Irrealis modality indicates the situation to which it pertains is non-actual or non-factual. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#irrealisModality)
adopted from ILPOSTS (http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#PresumptiveMood) for Indian languages
The presumptive mood is used in Romanian to express presupposition or hypothesis regarding the fact denoted by the verb, as well as other more or less similar attitudes: doubt, curiosity, concern, condition, indifference, inevitability. For example, acolo s-o fi dus "he might have gone there" shows the basic presupposition use, while the following excerpt from a poem by Eminescu shows the use both in a conditional clause de-o fi "suppose it is" and in a main clause showing an attitude of submission to fate le-om duce "we would bear". De-o fi una, de-o fi alta... Ce e scris și pentru noi, Bucuroși le-om duce toate, de e pace, de-i război. Be it one, be it the other... Whatever fate we have, We will gladly go through all, be it peace or be it war (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrealis_mood#Presumptive)
In Inuktitut, conditionality is expressed by verbal inflection. Conditional mood signifies conditional relationships in a sentence. (Nowak 1996, p.39) A conditional relation is a logical relation in which the illocutionary act employing one of a pair of propositions is expressed or implied to be true or in force if the other proposition is true. (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAConditionalRelation.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1258) Elke Nowak (1996), Transforming the images: Ergativity and transitivity in Inuktitut (Eskimo). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin.
subClassOf verbFormMood (dcif:conceptualDomain)
ILPOSTS (Indian languages), http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#Real is restricted to conditional participles, hence probably a subtype of ConditionalMood
Conditional Mood (modality) with Realis meaning (ILPOSTS)
ILPOSTS (Indian languages), http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#NonReal is restricted to conditional participles, hence probably a subtype of ConditionalMood
Conditional Mood (modality) with Irrealis meaning (ILPOSTS)
in EAGLES and MULTEXT-East restricted to pronouns, in ILPOSTS applicable to many different WordClasses, hence modelled as an independent feature, cf. http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#Emphasis
added in accordance with ILPOSTS, cf. http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#EmphaticDeterminer, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#EmphaticPronoun, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1941 (emphatic pronoun)
Pronoun marked to show its importance. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1941) In Romanian, the so-called emphatic determiner may accompany both a noun and a personal pronoun: fata *însăşi* (the girl *herself*), also ea *însăşi* (she *herself*). (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#EmphaticDeterminer) Emphasis can not only be expressed on nouns and pronouns, but also at verbs, adverbs, adpositions, etc., cf. http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#Emphasis
added in accordance with ILPOSTS, cf. http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#EmphaticDeterminer, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#EmphaticPronoun
In languages where emphasis can be grammatically marked, the unmarked form would be considered NonEmphatic, see #Emphatic
EAGLES, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Third
Third person is deictic reference to a referent(s) not identified as the speaker or addressee. For example in English "he", "she", "they" or the third person singular verb suffix -s, e.g. in "He sometimes flies." (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsThirdPersonDeixis.htm 20.11.06)
EAGLES, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Second
Refers to the person(s) the speaker is addressing (Crystal 1997: 285). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Second)
EAGLES, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/First
First person deixis is deictic reference that refers to the speaker, or both the speaker and referents grouped with the speaker (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1288) cf. gold:First: Refers to the speaker and one or more nonparticipants, but not hearer(s). Contrasts with FirstPersonInclusive (Crystal 1997: 285). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/First)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ThirdProximative, modelled here under Third
Proximative refers to one or more non-participants that are in some way distinct/closer to the speaker than other non-particpants. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ThirdProximative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FirstInclusive, modelled here as subconcept of First
Refers to the speaker, hearer(s) and possibly others. Contrasts with FirstPersonExclusive (Crystal 1997: 285). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FirstInclusive)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ThirdObviative, modelled here as a subconcept of Third
Obviative refers to one or more non-participants that are in some way further removed from the speaker than other non-particpants. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ThirdObviative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FirstExclusive, modelled as a subconcept of First here
Refers to the speaker and one or more nonparticipants, but not hearer(s). Contrasts with FirstPersonInclusive (Crystal 1997: 285). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FirstExclusive)
EAGLES PersonalPronoun attribute Politeness="Polite". The EAGLES attribute politeness (polite/ familiar) is limited to second-person pronouns. In French, for example, it is possible to treat Polite simply as pragmatic values encoded through other attributes - especially person and number. In languages where there are special polite pronoun forms (e.g. Dutch u and Spanish usted), the additional Politeness attribute is required. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1p 19.09.06)
Adopted from ILPOSTS for Indian languages, http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#Honorific
TOCHECK: is SecondHonorific different from SecondPolite ?
Adopted from ILPOSTS for Indian languages, http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#NonHonorific
TOCHECK: is SecondNonHonorific different from SecondFamiliar ?
EAGLES PersonalPronoun attribute Politeness="Familiar". The EAGLES attribute politeness (polite/ familiar) is limited to second-person pronouns.
In several European languages exist special forms of pronouns for polite or respectful reference, e.g. Dutch u and Spanish usted. The feature SecondFamiliar applies to the corresponding unmarked forms for informal conversiation in such languages. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1p 19.09.06)
VisualEvidentiality encodes the fact that the speaker came to believe the content of the expression through direct visual experience; they saw it [Palmer 2001: 57].
An indication that the source of information is someone other than the speaker. [Aikhenvald 2006: 106]
DeductiveEvidentiality encodes the fact that the speaker came to believe the content of the expression through a sound inference procedure. [Palmer 2001: 6-8].
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#feminineGender
Feminine gender is a grammatical gender that marks nouns, articles, pronouns, etc. that have human or animal female referents, and often marks nouns that have referents that do not carry distinctions of sex. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node19.html#oav2at 17.11.06)
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#neuterGender
Neuter gender is a grammatical gender that includes those nouns, articles, pronouns, etc. having referents which do not have distinctions of sex, and often includes some which do have a natural sex distinction. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsNeuterGender.htm 17.11.06)
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#masculineGender
Masculine gender is a grammatical gender that marks nouns, articles, pronouns, etc. having human or animal male referents, and often marks nouns having referents that do not have distinctions of sex. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsMasculineGender.htm 17.11.06)
Common is an optional attribute for nouns in EAGLES. The Common gender contrasts with Neuter in a two-gender system e.g. Danish, Dutch. This value is also used for articles, pronouns and determiners especially for Danish. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node19.html#oav2at 17.11.06)
One of the two grammatical genders, or classes of nouns, the other being inanimate. Membership in the animate grammatical class is largely based on meanings, in that living things, including humans, animals, spirits, trees, and most plants are included in the animate class of nouns (Valentine 2001: 114). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Animate)
One of the two grammatical genders, or noun classes, of Nishnaabemwin, the other being animate. Membership in the inanimate grammatical class is largely based on meaning, in that non-living things, such as objects of manufacture and natural 'non-living' things are included in it (Valentine 2001: 114). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Inanimate)
Vegetable gender refers to inanimates and exists in some four-way gender systems, e.g., masculine, feminine, neuter, and vegetable as in Bininj Gun-wok [Evans 2003: 202].
Subclassification in absolute, relaive and absolute-relative adopted from TDS. Habitual is modelled here as Aspect, in accordance with GOLD, replaced here by NotTemporallyAnchored. Skipped TDS non-presentTense (= complement of Present), http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NonFuture, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NonPast, redefined Future and Past as superconcepts to cover different future and past tenses
A replacement for TDS Habitual that is modelled here as an Aspect: Habitual tense pertains to verbs which refer to an action that occurs repeatedly. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#habitualTense)
To be used for actions that are not bound to a particular reference point.
Relative tense is a tense that refers to a time in relation to a contextually determined temporal reference point, regardless of the latter’s temporal relation to the moment of utterance. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#relativeTense with reference to http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/whatisrelativetense.htm)
Absolute tense refers to a time in relation to the moment of utterance. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#absoluteTense with reference to http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/whatisabsolutetense.htm")
Absolute-relative tense is a tense that (i) refers to a time in relation to a temporal reference point that, in turn, is referred to in relation to the moment of utterance (ii) in which the time and the reference point are not identical, and (iii) the reference point and the moment of utterance are not identical. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#absoluteRelativeTense with reference to http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/whatisabsoluterelativetense.htm)
Past perfect tense is an absolute-relative tense that refers to a time in the past relative to a reference point, which itself is in the past relative to the moment of utterance (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsPastPerfectTense.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1348)
denoting a tense of verbs used in relating past events where the action had already occurred at the time of the action of a main verb that is itself in a past tense. In English this is a compound tense formed with had plus the past participle (www.wordreference.com/English/definition.asp?en=past+perfect; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1348)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1351, modelled as an absolute tense here
A verb tense that refers to completed action in the past. It corresponds to three English tenses. (www.southwestern.edu/~carlg/Latin_Web/glossary.html; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1351)
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#presentTense
Present tense refers to the moment of utterance. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#presentTense) Present tense refers to the moment of utterance. It often refers to events or states that do not merely coincide with the moment of utterance, such as those that are continuous, habitual, or lawlike. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsPresentTense.htm 17.11.06)
present (action in the same time as of the predicate): The dog going through the house barks. past (action premature to the one of predicate): He has started to read the book after he had sat down. (ark.wz.cz/cidarke/mverb.html; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1404)
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#futureTense, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Future
The future tense refers to events that have yet to happen. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future 17.11.06) The future tense refers to a tense category which places an event in the future. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#futureTense) FutureTense locates the situation in question later than the present moment (time of speaking.) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Future)
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#pastTense
The past tense is a verb tense expressing action, activity, state or being in the past. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Past_tense 17.11.06) The past tense refers to a tense category which places an event in the past. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#pastTense)
Simple past tense that is predominantly used for narration. Both the perfective and the imperfective forms can be used in the aorist without any restrictions. (www.helsinki.fi/~bontchev/grammar/index.html; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1240)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RemotePast, classified as absolute-relative here
RemotePastTense locates the situation in question prior to the present moment, usually more than a few days ago (Dahl 1985:121; Comrie 1985:88). Subsumes notion of PreHesternalPast tense, which locates the situation in question before that of an opposing hesternal past tense. (Bybee, Perkins, Pagliuca 1994: 98). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RemotePast)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FutureInPast, classified as absolute-relative tense here
FutureInPastTense locates the situation in question in the future, relative to a contextually determined temporal reference point that itself must be located in the past relative to the moment of utterance. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FutureInPast)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/HodiernalPast, classified as Past here
HodiernalPastTense locates the situation in question before the moment of utterance within the span culturally defined as 'today' (Comrie 1985:87; Dahl 1985:125-126). Contrasts with PreHodiernalPastTense. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/HodiernalPast)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/CloseFuture, classified as AbsoluteTense here
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PastInPast, classified as absolute-relative tense here.
PastInPast tense locates the situation in question prior to a reference time in the past. Also known as PluperfectTense. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PastInPast)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RelativeFuture, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1292
RelativeFutureTense locates the situation in question after a contextually determined temporal reference point, regardless of the latter's relation to the moment of utterance. Also called FuturePerfectTense (Comrie 1985:69-71). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RelativeFuture) A verb tense that refers to an action or state of being completed in the future. Translation into English requires the use of the auxiliary verbs will/shall have. (www.southwestern.edu/~carlg/Latin_Web/glossary.html; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1292) A tense of verbs describing an action that will have been performed by a certain time. In English this is formed with will have or shall have plus the past participle. (www.wordreference.com/English/definition.asp?en=future+perfect; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1292)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/HesternalPast, classified as Past here
HesternalPastTense locates the situation in question somewhere in the span beginning with the period defined culturally as 'yesterday' and extends back through some period that is considered nonremote (Comrie 1985:87-88; Dahl 1985:126). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/HesternalPast)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/HodiernalFuture, classified as Future here
HodiernalFutureTense locates the situation in question after the moment of utterance within the span culturally defined as 'today' (Comrie 1985: 86; Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca 1994: 247). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/HodiernalFuture)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PostHodiernalFuture, classified as Future here
PostHodiernalFutureTense locates the situation in question after the span that is culturally defined as 'today' (Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca 1994: 247). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PostHodiernalFuture)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FutureInFuture, classified as absolute-relative tense here.
FutureInFutureTense locates the situation in question in the future, relative to a temporal reference point that itself is located in the future relative to the moment of utterance. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FutureInFuture)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RemoteFuture, classified as Future here
RemoteFutureTense locates the situation in question at a time that is considered relatively distant. It is characteristically after the span of time culturally defined as 'tomorrow' (Dahl 1985:121; Comrie 1985:94). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RemoteFuture)
RelativePastTense locates the situation in question before that of a contextually determined temporal reference point (Comrie 1985: 104). Also called PastPerfectTense. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RelativePast)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ImmediatePast, classified as Past here
ImmediatePastTense locates the situation in question at a time considered very recent in relation to the moment of utterance (Comrie 1985: 87). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ImmediatePast)
RelativePresentTense locates the situation in question simultaneously with some contextually determined temporal reference point. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RelativePresent)
StillPresentTense is similar to PresentTense but carries the presupposition that an event or state held before the moment of utterance. In positive declarative clauses, still present tense asserts that the event or state holds at the moment of utterance (Comrie 1985: 54; named changed from 'StillTense'). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/StillPresent)
Verb tense that refers to action in the past that is incomplete or ongoing. (www.southwestern.edu/~carlg/Latin_Web/glossary.html; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1304)
subClassOf grammaticalTense (dcif:conceptualDomain)
Locates the situation in question in the future, prior to a reference time in the future.
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NearFuture, classified as Future here
adopted from GOLD, no definition given there (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NearFuture)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PreHodiernalPast, classified as absolute tense
PreHodiernalPastTense locates the situation in question before that of a contrasting HodiernalPastTense. According to Bybee, Perkins, Pagliuca 1994: 98. this category must be defined relative to a HodiernalPastTense. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PreHodiernalPast)
PastTense locates the situation in question prior to the present moment, with no specification on the distance in time (Comrie 1985). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Past)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Future, cf. http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Past
FutureTense locates the situation in question after the present moment, with no specification on the distance in time. (adapted from the definition of http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Past)
ImmediateFutureTense, also called 'close future', locates the situation in question shortly after the moment of utterance (Dahl 1985:121; Comrie 1985:94; Bybee, Perkins, and Pagliuca 1994: 244-245). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ImmediateFuture)
RecentPastTense locates the situation in question prior to the present moment, but by culturally and situationally defined criteria, usually within the span ranging from yesterday to a week or a few months previous (Comrie 1985:87; Dahl 1985:121-122). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/RecentPast)
EAGLES, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1422
The superlative of an adjective or adverb is a form of adjective or adverb which indicates that something has some feature to a greater degree than anything it is being compared to in a given context. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superlative 17.11.06)
EAGLES, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1420
Value used in a comparison relationship when no comparison is involved. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1420) The Positive is the form of an adjective or adverb on which comparative and superlative are formed. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positive 17.11.06)
EAGLES, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1421
The comparative is the form of an adjective or adverb which denotes the degree or grade by which a person, thing, or other entity has a property or quality greater or less in extent than that of another. In English the structure of a comparative consists normally of the positive form of the adjective or adverb, plus the suffix -er, or (especially in the case of longer words) the modifier "more" (or "less") before the adjective or adverb. The form is usually completed by "than" and the noun which is being compared, e.g. "he is taller than his father is", or "the village is less picturesque than the town near by is". (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparative 17.11.06)
noun expressing a location, equivalent to ProperNoun and hasSemanticRole some LocationRole
noun expressing an instrument of the action
deprecated, as merely a shorthand for Noun and hasSemanticRole some InstrumentRole
deprecated, as merely a shorthand for CommonNoun and hasEmphasis some Emphatic
deprecated, as merely a shorthand for Noun and hasSemanticRole some TimeRole
noun conveying the meaning that the action is performed once
onceNoun [DC-3853] ``noun conveying the meaning that the action is performed once''. Clearly, this noun carries a meaning that is closely related to aspect information (e.g., SemelfactiveAspect), but as aspect is a verb-centered concept, it would have been counter-intuitive to model this as Noun and hasAspect some SemelfactiveAspect. Hence, this concept is directly adopted in the OLiA Reference Model, but marked as deprecated until an ontologically satisfying modeling of aspect-related features of nouns has been achieved.
deprecated, as merely a shorthand for CommonNoun and hasSemanticRole some MannerRole
noun to express both comparative and superlative
http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#ElativeDegree, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1276, note that the latter conflates ElativeDegree and ElativeCase
MULTEXT-East Degree="elative" (Adjective: Resian, Serbian, Macedonian) In Semitic languages, ElativeDegree refers to the “adjective of superiority.” In some languages such as Arabic, the concepts of comparative and superlative degree of an adjective are merged into a single form, the elative. How this form is understood or translated depends upon context and definiteness. In the absence of comparison, the elative conveys the notion of “greatest”, “supreme.” The elative of كبير (kabí:r, "big") is أكبر (’ákbar, “bigger/biggest”, “greater/greatest”). (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/elative) In Slavic languages, as well, it is pretty standard. I do agree with the definition though, that "the elative conveys the notion of “greatest”, “supreme.”" So, Slovene "lep" is beautiful, "prelep" is very (or supremely) beautiful; I guess the "pre-" prefix could be roughly translated as "over-". Used in Resian, Serbian, Macedonian. In Slovenian, we banished it, as even "ordinary" degrees are borderline inflection / derivation, but, I think, elative is is definitely not inflection. (Tomaž Erjavec, email 2010/06/21)
e.g., predivan, prekasan, premanjeg/premali, premanjega/premali, premanjem/premali, premanjemu/premali, premanji/premali (sr)
e.g., прешпионска/шпионски, прешпионскава/шпионски, прешпионскана/шпионски, прешпионската/шпионски, прешпионски/шпионски, прешпионскиве/шпионски, прешпионскине/шпионски, прешпионскиов/шпионски, прешпионскион/шпионски (mk)
Skipped EAGLES case feature values Uninflected (uninformative), and NonGenitive (= complement of Genitive). As for TDS case feature values, only "grammaticalCase" has been adopted. As for GOLD case feature values, everything has been adopted, although it seems that some of these cases are actually semantic (theta) roles, i.e., "case" in the sense of Fillmore (1966), e.g., BenefactiveCase.
TODO: rename all subconcepts to ...Case
Note that also Indian case markers were included here (ILPOSTS). These are described differently, either as postpositions or as grammatical cases.
Case used to express the direct object, indirect object, object of a preposition, object complement and subject of an infinitive.
AversiveCase expresses fear or is literally translated as 'turning from' in some languages [Blake 2001: 156].
case category of the Hungarian MULTEXT-East scheme, e.g., amilyenné/amilyen, azzá/az, erőddé/erő, jelmezeivé/jelmez, jelükké/jel, kevéssé/kevés, Kissé/Kiss, legjelentéktelenebbekké/jelentéktelen (hu) (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#FactiveCase)
The distributive case is used on nouns for the meanings of per or each, e.g., Hungarian egyenként/egy, hetenként/hét, ilyenként/ily, kéthetenként/kéthét, rekordonként/rekord, tömbönként/tömb, vércsoportonként/vércsoport In Hungarian it is -nként and expresses the manner when something happens to each member of a set one by one (e.g., fejenként "per head", esetenként "in some case"), or the frequency in time (hetenként "once a week", tízpercenként "every ten minutes"). In the Finnish language, this adverb type is rare, even rarer in the singular. Its ending is -ttain/-ttäin. The basic meaning is "separately for each". For example, maa ("country") becomes maittain for an expression like Laki ratifioidaan maittain ("The law is ratified separately in each country"). It can be used to distribute the action to frequent points in time, e.g., päivä (day) has the plural distributive päivittäin (each day). It can mean also "in (or with) regard to the (cultural) perspective" when combined with a word referring to an inhabitant (-lais-). Frequently Finns (suomalaiset) say that suomalaisittain tuntuu oudolta, että, or "in the Finnish perspective, it feels strange that". (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#DistributiveCase, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributive_case)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Abessive, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1223
AbessiveCase expresses the lack or absence of the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning of the English preposition 'without' (Pei and Gaynor 1954: 3,35; Gove, et al. 1966: 3). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Abessive)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Ablative, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1224
Case used to indicate locative or instrumental function. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1224) AblativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location from which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'from'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Ablative)
TDS Ontology, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1225
Absolutive case marks the first argument of an intransitive verb and the second argument of a transitive verb in ergative-absolutive languages. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#absolutiveCase)
In nominative-accusative languages, accusative case marks certain syntactic functions, usually direct objects. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsAccusativeCase.htm 17.11.06)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Adessive, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1228
AdessiveCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location near/at which another referent exists. It has the meaning of 'at' or 'near' (Crystal 1997: 8). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Adessive)
aditive case
Case expressing "to" in Basque studies. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1229)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Allative; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1236
AllativeCase expresses motion to or toward the referent of the noun it marks (Pei and Gaynor 1954: 6,9,216; Lyons 1968: 299; Crystal 1985: 1213; Gove, et al. 1966: 55,2359). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Allative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Benefactive; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1247
BenefactiveCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks receives the benefit of the situation expressed by the clause (Crystal 1980: 43; Gove, et al. 1966: 203). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Benefactive)
causative case
Case which expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the cause of the situation expressed by the clause. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1253)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Comitative; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1255
ComitativeCase expresses accompaniment. It carries the meaning 'with' or 'accompanied by' (Anderson, Stephen 1985: 186; Pei and Gaynor 1954: 42;Dixon, R. 1972: 12; Gove, et al. 1966: 455). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Comitative)
ContablativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location from near which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'from near'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Contablative)
ContallativeCase expresses that something is moving toward the vicinity of the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'towards the vicinity of'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Contallative)
ConterminativeCase expresses the notion of something moving into the vicinity of the referent of the noun it marks, but not through that region. It has the meaning 'moving into the vicinity of'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Conterminative)
ContlativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location in the vicinity of which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'in the vicinity of'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Contlative)
Dative case marks indirect objects (for languages in which they are held to exist), or nouns having the role of a recipient (as of things given), a beneficiary of an action, or a possessor of an item. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsDativeCase.htm 17.11.06)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Delative, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1268
DelativeCase expresses motion downward from the referent of the noun it marks (Pei and Gaynor 1954: 53; Gove, et al. 1966: 595). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Delative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Elative, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1276, note that the latter conflates ElativeDegree and ElativeCase
ElativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location out of which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'out of' (Lyons 1968: 299; Pei and Gaynor 1954: 64; Crystal 1985: 106; Gove, et al. 1966: 730). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Elative)
Case that expresses likeness or identity to the referent of the noun it marks. It can have meaning, such as: 'as', 'like', or 'in the capacity of'. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1279)
In ergative-absolutive languages, the ergative case identifies the subject of a transitive verb. In such languages, the ergative case is typically marked (most salient), while the absolutive case is unmarked. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#ergativeCase with reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ergative_case).
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Essive, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1281
EssiveCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location at which another referent exists (Lyons 1968: 299,301; Gove, et al. 1966: 778; Crystal 1985: 112; Blake 1994: 154-5). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Essive)
The Hungarian "formativus, or essivus-formalis `-ként' ... usually expresses a position, task and manner of the person or the thing." (Nose 2003), e.g., Hungarian 'katonaként' -> [serves] as a soldier. (Csaba Oravecz, email 2010/06/15) "Haspelmath & Buchholz (1998:321) explained the function of the essive case as ``role phrases''. Role phrases represent the role of the function in which a participant appears. They regard the role phrases as adverbial." (Nose 2003, p. 117) In the Hungarian language this case combines the Essive case and the Formal case, and it can express the position, task, state (e.g. "as a tourist"), or the manner (e.g. "like a hunted animal"). The status of the suffix -ként in the declension system is disputed for several reasons. First, in general, Hungarian case suffixes are absolute word-final, while -ként permits further suffixation by the locative suffix -i. Second, most Hungarian case endings participate in vowel harmony, while -ként does not. For these reasons, many modern analyses of the Hungarian case system, starting with László Antal's "A magyar esetrendszer" (1961) do not consider the essive/formal to be a case. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essive-formal_case) cf. Masahiko Nose (2003), Adverbial Usage of the Hungarian Essive Case
In the Romanian case system the value 'direct' conflates 'nominative' and 'accusative', e.g., -acea/acel, -aceasta/acesta, -această/acest (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#DirectCase)
Genitive case signals that the referent of the marked noun is the possessor of the referent of another noun, e.g. "the man's foot". In some languages, genitive case may express an associative relation between the marked noun and another noun. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsGenitiveCase.htm 17.11.06)
In Hungarian, `essive-formal' is in some descriptions simply called `formal', with the affix _-képp(en)_ and meaning (`in the form of ...', they probably meant when they came up with the term). In the Hungarian MULTEXT-East scheme, essive-formal and formal are distinguished. (Ivan A. Derzhanski, email 2010/06/15, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#FormalCase)
A case used in the Hungarian MULTEXT-East scheme, e.g., tizennegyedszer/tizennegyed, tucatszor/tucat, tízezredszer/tízezred (hu) (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#MultiplicativeCase)
The multiplicative case is a grammatical case used for marking a number of something ("three times"). The case is found in the Hungarian language, for example nyolc (eight), nyolcszor (eight times). The case appears also in Finnish as an adverbial (adverb-forming) case. Used with a cardinal number it denotes the number of actions; for example, viisi (five) -> viidesti (five times). Used with adjectives it refers to the mean of the action, corresponding the English suffix -ly: kaunis (beautiful) -> kauniisti (beautifully). It is also used with a small number of nouns: leikki (play) -> leikisti (just kidding, not really). In addition, it acts as an intensifier when used with a swearword: piru -> pirusti. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiplicative_case)
The so-called Temporalis Case is formed in Hungarian with -kor. Expresses a point of time or a period. (http://member.melbpc.org.au/~tmajlath/form-suffix.html)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Illative; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1303
IllativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location into which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'into' (Lyons 1968: 299; Gove, et al. 1966: 1126; Crystal 1985: 152). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Illative)
InablativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location from within which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'from within'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Inablative)
InallativeCase expresses that something is moving toward the region that is inside the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'towards in(side)'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Inallative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Inessive, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1311
InessiveCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location within which another referent exists. It has the meaning of 'within' or 'inside' (Lyons 1968: 299; Gove, et al. 1966: 1156; Crystal 1985: 156). X in Y. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Inessive)
TDS Ontology, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#instrumentalCase-grammatical; GOLD, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Instrumental; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1316
InstrumentalCase indicates that the referent of the noun it marks is the means of the accomplishment of the action expressed by the clause (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Instrumental)
InterablativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location from between which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'from inbetween'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Interablative)
InterallativeCase expresses that something is moving toward the region that is in the middle of the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'towards the middle of'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Interallative)
InteressiveCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location between which another referent exists. It has the meaning of 'between'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Interessive)
InterlativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location between which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'to the middle of'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Interlative)
'into in(side of)'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Interminative)
InterterminativeCase expresses the notion of something moving into the middle of the referent of the noun it marks, but not through it. It has the meaning 'into the middle of'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Interminative)
IntertranslativeCase expresses the notion of something moving along a trajectory between the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'along the in between. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Intertranslative)
IntranslativeCase expresses the notion of something moving through the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'along through'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Intranslative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Lative; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1323
LativeCase expresses 'motion up to the location of,' or 'as far as' the referent of the noun it marks (Pei and Gaynor 1954: 121; Gove, et al. 1966: 1277). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Lative)
Category of case that denotes that the referent of the noun it marks is a location. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Locational)
Case that indicates a final location of action or a time of the action. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1326)
locative case
Opposite of BenefactiveCase; used when the marked noun is negatively affected in the clause. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Malefactive)
In nominative-accusative languages, nominative case marks clausal subjects and is applies to nouns in isolation. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsNominativeCase.htm 17.11.06)
oblique case
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1336; in EAGLES applied to non-subject pronouns in English and Dutch
Case that is used when a noun is the object of a verb or a proposition, except for nominative and vocative case. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1336)
TDS ontology; http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Partitive; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2003
The partitive case is a grammatical case which denotes "partialness", "without result", or "without specific identity". (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#partitiveCase with reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partitive) PartitiveCase expresses the partial nature of the referent of the noun it marks, as opposed to expressing the whole unit or class of which the referent is a part. This case may be found in items such as the following: existential clauses, nouns that are accompanied by numerals or units of measure, or predications of material from which something is made. It often has a meaning similar to the English word 'some' (Pei and Gaynor 1954: 161; Richards, Platt, and Weber 1985: 208; Quirk, et al. 1985: 249; Gove, et al. 1966: 1648; Sebeok 1946: 1214). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Partitive)
PerlativeCase expresses that something moved 'through','across', or 'along' the referent of the noun that is marked (Blake 1998: 38, 203). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Perlative)
PossessedCase is used to mark the noun whose referent is possessed by the referent of another noun. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Possessed)
Prepositional case is an in EAGLES optional value of CaseFeature for Spanish pronouns and determiners. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node19.html#oav2v 15.11.06)
In many grammars, the term "prepositional case" is to refer to case marking that only occurs in combination with prepositions. Normally, this is an oblique case, e.g., the Russian 6th case, also referred to as "locative". (Ch. Chiarcos)
Case for a noun or a pronoun that expresses motion within a place or a period of time needed for an event. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1368)
TDS Ontology, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#proprietiveCase-grammatical
Proprietive case marks a possessional relation, i.e. 'having' something. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#proprietiveCase-grammatical)
added in accordance with the ILPOSTS tagset for a case marker (postposition) in Indian languages, cf. http://purl.org/olia/ilposts.owl#PurposiveCase
Purposive marks the goal of an activity, e.g., 'going out FOR (i.e. to catch) KANGAROOS'; 'call them FOR (i.e. to eat) FOOD'. The common purposive suffix -gu is a recurrent suffix on verbs ... The purposive case suffix is often used on a nominalised clause (and this may possibly be the origin of the verbal purposive). (Dixon 2002, p.134, on purposive case in [several] Australian languages) R.M.W. Dixon (2002), Australian Languages. CUP, Cambridge
sociative case
adopted from http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1388
TODO: check whether this is really different from comitative
Case related to the person in whose company the action is carried out, or to any belongings of people which take part in the action. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1388)
SubablativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location from under which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'from under'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Subablative)
SuballativeCase expresses that something is moving toward the region that is under the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'towards the region that is under'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Suballative)
SubessiveCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location under which another referent exists. It has the meaning of 'under' or 'beneath'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Subessive)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Sublative; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1392
SublativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location under which another referent is moving toward. It has the meaning 'towards the underneath of'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Sublative)
SubterminativeCase expresses the notion of something moving into the region under the referent of the noun it marks, but not through that region. It has the meaning 'into the region under'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Subterminative)
SubtranslativeCase expresses the notion of something moving along a trajectory underneath the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'along the region underneath'. Unfortunate name clash with 'Superlative' as a feature of adjectives. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Subtranslative)
Superablative expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location from over which another referent is moving. It has the meaning 'from over'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Superablative)
SuperallativeCase expresses that something is moving toward the region that is above the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'towards the region that is over'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Superallative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Superessive, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1396
SuperessiveCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location on which another referent exists. It has the meaning of 'on' or 'upon'. (Pei and Gaynor 1954: 207, Gove, et al. 1966: 2293). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Superessive)
SuperlativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun it marks is the location onto which another referent is moving. It has the meaning of 'onto'. Unfortunate name clash with 'Superlative' as a property of adjectives. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Superlative)
SuperterminativeCase expresses the notion of something moving into the region over the referent of the noun it marks, but not through that region. It has the meaning 'into the region over'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Superterminative)
SupertranslativeCase expresses the notion of something moving along a trajectory above the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'along the region over'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Supertranslative)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/TerminativeCase, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1401
Case that indicates to what or where something ends. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1401) TerminativeCase expresses the notion of something into but not further than (ie, not through) the referent of the noun it marks. It has the meaning 'into but not through'. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/TerminativeCase)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Translative, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1406
TranslativeCase expresses that the referent of the noun, or the quality of the adjective, that it marks is the result of a process of change (Lyons 1968: 299301, Gove, et al. 1966: 813,2429, Sebeok 1946: 17, Hakulinen 1961: 70). X along, across Y. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Translative)
Vocative case marks a noun whose referent is being addressed. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsVocativeCase.htm 17.11.06)
Skipped EAGLES "Unmarked" definiteness that was only introduced "to handle the suffixed definite article in Danish: e.g. "haven" (`the garden'); "havet" (`the sea')." (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node19.html#oav2 16.11.06)
TODO: use this property to define Definite/IndefiniteArticle
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#definite, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2004
Value referring to the capacity of identification of an entity. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2004) An entity is specified as definite when it refers to a particularized individual of the species denoted by the noun. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#definite) Definite noun phrases are used to refer to entities which are specific and identifiable in a given context. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definiteness 20.11.06)
morphological form of the nominal head of noun+noun-phrases which in spite of a missing determiner (article) is invariably understood as semantically determined. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2997) The construct state or status constructus is a noun form occurring in Afro-Asiatic languages. It is particularly common in Semitic languages (such as Arabic, Hebrew, and Syriac), in the Berber languages, and in the extinct Egyptian language. ... In Semitic languages, nouns are placed in the construct state when they are semantically definite and modified by another noun in a genitive construction. Note that this differs from the genitive case of European languages in that it is the head (modified) noun rather than the dependent (modifying) noun which is marked. However, in Semitic languages with grammatical case (e.g. Classical Arabic), the modifying noun in a genitive construction is placed in the genitive case, in addition to marking the head noun with the construct state. ... The construct state is one of the three grammatical states of nouns in Arabic, the other two being the indefinite state and the definite state. ... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Construct_state)
According to the Arabic usage of this category, modeled here as a DefinitenessFeature, though not directly a subconcept of definite, because it has other functions in other languages.
EAGLES, http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#indefinite
An entity is specified as indefinite when it refers to a non-particularized individual of the species denoted by the noun. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#indefinite) Indefinite noun phrases are used to refer to entities which are not specific and identifiable in a given context. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definiteness 20.11.06)
In hierarchical relations, the parent is modelled as source, the child as target.
Indication concerning the number of the possessed thing. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1930)
EAGLES feature for the inherent plural/singular of possessive pronouns and possessive determiners; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1417, does not entail hasNumber (against hasOwnedNumber), because hasNumber applies to agreement information
The EAGLES-recommended attribute Possessive accounts for the fact that a possessive pronoun or possessive determiner may have two different numbers. This attribute handles the number which is inherent to the possessive form (e.g. Italian "(la) mia", "(la) nostra" as first-person singular and first-person plural) as contrasted with the number it has by virtue of agreeing with a particular noun (e.g. Italian "(la) mia", "(le) mie)". (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node17.html#recc 20.11.06) Indication concerning the number of the person that ownes something. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1417) Inherent plural or singular of possessive pronouns and possessive determiners.
introduced for double agreement of transitive verbs, e.g., in Hungarian, see http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#FirstSgSecondSg
Number of the subject of a transitive verb. (By default, this is the meaning of hasNumber).
Number of the object of a transitive verb. (Note that this does not entail of hasNumber).
Indication concerning the gender of the person that ownes something. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1416)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2278 (subject person)
person for the subject of the verb (in languages with double congruency) (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2278)
person for the object of the verb (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2279)
Indication concerning the person that ownes something. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1929)
does not entail hasPerson: hasPerson pertains to agreement
PTB Bracketing Guidelines, Santorini (1991)
The term \adjunction structure" refers to structures which would be represented by tree diagrams of the general form in (@9). The defining characteristic of adjunction structures is that a node X dominates another instance of X. (Santorini 1991)
Apposition is a relation between two phrases: (1) the nucleus phrase and (2) an appositive phrase, generally set o by punctuation, which modi es the nucleus phrase. An example of apposition is given in (@11). (11) Ryukichi Imai, Japan’s ambassador to Mexico, agrees that Mexico may be too eager. Here, Ryukichi Imai is the nucleus phrase, and the phrase enclosed in commas, Japan’s ambassador to Mexico, is the appositive. Instances of apposition should be represented as adjunction structures (see Section 3.1). (Santorini 1991)
added in accordance with TIGER, definition according to PTB Bracketing Guidelines (Santorini 1991)
PTB bracketing guidelines (Santorini 1991, Bies et al. 1995)
SINV|Inverted declarative sentence, i.e. one in which the subject follows the verb. See Section 5.19. (Santorini 1991) The SINV label is used for subject-auxiliary inversion in the case of negative inversion, conditional inversion, locative inversion, and some topicalizations. ... SINV â ´ Inverted declarative sentence, i.e. one in which the subject follows the tensed verb or modal. (Bies et al. 1995)
Wh-clefts are constructions in which a wh-clause functions as the subject of a sentence. A simple example is What matters is the price. Here, the wh-clause What matters is the subject, and is the price is the predicate. The internal structure of the subject is: (NP (SBAR (WHNP what) (S (NP T) (VP matters)))) (Santorini 1991)
-CLF (cleft) — marks it-clefts (“true” clefts) and may be added to the labels S, SINV, or SQ. See section 16 [Clefts]. (SQ-CLF Was (NP-SBJ it) (NP-PRD (NP John's) car) (SBAR (WHNP-6 0) (S (NP-SBJ you) (VP borrowed (NP *T*-6)))) ?) (Bies et al. 1995) S-CLF (it-cleft or “true” cleft) Declarative it-clefts are labeled S-CLF, expletive it is tagged as the surface subject (-SBJ), the SBAR is attached at VP-level, and a trace is coindexed to the wh-complementizer of the clefted portion. (See section 16 [Clefts] for more information.) (Bies et al. 1995)
PTB bracketing guidelines, Bies et al. 1995
*EXP* — Expletive (extraposition) ... In cases where a clausal subject has been extraposed and replaced by an expletive it, we use a type of pseudo-attach called *EXP*. (In the small ATIS sample included with this release, it is also used for existential there.) Use of *EXP*-attach is discussed in more detail in section 17 [It-Extraposition]. (S (NP-SBJ (NP It) (SBAR *EXP*-1)) (VP is (ADJP-PRD clear) (PP to (NP me)) (SBAR-1 that (S (NP-SBJ this message) (VP is (ADJP-PRD unclear)))))) (Bies et al. 1995)
T-CODEX (Petrova 2008, http://purl.org/olia/tcodex.owl#InitionalPosition)
Expression occurs at the left periphery of the sentence. This includes various noncanonical and canonical word order possibilities. (Note that it is not restricted here to noncanonical word order; for noncanonical fronting see subconcepts, e.g., Topicalization.) (Chiarcos)
Topicalization structures are ones where a non-subject immediately precedes a subject, which immediately precedes the verb/auxiliary of the sentence. Two examples: Pizza, John likes. Tomorrow, I will go to the store. Such examples should be bracketed as adjunction structures. (Santorini 1991) -TPC (“topicalized”) — marks elements that appear before the subject in a declarative sentence, but in two cases only: (i) if the fronted element is associated with a *T* in the position of the gap. (ii) if the fronted element is left-dislocated (i.e., it is associated with a resumptive pronoun in the position of the gap). (See the section on fronted elements in section 1 [Overview of Basic Clause Structure] for more details on the treatment of fronted elements and the section on *T* with fronted elements in section 4 [Null Elements] for more details on the distribution of *T*.) (Bies et al. 1995) Fronted elements are placed inside the top clause level (e.g. S, SINV, SQ, SBAR). (Only certain fronted elements are tagged -TPC: (i) constituents associated with a *T* in the position of the gap and (ii) left-dislocated constituents (those associated with a resumptive pronoun in the position of the gap).) (See section 1 [Overview of Basic Clause Structure] for more details on the treatment of fronted elements.) (Bies et al. 1995)
HangingTopic constructions are closely related to LeftDislocation. Unlike LeftDislocation, the dislocated element and its resuming pronoun do not necessarily agree in case, number and gender. (Petrova and Odebrecht 2011, http://purl.org/olia/tcodex.owl#HangingTopic)
PTB bracketing guidelines, Bies et al. (1995)
T|Trace. Marks the position where a fronted wh-constituent is interpreted. ... T marks the spot where an argument NP that has been moved by wh-movement or relative clause formation is interpreted. For instance, the relative clause the man that I saw should be bracketed as follows, by analogy to the corresponding simple declarative I saw the man. (NP (NP the man) (SBAR that (S (NP I) (VP saw) (NP T))))) T is also used to represent the empty subjects of as-clauses. (Santorini 1991) *T* â ´ trace of Aâ ²-movement (Bies et al. 1995)
PTB bracketing guidelines, Santorini 1991, Bies et al. 1995; often considered as extremely weak form of personal pronouns (Ariel 1990; Givón 1995)
*|An asterisk represents a zero pronoun; it may need to be deleted. ... * is used to represent the empty subject of gerunds, imperatives and to-infinitive clauses. (Santorini 1991) (NP *) â ´ arbitrary PRO, controlled PRO, and trace of A-movement (Bies et al. 1995)
added in conformance with PTB bracketing guidelines (Santorini 1991)
0|Zero represents a zero complementizer (= subordinating conjunction); it may need to be deleted. The zero complementizer is generally the counterpart of the overt complementizer that. Example: Iâ ¹m sure 0 heâ ¹ll be here any minute. ... 0 stands in for overt subordinating conjunctions like that in tensed subordinate clauses, including relative clauses. So the relative clause the man I saw should be bracketed as follows: (NP (NP the man) (SBAR 0 (S (NP I) (VP saw) (NP T))))) (Santorini 1991)
added in conformance with PTB bracketing guidelines (Santorini 1991, Bies et al. 1995)
*U* â ´ unit ... This element marks the interpreted position of a unit symbol, such as $, # (British pounds), FFr (French francs), C$, US$, HK$, A$, M$, S$, and NZ$. It may also appear after % or even cents, when convenient. See section 11 [Modification of NP] for more details on the use of *U*. ... In general, *U* is placed where the word corresponding to the symbol would appear in the string if the text were read aloud. One notable exception is in certain hyphenated compound adjectives, such as a $5-a-share increase (spoken: â ¼A five dollar a share increaseâ ½). Here, the bracketing will usually not reflect the spoken order, with *U* placed as the last element in the ADJP: (NP a (ADJP $ 5-a-share *U*) increase) Sometimes, this type may lack the *U* entirely. (Bies et al. 1995)
*?* â ´ placeholder for ellipsed material ... *?* is now available in the following great-tasting flavors: (VP *?*), (ADJP-PRD *?*), (PP-PRD *), (NP *?*), (S *?*), (SBAR *?*). These act as placeholders for a missing predicate or piece thereof, especially in comparative constructions and other environments where predicate deletion occurs. Although the missing material represented by *?* is often identical to another constituent in the same sentence, the two are never coindexed. Postmodifiers of the verb (including traces) may be attached under (VP *?*), but not to any other null element, including the other *?* null elements and (VP *T*). Note that policy for *?* was never finalized, so its use varies to some extent. In general, *?* is used by the annotators as a last resort (short of the FRAG analysis) for the annotation of clauses with â ¼missingâ ½ material. Nonetheless, there are certain constructions that are particularly likely to contain *?*: (Bies et al. 1995)
PTB bracketing guidelines (Santorini 1991)
The term "gapping" refers to a form of coordination in which the coordinated phrases after the rst are incomplete. For instance, the gapped equivalent of the full coordination structure in (@18a) is given in ( 18b). ( 18) a. Mary likes Bach and Susan likes Beethoven. b. Mary likes Bach and Susan, Beethoven. Gapped sequences like Susan, Beethoven should be labelled X. On the other hand, while coordination constructions containing gapped sequences involve coordination of unlike categories, it is clear that the entire coordination structure is a clause; hence, it should be labelled S. (Santorini 1991)
Topological fields are a descriptive formalism to describe regularities of the makro-structure of sentences, for example, in the traditional description of word order inseveral Germanic languages (e.g., German, Dutch, Danish). More recently, similar conceptions of topological fields have been further developed in the context of constructivistic grammar formalisms, e.g., Role and Reference Grammar (van Valin and LaPolla 1997).
In a German clause, the finite verb can appear in three different positions: verb-second, verb-initial, and verb-final. Only in verb-final clauses the verb complex consisting of the finite verb and non-finite verbal elements forms a unit. The discontinuous positioning of the verbal elements in verb-first and verb-second clauses is the traditional reason for structuring German clauses into fields. The positions of the verbal elements form the Satzklammer (sentence bracket) which divides the sentence into a Vorfeld (initial field), a Mittelfeld (middle field), and a Nachfeld (final field). The Vorfeld and the Mittelfeld are divided by the linke Satzklammer (left sentence bracket), which is the finite verb, the rechte Satzklammer (right sentence bracket) is the verb complex between the Mittelfeld and the Nachfeld. (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.13)
In the canonical sentence, the initial field is the first position in the sentence, hence grouped under Fronting.
In a German clause, the finite verb can appear in three different positions: verb-second, verb-initial, and verb-final. Only in verb-final clauses the verb complex consisting of the finite verb and non-finite verbal elements forms a unit. The discontinuous positioning of the verbal elements in verb-first and verb-second clauses is the traditional reason for structuring German clauses into fields. The positions of the verbal elements form the Satzklammer (sentence bracket) which divides the sentence into a Vorfeld (initial field), a Mittelfeld (middle field), and a Nachfeld (final field). The Vorfeld and the Mittelfeld are divided by the linke Satzklammer (left sentence bracket), which is the finite verb, the rechte Satzklammer (right sentence bracket) is the verb complex between the Mittelfeld and the Nachfeld. (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.13) The Verbkomplex is a sequence of verb forms. In verb-second and verb-first clauses it consists of one or more non-finite elements or - depending on the verb - of a separable prefix. In verb-final clauses it also contains the finite verb. The rule for the linear order in general is: right determines left. If there is a finite verb in the verb complex, it is usually the right-most element. (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.15)
The German Linksversetzungsfeld is a field for the left-dislocated phrase of resumptive constructions. A Linksversetzung is a pendent constituent. It can be regarded as a syntactic anticipation of a part of a sentence (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.16)
The C-Feld occurs in verb-final clauses in German (exception: the conjunction als in subordinated sentences of comparison als w¨are es nie geschehen.). It is obligatorily occupied in finite verb-final clauses if there is no conjunction in the Linke Klammer. In non-finite verb-final clauses the C-position may be empty. This field can be occupied by conjunctions of sentential objects (e.g. daß, ob) or sentence initial conjunctions like um, obwohl, wenn and also by complex interrogative or relative phrases, e.g. ..., ’um wieviel Geld’ geht es dabei? / ..., ’an der’ Max Daniel Professor f¨ur Klavier ist. (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.17)
The KOORD-field is the field for coordinating particles in the German clause. In contrast to the PARORD-field, it can optionally occur as the left-most element of all clause types. (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.17)
In the German clause, the PARORD-field is the field for non-coordinating particles which optionally occur as the left-most element of a verb-second clause (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.17)
Constituents correspond to a GOLD SyntacticConstruction: SyntacticConstruction is the class of grammar units that have syntactic structure, i.e., consisting of more than one syntactic word or construction in a syntactic configuration. [Crystal 1980, 85-86]. (http://www.linguistics-ontology.org/gold/2008) Corresponds to units of annotation in the EAGLES recommendations for syntactic annotation (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node29.html#SECTION00052000000000000000)
EAGLES category Sentence (S), http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/OrthographicSentence
TODO: model Sentence as separate concept indepdendently from Constituent (cf. TüBa-DZ "Root"). But what would be an appropriate name for that ?
The maximal, syntactically independent, segments into which a text is subdivided, for parsing purposes, are normally considered to be sentences. In a written text, they are typically (though by no means invariably) delimited by an initial capital letter and a final full stop (`.') or other terminal punctuation. It is convenient to accept this primary orthographic definition of `sentence' for the purposes of syntactic annotation. However, a sentence, so defined, may be either a full sentence (9) or a `grammatically incomplete' one (10). (9) [S This is a sentence. S] (10) [S Well done. S] The same applies to sentences included within other sentences, as in (11) (11) [S [S ``Well done'', S] she said. S] } ``Well done'' in 11 is labelled as a sentence, since it clearly has an independent syntactic status equivalent to those of 9, even though it is included in another sentence. This inclusion of one independent sentence within another is found both with reported speech and elsewhere. Phenomena such as those illustrated in 10 are by no means exceptional in text corpora. In transcriptions of spoken discourse, there is no simple answer to the question ``What is a sentence?''. Some transcriptions, based on standard orthography, yield de facto sentences in the form of units beginning with a capital letter and closing with a terminal punctuation mark. For these, there is no problem in recognising the primary sentential segments and delimiting them by [S ... S], even though these segments frequently lack the canonical structure of a complete written sentence. Moreover, even in other transcriptions, where the standard orthographic practices of sentence delimitation are avoided, it is possible to identify `primary segments' analogous to the written sentence, viz. the primary units into which the transcribed discourse is divided for parsing purposes. For spoken as well as written language, then, the [S] unit may be retained, although it may be interpreted differently, and some other term, such as `primary segment', may be preferred to `sentence'. We conclude by recommending, for the syntactic annotation of any text (including a transcription of spoken language), an exhaustive division of the text into units labelled [S ... S]. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node30.html#SECTION00052100000000000000)
Phrase is the class of syntactic constructions that consist of one or more syntactic words, but lack the subject-predicate organization of a clause. Phrases get their grammatical characteristics according to what word occupies the head position; thus, all phrases have heads [Crystal 1980, 232-233; Pei and Gaynor 1954, 169; Pike and Pike 1982, 453]. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Phrase)
EAGLES, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Clause
Clause is the class of constructions that form minimal sentential units. They must include a predicate, all arguments of the predicate, and all modifiers of the predicate and the arguments. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Clause)
Traditionally sentences are deemed to be composed of major constituents known as clauses, which may be main clauses (not included in a superordinate clause) or embedded clauses (included in a superordinate clause) such as relative clauses or adverbial clauses. A main clause, unless it is coordinated, is equivalent to a simple sentence, and does not need to be separately labelled. Embedded and coordinated clauses, on the other hand, will need to be separately identified. We recommend that such units be identified in the annotation, and labelled either as sentences (S) or as clauses (CL), according to the preference specified in the annotation scheme. The reason for allowing choice here is that different theoretical preferences have to be accommodated. In some syntactic models, the `clause' category is not used (except informally), embedded clauses being marked by included [S] constituents. In other models, clauses are identified as such, even where they are coextensive with an independent sentence. One solution which commends itself (and is employed in the Lancaster Treebank and the SUSANNE Corpus) is to retain [S ... S] as the delimiter of sentences, whether included or not, and also to use [S ... S] for the coordinated parts of a compound sentence; but to use `clause' labels for subordinate clauses. An example which illustrates this division is 12: (12) [S [S The distinction at issue is relatively clear S] , but [S closer examination reveals [CL that all is not quite so straightforward [CL as it seems CL] CL] S] . S] Embedded (subordinate) clauses are generally identified by some sign of their dependence on the superordinate clause or sentence, such as an introductory conjunction or a non-finite verb form. It is noticeable that the coordinated parts of the compound sentence do not have to be clause-like units with subjects and verbs, and to this extent [CL] would be a misleading label to apply to them. This is true, in 13, of so far so good in: (13) [S [S So far so good S] , but [S now consider gender in adjectives S] . S] (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node31.html)
FRAG marks those portions of text that appear to be clauses, but lack too many essential elements for the exact structure to be easily determined (e.g., answers to questions). Predicate argument structure therefore cannot be extracted from FRAGs. (Bies et al. 1995) Sentence fragments that end with sentence- nal punctuation like Not even an earthquake. should not be bracketed as S, but only with the highest appropriate label|in this case, NP. Do not attach such fragments to the preceding or following full sentence. (Santorini 1991)
PTB bracketing guidelines, Santorini 1991, Bies et al. 1995
Subclassification here follows the functional subclassification of subordinate clauses in the TDS ontologies. GOLD proposes an alternative syntax-based subclassification (yet without documentation or explanation) in AdjunctSubordinate and ComplementSubordinate. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ComplementSubordinate, http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/AdjunctSubordinate)
SubordinateClause is the class of clauses that cannot stand on their own as sentences. A matrix clause combined with a subordinate clause form a main clause. In the sentence 'John thinks that Mary is sick', 'Mary is sick' is the subordinate clause. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/SubordinateClause) Dependent clauses (which are also sometimes referred to as subordinate clauses) cannot stand alone as sentences. They usually begin with subordinating conjunctions. A sentence with an independent clause and any number of dependent clauses is referred to as a complex sentence. One with two or more independent clauses and any number of dependent clauses is referred to as a compound-complex sentence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clause, cf. http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#subordinateClause). A subordinate clause is an embedded construction which contains a finite verb form. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#finiteEmbeddedConstruction)
MainClause is the class of clauses that can stand on their own as a full, independent sentence. If a sentence contains any embedded clauses, the main clause is understood as the matrix plus the embedded clauses. In the sentence 'John thinks that Mary is sick', 'John thinks that Mary is sick' is the main clause [Crystal 2001, 231]. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/MainClause) The independent clause can stand by itself as a grammatically viable simple sentence. Multiple independent clauses can be joined (usually with a comma and a coordinating conjunction) to form a compound sentence (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#mainClause with reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clause).
adopted from http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#coordinateClause
A coordinate clause is a clause belonging to a series of two or more clauses which are not syntactically dependent on one another, and are joined by means of a coordinate conjunction, a connective or parataxis. (http://www.sil.org/linguistics/glossaryoflinguisticterms/WhatIsACoordinateClause.htm).
An embedded construction which contains a non-finite verb form (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#non-finiteEmbeddedConstruction with reference to Dik 1997)
http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#non-embeddedSubordinateClause Termed "cosubordination" here in accordance with van Valin and LaPolla (1997)
A relative clause is a subordinate clause that modifies a noun. For example, the noun phrase [the man who wasn't there] contains the noun [man], which is modified by the relative clause [who wasn't there] (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#relativeClause with reference to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_clause and Dik 1997) There are three di erent types of relative clauses in English (be careful not to confuse relative clauses and complement clauses): (i) wh-relative clauses (a guy who(m) I know), (ii) that-relative clauses (a guy that I know), and (iii) zero relative clauses (a guy I know). (Santorini 1991)
RRC (reduced relative clause) Reduced relative clauses are adjoined to the NP they modify. (Bies et al. 1995) We will use the term \reduced relative clause" to refer to participial or adjectival constituents of the type illustrated in (@26). (26) He bought two watches designed by Paloma Picasso. Reduced relative clauses should be bracketed as adjunction structures. The structure of ( 26) is thus as in (@27). Note that the reduced relative clause, which is headed by a participle, is bracketed as a VP. (27) (S (NP He) (VP bought (NP (NP two watches) (VP designed (PP by (PNP (PNP Paloma) (PNP Picasso)))))) .) (Santorini 1991)
Conditional clauses refer to a hypothetical situation, in English they are introduced by 'if' or 'unless'. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#conditionalClause)
Subordinate clauses with adverbial function are annotated as ADV, e.g. "Tom sleeps when the sun rises." (Dipper et al. 2007, §4.3.6)
added in conformance with the SFB632 Annotation Guidelines (Dipper et al. 2007)
In noun phrases like the fact that she is late, the subordinate clause that she is late is a complement of the noun fact and should not be confused with a relative clause. (Note that the embedded clause she is late is not missing a constituent; by contrast, in a relative clause construction like the TV that she bought the other day, the clause that she bought the other day is incomplete.) The entire noun phrase should be bracketed as a sister of the head noun. (NP the fact (SBAR that (S (NP she) (VP is (ADJP late))))) (Santorini 1991)
A non-finite embedded construction which contains features with nominal properties (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#withNominalProperites, with reference to Dik 1997)
http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#withParticipleAsHead, http://purl.org/olia/tcodex.owl#ParticipialConstruction
A participle is the head of the embedded construction. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#withParticipleAsHead) Participial constructions are used as adjunct clauses in Old High German. As they lack a finite verb form they are kept separately from finite subordinate clauses. (http://purl.org/olia/tcodex.owl#ParticipialConstruction)
http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#withInfinitiveAsHead, http://purl.org/olia/tcodex.owl#InfinitivalClause
An infinitive is the head of the embedded construction. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#withInfinitiveAsHead) Infinitival relatives. See section 14 [Infinitives] for more information. (NP (NP a movie) (SBAR (WHNP-1 0) (S (NP-SBJ *) (VP to (VP see (NP *T*-1)))))) (Bies et al. 1995)
“A minimal (non recursive) phrase(partial structure) consisting of correlated, inseparable words/entities, such that the intra-chunk dependencies are not distorted” ... A chunk would contain a 'head' and its modifiers. Akshar Bharati, Dipti Misra Sharma, Lakshmi Bai, Rajeev Sangal (2006), AnnCorra : Annotating Corpora. Guidelines For POS And Chunk Annotation For Indian Languages, Tech. Rep., L anguage Technologies Research Centre IIIT, Hyderabad, version of 15-12-2006, http://ltrc.iiit.ac.in/tr031/posguidelines.pdf Note that, often, it is not required that chunks are complete. Chunks can thus be phrases or fragments. In the sense of OLiA, they are, however, constituents (of an annotation).
Single foreign words are projected to a syntactic level assigned the node label FX, which is an universal label for any syntactic category (phrasal and sentential) in the respective foreign language. (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.44)
TüBa-D/Z, NOTE: not to be confused with "determiner phrase" in generative grammar, which would be a NounPhrase in most annotation frameworks
Certain pronouns serving as determiners in noun phrases may be premodified, for instance, by degree adverbs such as in German "so viele ¨Altere", "gar kein Schutz", etc. In the case of "so viele Ältere", the premodifying adverb so is attached to the indefinite pronoun viele. Together, they form a determiner phrase (DP), which is attached to the head noun Ältere on the same level: [so viele] Ältere (Telljohann et al. 2009, p.63)
A NounHeadedPhrase takes a nominal as its (semantic) head. Introduced as a generalization over NounPhrase and PrepositionalPhrase for reasons of consistency with dependency parsers like Connexor where this differentiation is not made.
NounPhrase is the class of phrases that have nouns as heads. They can play the role of subject in a main clause. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NounPhrase)
At phrase level, the noun phrase is probably the least problematic of the categories to be dealt with. In general, a noun phrase will a have noun or a pronoun as its head, and included within the noun phrase are the determinative elements, any premodification, and any postmodification. The examples below, 14 to 17 show noun phrases with the head noun/pronoun in bold: (14) [NP He NP] was a tiny man (15) [NP his white shirt cuffs NP] (16) [NP his surprisingly thick and hairy wrists NP] (17) [NP some wholly unanticipated but remotely possible event of absorbing interest NP] However, noun phrases may also occur with adjectival heads, as in 18 and 19: (18) [NP The unemployed NP] have had enough (19) We've beaten [NP the best NP] or with a head which is a cardinal or ordinal number, as in 20 and 21: (20) [NP The ninth NP] is my particular favourite (21) [NP The other seven NP] continued with the trip In `pro-drop' languages, such as Spanish and Italian, pronominal Subjects are usually not expressed. Depending on the chosen type of analysis, this may require another definition of noun phrase, in order to include `empty noun phrases', in which the pronoun is not actually present, but may be inferred from the verb ending. A classic constituency test for Noun Phrases is that only whole NPs can be moved within the same sentence. In English, constituents can be preposed to achieve some effect, as in 23 (from Radford 1988: 70): (22) I can't stand your elder sister (23) Your elder sister I can't stand (though your brother's OK). Examples 24 and 25 show that it is not possible to move only part of the NP: (24) *Your elder I can't stand sister (25) *Elder sister, I can't stand your However, this test should be used with caution. It works well in English, but not always in other languages. For example, in 26 Neue Bücher is moved to the beginning of the sentence while keine is left at the end: (26) Neue Bücher habe ich keine new books have I no `I have not got any new books' (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node32.html)
WHNP|Wh-noun phrase. Noun phrase containing (among other things) a wh-determiner, as in which book or whose daughter, or consisting of a wh-pronoun like who. (Santorini 1991) WHNP â ´ Wh-noun Phrase. Introduces a clause with an NP gap. May be null (containing the 0 complementizer) or lexical, containing some wh-word, e.g. who, which book, whose daughter, none of which, or how many leopards. (Bies et al. 1995)
VerbPhrase is the class of phrases that have verbs as heads. They can play the role of predicate in a main clause. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/VerbPhrase)
This category is slightly more difficult to define, since there is disagreement over the extent of the verb phrase. In particular, should the verb phrase include only the words that are verbs, or should it also include the complements of the verb? In the examples given in this document, and in the sample texts in the appendices, we have chosen to include the complements, but it must be noted that this is an open issue, and we are in no way implying that this analysis is preferable to the alternative. The choice to be made at this level, i.e. the inclusion or exclusion of verbal complements in the Verb Phrase, is shown by the examples in 27 and 28, 27 showing the inclusion of the complement of the verb in the verb phrase and 28 excluding the complement: (27) He [VP took up [NP a clothes brush NP] VP] (28) He [VP took up VP] [NP a clothes brush NP] An advantage in the type of analysis shown in 27 is that the relative levels of the constituents can be shown to a greater extent -- i.e. complements of the verb are included in the verb phrase, while adjuncts and peripheral adverbials are left at sentence level. However, in a case where an adjunct occurs before the complement of the verb, the approaches used in 27 and 28 would cause problems, since either both the adjunct and the complement would be included as daughters of the verb phrase, or both would be daughters of the sentence, rather than keeping the complement as a daughter of the verb phrase and the adjunct as a sister of the verb phrase. These problems may be solved by an additional notation, but at some level, arbitrariness is inevitable. Regardless of the choice made over the extent of the Verb Phrase, there arises a problem of discontinuous Verb Phrases. A complex verbal construction may be discontinuous, e.g. the auxiliary and the main verb are separated in inverted constructions in English, or the main verb is positioned at the end of the sentence in German and Dutch. Such discontinuity can be avoided by having different labels and constituents for the auxiliary verb and the main verb, resulting in an analysis as shown in the Dutch example 29 below: (29) [NP Ze NP] [AUX zullen AUX] [ADVP er ADVP] [VP [NP de VN-agenda [PP voor [NP het komende jaar NP] PP] NP] behandelen VP]. and in the English interrogative inverted example 30, using the so-called `dummy auxiliary' do: (30) [AUX Do AUX] [NP they NP] [VP confide [PP in you PP] VP]? As with Noun Phrases, Verb Phrases can be identified by a constituency test. In strong constituency languages like English, the whole VP can be moved, but not part of it: compare 31 and 32: (31) Give in to blackmail, I never will (32) *Give in, I never will to blackmail However, there are languages in which constituent tests do not work. These will typically be languages with flexible word order, such as Finnish. 33 is an example of a discontinuous VP (Vilkuna 1989: 26): (33) Maailmaa nähnyt hän on. world-Part seen he is `He IS a widely-travelled person.' For Finnish, then, evidence for a VP is less convincing than it is for English, and a dependency approach seems the more natural choice. (Covington (1990) provides a parsing strategy for variable word order languages and Covington (1991) for parsing discontinuous constituents, both using a dependency syntax approach.) In Italian also, constituency tests cannot be applied. This can be shown through the distribution of VP-adverbs (e.g. completamente `completely', intenzionalmente `intentionally', attentamente `carefully') and S-adverbs (e.g. probabilmente `probably', certamente `certainly'). In English, these different classes of adverbs have a different distribution within the sentence. In contrast, in Italian, the distinct adverb classes cannot be distinguished on the basis of their distribution in the sentence. S-adverbs and VP-adverbs can occur in the same positions within the sentence, as illustrated in examples 34 to 37: (34) Attentamente/certamente, il bambino ascoltó la storia `Carefully/certainly, the child listened to the story' (35) Il bambino attentamente/certamente ascoltó la storia `The child carefully/certainly listened to the story' (36) Il bambino ascoltó attentamente/certamente la storia `The child listened carefully/certainly to the story' (37) Il bambino ascoltó la storia attentamente/certamente `The child listened to the story carefully/certainly' Thus, in Italian as well as other languages, neither the position nor the syntactic context can help to decide whether an adverb is an S-adverb or a VP-adverb; this can only be stated by considering its semantic content and the way it relates to the content of the predicate or the sentence. This situation has consequences for the success of standard VP-tests. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node33.html)
Ancorra, http://purl.org/olia/ancorra.owl#GerundChunk
VGNN Gerunds A verb chunk having a gerund will be annotated as VGNN. For example, h18a. sharAba ((pInA_VM))_VGNN sehata ke liye hAnikAraka hE. 'liquor' 'drinking' 'heath' 'for' 'harmful' 'is' “Drinking (liquor) is bad for health” h19a. mujhe rAta meM ((khAnA_VM))_VGNN acchA lagatA hai 'to me' 'night' 'in' 'eating' 'good' 'appeals' “I like eating at night” h20a. ((sunane_VM meM_PSP))_VGNN saba kuccha acchA lagatA hE 'listening' 'in' 'all' 'things' 'good' 'appeal' 'is' (Akshar Bharati, Dipti Misra Sharma, Lakshmi Bai, Rajeev Sangal (2006), AnnCorra : Annotating Corpora. Guidelines For POS And Chunk Annotation For Indian Languages, Tech. Rep., L anguage Technologies Research Centre IIIT, Hyderabad, version of 15-12-2006, http://ltrc.iiit.ac.in/tr031/posguidelines.pdf)
Ancorra, http://purl.org/olia/ancorra.owl#InfiniteVerbChunk
VGINF Infinitival Verb Chunk This tag is to mark the infinitival verb form. In Hindi, both, gerunds and infinitive forms of the verb end with a -nA suffix. Since both behave functionally in a similar manner, the distinction is not very clear. However, languages such as Bangla etc have two different forms for the two types. Examples from Bangla are given below. b8. Borabela ((snAna karA))_VGNN SorIrera pokze BAlo 'Morning' 'bath' 'do-verbal noun' 'health-gen' 'for' 'good' ‘Taking bath in the early morning is good for health” b9. bindu Borabela ((snAna karawe))_VGINF BAlobAse 'Bindu' 'morning' 'bath' 'take-inf' 'love-3pr' “Bindu likes to take bath in the early morning” In Bangla, the gerund form takes the suffix –A / -Ano, while the infinitive marker is –we. The syntactic distribution of these two forms of verbs is different. For example, the gerund form is allowed in the context of the word darakAra “necessary” while the infinitive form is not, as exemplified below: b10 Borabela ((snAna karA))_VGNN darakAra 'Morning' 'bath' 'do-verbal noun' 'necessary' “It is necessary to take bath in the early morning” b11. *Borabela ((snAna karawe))_VGINF darakAra Based on the above evidence from Bangla, the tag VGINF has been included to mark a verb chunk. (Akshar Bharati, Dipti Misra Sharma, Lakshmi Bai, Rajeev Sangal (2006), AnnCorra : Annotating Corpora. Guidelines For POS And Chunk Annotation For Indian Languages, Tech. Rep., L anguage Technologies Research Centre IIIT, Hyderabad, version of 15-12-2006, http://ltrc.iiit.ac.in/tr031/posguidelines.pdf)
An adverb phrase may consist of an adverb, or a sequence of words in which an adverb is the head of the phrase. Adverb phrases may function as adverbials, as in 41: (41) [NP Her beautiful white hat NP] [VP was [ADVP very nearly ADVP] ruined VP] or as modifiers of adjectives, as in 42: (42) [NP Il NP] [VP parle [ADVP infiniment plus couramment ADVP] VP] or noun phrases, as in 43: (43) [NP They NP] [VP let [NP me NP] [VP speak VP] [ADVP now and then ADVP] VP] or as the complement of a preposition, as in 44: (44) [ADVP Strangely enough ADVP] , [NP we NP] [VP received [NP a reply NP] [NP the next day NP] VP] Other examples: (45) [NP The book NP] [VP is [ADVP right here ADVP] VP] (46) [ADVP Como [NP resultado [PP de [NP esa trama NP] PP] NP] ADVP] [VP no se lleva [PP a cabo PP] [NP ninguna acción NP] VP] (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node35.html)
WHADVP|Wh-adverb phrase. Phrasal category headed by a wh-adverb such as how or why. (Santorini 1991) WHADVP â ´ Wh-adverb Phrase. Introduces a clause with an ADVP gap. May be null (containing the 0 complementizer) or lexical, containing a wh-adverb such as how or why. (Bies et al. 1995)
AdjectivePhrase is the class of phrases that have adjectives as heads. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/AdjectivePhrase)
An adjective phrase may consist of an adjective, or a sequence of words in which an adjective is the head of the phrase, as shown in 47 to 50 below. (47) [NP his [ADJP surprisingly thick and hairy ADJP] wrists NP] (48) [NP some [ADJP [ADJP wholly unanticipated ADJP] but [ADJP remotely possible ADJP] ADJP] event NP] (49) [S [NP His speeches NP] [VP are [ADVP always ADVP] [ADJP too long [PP for comfort PP] ADJP] VP] S] (50) [AUX have AUX] [NP you NP] [VP found [NP something [ADJP suitable [PP for [NP your needs NP] PP] ADJP] NP] VP] ? (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node36.html)
WHADJP â ´ Wh-adjective Phrase. Adjectival phrase containing a wh-adverb, as in how hot. (Bies et al. 1995)
As has already been shown in some of the preceding examples, the issue of coordination necessarily arises: how is coordination to be represented in terms of constituency? Different approaches have been taken, and in the example analyses given in this document, we have chosen to take a traditional approach, showing the coordinated constituents at the same level, with the conjunction between them (see also 47 and 48): (51) [NP [NP John NP] and [NP Mary NP] NP] (52) She went [PP [PP to the library PP] or [PP to the cafeteria PP] PP] (53) He works [ADVP [ADVP very slowly ADVP] but [ADVP very meticulously ADVP] ADVP] However, in practice, in an automated parsing system, this is not an easy differentiation to make, and in some existing schemes, a slightly less satisfactory solution has been found, viz. analysing coordination in a similar fashion to subordination. Most constituents (both phrases and clauses) can be coordinated, but the extent to which this is possible will differ across languages. The conjuncts may be marked as such by separate descriptors: NPtex2html_wrap_inline4084 etc. However, there are many occasions where the conjuncts are not of the same formal category, or where they do not correspond to an entire phrasal or clausal constituent. There is much to be said, in these cases, or perhaps for all cases of coordination, for the use of a generalised label applied to all coordinate constituents or conjuncts, e.g. the label CO used in the TOSCA system. We do not offer a definitive solution for the annotation of coordination, and the many variants of coordination will not be considered further in this report. See Sampson (1995: 310f) for a detailed treatment. (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node37.html)
A sequence of a preposition and its complement is a prepositional phrase. The complement of a preposition is usually a noun phrase (see examples 38 to 40), but may also be a clause or an adverb phrase. According to the categories recommended here, a prepositional phrase may be analysed further into preposition and noun phrase. The examples below demonstrate how this further analysis can be a recursive procedure. (38) [PP en [NP sustitucion [PP de [NP los canales correspondientes [PP de [NP 50 baudios NP] PP] NP] PP] NP] PP]. (39) [NP Fairbanks NP] [VP hummed [NP a few bars NP] VP] [PP in [NP a voice [VP made resonant [PP by [NP the very weakness [PP of [NP his chest NP] PP] NP] PP] VP] NP] PP]. (40) [PP En [NP el caso [PP de [NP un sistema mixto [PP en [NP el [CL que [VP se utilicen [NP canales [PP con [NP tres velocidades [PP de [NP modulacion NP] PP] diferentes NP] PP] NP] VP] CL] NP] PP] NP] PP] NP] PP] In a language such as Spanish, where a large proportion of the modification of nouns takes the form of a following preposition de and another noun, this recursion is extremely prevalent, as in 40. In cases where the prepositional phrase is complemented by a one word noun phrase, it may be advantageous to leave the analysis at this point, rather than continuing to analyse further by enclosing the complement (see also one-word constituents). (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node34.html#SECTION00052500000000000000)
WHPP|Wh-prepositional phrase. Prepositional phrase containing a wh-determiner, as in by whatever means necessary. (Santorini 1991) WHPP â ´ Wh-prepositional Phrase. Prepositional phrase containing a wh-noun phrase (such as of which or by whose authority) that either introduces a PP gap or is contained by a WHNP. (Bies et al. 1995)
Penn bracketing guidelines, Bies et al. 1995
Multi-word conjunction Besides the usual and, or, but, etc., certain prepositions and subordinating conjunctions can be used as coordinating conjunctions. Multi-word coordinating conjunctions are labeled CONJP (see section 7 [Coordination]). ... CONJP — Conjunction Phrase. Used to mark certain “multi-word” conjunctions, such as as well as, instead of. (Bies et al. 1995)
-ADV (adverbial) — marks a constituent other than ADVP or PP when it is used adverbially (e.g., NPs or free (“headless”) relatives). However, constituents that themselves are modifying an ADVP generally do not get -ADV. (Bies et al. 1995)
-NOM (nominal) — marks free (“headless”) relatives and gerunds when they act nominally. (See section 9 [WH-Phrases] for more information about free relatives, and section 13 [Gerunds and Participles] for more information about gerunds.) (Bies et al. 1995)
In MULTEXT-East a characteristic of attributive pronouns and abbreviated adjectives, e.g., in Ukrainian e.g., абичий/= бозна-чий/= будь-чий/= дечий/= хтозна-чий/= чий-будь/= чий-небудь/= чийсь/=, абичийого/абичий аби до чийого/абичий бозна-чийого/бозна-чий будь-чийого/будь-чий дечийого/дечий хтозна-чийого/хтозна-чий чийого-будь/чий-будь чийого-небудь/чий-небудь чийогось/чийсь, абичийого/абичий бозна-чийого/бозна-чий будь-чийого/будь-чий дечийого/дечий хтозна-чийого/хтозна-чий чийого-будь/чий-будь чийого-небудь/чий-небудь чийогось/чийсь, абичийому/абичий абичиєму/абичий абичиїм/абичий аби на чийому/абичий аби на чиєму/абичий аби на чиїм/абичий бозна на чийому/бозна-чий бозна на чиєму/бозна-чий бозна на чиїм/бозна-чий будь-чийому/будь-чий будь-чиєму/будь-чий будь-чиїм/будь-чий будь на чийому/будь-чий будь на чиєму/будь-чий будь на чиїм/будь-чий дечийому/дечий дечиєму/дечий дечиїм/дечий де на чийому/дечий де на чиєму/дечий, абичийому/абичий абичиєму/абичий бозна-чийому/бозна-чий бозна-чиєму/бозна-чий будь-чийому/будь-чий будь-чиєму/будь-чий дечийому/дечий дечиєму/дечий хтозна-чийому/хтозна-чий хтозна-чиєму/хтозна-чий чийому-будь/чий-будь чиєму-будь/чий-будь чийому-небудь/чий-небудь чиєму-небудь/чий-небудь чийомусь/чийсь чиємусь/чийсь, абичийому/абичий абичиєму/абичий бозна-чийому/бозна-чий будь-чийому/будь-чий будь-чиєму/будь-чий дечийому/дечий хтозна-чийому/хтозна-чий чийому-будь/чий-будь чийому-небудь/чий-небудь чийомусь/чийсь, абичию/абичий бозна-чию/бозна-чий будь-чию/будь-чий дечию/дечий хтозна-чию/хтозна-чий чию-будь/чий-будь чию-небудь/чий-небудь чиюсь/чийсь, абичия/абичий бозна-чия/бозна-чий будь-чия/будь-чий дечия/дечий хтозна-чия/хтозна-чий чия-будь/чий-будь чия-небудь/чий-небудь чиясь/чийсь, абичиє/абичий бозна-чиє/бозна-чий будь-чиє/будь-чий дечиє/дечий хтозна-чиє/хтозна-чий чиє-будь/чий-будь чиє-небудь/чий-небудь чиєсь/чийсь (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Adjectival)
In MULTEXT-East a characteristic of abbreviated verbs (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Verbal)
There are two types of questions: direct questions (which are main clauses ending with a question mark) and indirect questions (which are subordinate clauses embedded under a verb). In this section, we discuss only direct questions; indirect questions are bracketed as SBARâ ¹s (see Section 5.17). (Santorini 1991)
There are two types of direct questions: yes-no questions and wh-questions. Yes-no questions should be bracketed as SQ. The auxiliary verb or form of do that precedes the subject in a yes-no question is a child of SQ. Note that yes-no questions need not contain a VP node (Santorini 1991)
SQ â ´ Inverted yes/no question, or main clause of a wh-question, following the wh-phrase in SBARQ. (Bies et al. 1995) SQ|That part of an SBARQ that excludes the wh-word or wh-phrase. See Section 5.32. (Santorini 1991) The SBARQ label marks wh-questions (i.e., those that contain a gap and therefore require a trace). A further level of structure, SQ, contains the inverted auxiliary (if there is one) and the rest of the sentence. The inverted auxiliary in wh-questions is not labeled. ... SQ (See also section 1.2.7.) â ¢ inside SBARQ: As described above, inside wh-questions, SQ holds the subject, inverted auxiliary (if any), main verb phrase, and some adjuncts. â ¢ yes/no questions: SQ is used for yes/no questions (i.e., those with inversion but no wh-movement). ... â ¢ subject-less yes/no questions: In questions where the auxiliary and subject do not appear, the auxiliary is unlabeled and a null subject (NP-SBJ *) is used. ... Note that questions with overt subjects and auxiliaries that show declarative word order are simply labeled S. â ¢ Tag questions: Tag questions are treated as an adjunction of SQ to S. The resulting structure is labeled SQ, since the whole thing is interrogative in nature. The lower SQ is annotated to show predicate deletion; that is, an appropriate null *?* is inserted. (Bies et al. 1995)
SBARQ|Direct question introduced by a wh-word or wh-phrase. See Section 5.32. Indirect questions and relative clauses should be bracketed as SBAR, not SBARQ. (Santorini 1991) Wh-questions should be bracketed as SBARQ. The wh-constituent (whether it is a subject or not) is a child of SBARQ; the rest of the question is an SQ. If the wh-constituent is a subject or an object, the position where it is interpreted should be represented by the empty element T. (Santorini 1991) The SBARQ label marks wh-questions (i.e., those that contain a gap and therefore require a trace). A further level of structure, SQ, contains the inverted auxiliary (if there is one) and the rest of the sentence. The inverted auxiliary in wh-questions is not labeled. ... SBARQ â ´ Direct question introduced by a wh-word or wh-phrase. See section 1 [Overview of Basic Clause Structure]. Indirect questions and relative clauses should be bracketed as SBAR, not SBARQ. (Bies et al. 1995)
S|Simple declarative clause, i.e. one that is not introduced by a (possibly empty) subordinating conjunction or wh-word and that does not exhibit subject-verb inversion. (Santorini 1991) Simple declarative sentences: (S (NP-SBJ Casey) (VP threw (NP the ball))) ... S â ´ Simple declarative clause, i.e. one that is not introduced by a (possibly empty) subordinating conjunction or wh-word and that does not exhibit subject-verb inversion. (Bies et al. 1995)
2016/08/29 introduced to account for raising and control features in lexinfo
Control indicates how a an argument from a main clause will be utilized in a subclause. This class includes both control structures and raising structures (http://www.lexinfo.net/ontology/2.0/lexinfo#Control)
From http://www.lexinfo.net/ontology/2.0/lexinfo#Control. But note that we regard Control as a feature of syntactic units (either verbs [=> control/raising] or arguments [=> raisable argument], not as a subclass of Frame, this reflects a different understanding of "Frame", in OLiA, Frames are semantic units, in lexinfo, they seem to be syntactic patterns, in other resources, e.g., VerbNet, both aspects are combined.
Indicates either the subject or object of the main clause may be the omitted argument of the subclause (http://www.lexinfo.net/ontology/2.0/lexinfo#ArbitraryControl)
Indicates the object of the main clause is also the (omitted) object of the subclause (http://www.lexinfo.net/ontology/2.0/lexinfo#ObjectControl)
Indicates the subject of the main clause is the (omitted) subject of the subclause (http://www.lexinfo.net/ontology/2.0/lexinfo#SubjectControl)
Indicates the syntactic subject of the main clause is in fact the subject of the subclause. The main clause should then be interpreted as being impersonal. (http://www.lexinfo.net/ontology/2.0/lexinfo#RaisingSubject)
Control indicates how a an argument from a main clause will be utilized in a subclause. Control includes both control structures and raising structures of verbs/clauses (see Control). As opposed to this, the OLiA Raising class pertains to raisable/raised arguments, cf. http://www.lexinfo.net/ontology/2.0/lexinfo#RaisableArgument
from http://lemon-model.net/lemon#RaisableArgument, deprecated because this is just a shorthand for Raising and SyntacticArgument
from http://lemon-model.net/lemon#RaisableSubject, deprecated because this is just a shorthand for Raising and SyntacticSubject
2010/04/08 merged with EAGLES NPFunction "NPFunction is an additional optional attribute for adjectives. It subsumes the values HeadFunction, Postmodifying and Premodifying." (http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/annotate/node18.html#oav1a 20.11.06)
TIGER edge label HD, definition according to Penn Treebank Bracketing Guidelines (Santorini 1991)
Heads are single words that function as the nucleus of a phrase. For instance, the head of the noun phrase John’s book is book. Book is also the head of the more complex noun phrase that interesting book that you were telling me about the other day. The head of the verb phrase telling me about the other day is telling. The head of a prepositional phrase is the preposition. (Santorini 1991)
The predicate is the relation between the Clause and a portion of a clause, excluding the subject, that expresses something about the subject (Crystal 1980: 280; Hartmann and Stork 1972: 182; Pei and Gaynor 1954: 173; Pike and Pike 1982: 40; Mish et al. 1990: 926; Crystal 1985: 241-242). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/predicate)
adapted from http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/predicate
Note that most predicates are also (semantic) Heads of the respective clause (cf. van Valin and Lapolla 1997, who, however, use the term "nucleus"). A syntax-centered approach on heads may, however, assign the label Head to an auxiliary. As "head" is ambiguous between a syntactic function (finite verb) and a semantic function (predicate), a direct association is avoided here.
A complement is a phrase that fits a particular slot in the syntax requirements of a parent phrase (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Complement_%28linguistics%29). An additional (morpho)syntactic constituent that may be subcategorized for by the predicate. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#syntacticComplement)
The complement is attached inside the VP, NP, ADJP, or PP. Verbs: The term “complement” as it is used here refers to: 1. internal arguments such as NP objects, S and SBAR with no adverbial dash tags (including some if-clauses, as in I wonder if the Cubs are winning), and quoted constituents (including SINV and FRAG) 2. the passive logical-subject by-phrase 3. VP 4. constituents tagged -BNF, -CLR, -DTV, -PRD, and -PUT (S (NP-SBJ-1 the guide) (VP was (VP given (NP *-1) (PP-DTV to (NP Arthur)) (PP by (NP-LGS Ford))))) Nouns: Since it is difficult to consistently annotate an argument/adjunct distinction, all PP modifiers of nouns are Chomsky-adjoined to the NP: (NP (NP a teacher) (PP of (NP chemistry))) Adjectives: Except in comparatives, any modifier following an adjective is bracketed as a complement. (ADJP eager/likely/ready (S to believe anything)) Prepositions: The NP or S complement of a preposition is placed inside the PP. (Bies et al. 1995)
according to the PennTreebank definition (Bies et al. 1995), arguments are complements
Prototypically, an optional (morpho)syntactic constituent. 'Satellites are not ... required by the predicate; they give optional further information pertaining to additional features of the SoA ..., the location of the SoA ..., the speaker's attitude towards or evaluation of the propositional content ..., or the character of the speech act...' (Dik, 1997:87) (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#syntacticAdjunct) The category adjunct (ADJ) is assigned to those constituents that appear as optional additions, be it to the main verb or to a given noun. This means that they can be left out freely without a change in grammaticality or a significant change in meaning. In "John called Mary (from school) (with his cell phone)" the optional additions "from school" and "with his cell phone" are such optional additions that can be left out freely. Adjuncts are generally used to convey additional information about the time, place, manner, or cause of the event or situation described by the clause (see below). That is, they restrict the class of events/ situations described by the clause to a subset. If required the category ADJ can be split up into semantic sub-categories, that are annotated in layer semantic roles (time, location, etc.). (Dipper et al. 2007, §4.3.3)
added in conformance with TIGER, equivalent to SyntacticAdjunct, cf. definition by Dipper et al. (2007) there
Also called MODIFIER : A word or phrase that qualifies the sense of another word; for example, the noun alarm is a modifier of clock in "alarm clock" and the phrase every day is an adverbial modifier of walks in "he walks every day" (www.wordreference.com/English/definition.asp?en=modifier; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1373)
added to account for TIGER edge labels with syntactic function
An inherent (morpho)syntactic constituent subcategorized for by a predicate. 'Arguments are those terms which are required by some predicate in order to form a complete nuclear predication. They are essential to the integrity of the SoA designated by the predicate frame. If we leave them out, the property/relation designated by the predicate is not fulfilled or satisfied.' (Dik, 1997:86f) An argument can be a controller in an agreement relation. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#syntacticArgument) The category ARG is assigned to those syntactic constituents that appear as obligatory complements to the main verb. This means that they cannot be left out without a change in grammaticality or a significant change in meaning. (Dipper et al. 2007, §4.3.3)
A nominal predicate (noun or adjective), either with or without copula. The term nominal predicate may be used for the complements of further copulative verbs (cf. small clauses), e.g. "consider", "call", etc. (Dipper et al. 2007, §4.3.5)
added in conformance with SFB632 annotation guidelines (Dipper et al., 2007)
The predicate of the clause is represented by a verbal lexeme. (Ch. Chiarcos)
introduced for non-nominal predicates, normally referred to as ``predicate'' (Ch. Chiarcos)
A Verb (V) at the syntax layer is either a lexical (VLEX) or a copula verb (VCOP) at the POS layer. Modal verbs and auxiliaries are not annotated in the constituent structure. The verb and its arguments are placed at the same CSn layer. Raising and control verbs are treated like ordinary verbs. They subcategorize for a sentential complement. (Dipper et al 2007, §3.3.3)
The HeadFunction is a function of an adjective or participle that can serve as the focus of the phrase.
The subject of a sentence is one of the two main parts of a sentence, the other being the predicate. Providing an adequate definition of the notion of a subject is notoriously difficult, and depends on a range of grammatical properties that may vary from language to language. For this reason, many current grammatical theories avoid using the term, except for purely descriptive purposes, or define it in terms of occupying a particular position in the clause. The term subject refers to the grammatical function an expression may have in relation to other expressions in a sentence, and it should be distinguished from parts of speech, which classify expressions independently of their relations to other constituents of a sentence. The subject of a verb is the argument which generally refers to the origin of the action or the undergoer of the state shown by the verb. However, this definition depends on the particular language under consideration. In languages where a passive voice exists, the subject of a passive verb may be the target or result of the action. This is a semantic definition. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subject_(grammar)). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#syntacticSubject)
First argument of a transitive or ditransitive verb. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#A)
Intransitive argument (S), single argument of an intransitive verb or only argument in a one-place predicate (frame). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#S)
In linguistics, the object of a transitive verb is one of its core arguments, which generally represents the target of the verb's action or the undergoer of its effects. In more general terms, an object is a patient. Verbs with no object (as in the sentence "I run") are called intransitive verbs. Those which do take objects are called transitive verbs. Transitive verbs which take only one object are known as monotransitive. Ditransitive verbs have two objects, a patient and a recipient. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object_%28grammar%29). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#syntacticObject) An object, traditionally defined, is either a direct object or an indirect object. An object, in some usages, is any grammatical relation other than subject (Crystal 1985: 211; Hartmann and Stork 1972: 155-156; Mish et al. 1990: 814, Comrie 1989: 66). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/object)
Added in conformance with SFB632 annotation guidelines (Dipper et al. 2007, §4.3.4). Note that we include postpositional objects under this term, as well, so a more adequate term would be adpositional object.
facultative (i.e. optional) prepositional object, e.g., passivized subject (von-phrase)
http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#R, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1310
An indirect object is a grammatical relation that is one means of expressing the semantic role of goal and other similar roles. It is proposed for languages in which the role is distinct from the direct object and the oblique object on the basis of multiple independent syntactic or morphological criteria, such as the following: (i) Having a particular case marking, commonly dative (ii) Governing an agreement affix on the verb, such as person or number (iii) Being distinct from oblique relations in that it may be relativized A noun, pronoun, or noun phrase indicating the recipient or beneficiary of the action of a verb and its direct object (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1310) Third argument of a ditransitive verb. Ditransitive recipient (Siewierska 2004:57). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#R)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/directObject, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1274
A direct object is a grammatical relation that exhibits a combination of certain independent syntactic properties, such as the following: the usual grammatical characteristics of the patient of typically transitive verbs; particular case marking; a particular clause position; the conditioning of an agreement affix on the verb; the capability of becoming the clause subject in passivization; the capability of reflexivization. The identification of the direct object relation may be further confirmed by finding significant overlap with similar direct object relations previously established in other languages. This may be done by analyzing correspondence between translation equivalents (Crystal 1985: 94; Hartmann and Stork 1972: 155; Mish et al. 1990: 358; Comrie 1989: 66; Andrews, Avery 1985: 68,120,126; Comrie 1985a: 337). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/directObject)
Second argument of a transitive verb, transitive object (P) (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#P)
Ditransitive theme (T) (Siewierska 2004:57). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#T)
An adverbial modifier modifies a verb. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#adverbialModifier)
Each element in a construction is called adnominal that modifies a nominal, such as, all types of attributives, such as adjectives, possessives, prepositional attributes and relative clauses, such as the beautiful house; the neighbour’s house, the house at the sea, the house, that I want. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#nominalModifier)
Adnominal wird jedes Element in einer Konstruktion bezeichnet, das der Modifizierung eines Nomens dient, d.h. alle Formen von Attributen wie Adjektive, Genitivattribute, Präpositionalattribute, Relativsätze. Zum Beispiel, das schöne Haus; das Haus des Nachbars; das Haus am See; das Haus, das ich mir schon immer gewünscht habe. (http://www.uni-trier.de/uni/fb2/ldv/ldv_wiki/index.php/Adnominal)
EAGLES, NPFunction="postmodifying", http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1945 (without restriction on nominal heads ?)
Postmodifying is a function of an adjective that can modify, describe, or qualify a preceding noun. (EAGLES) modificationType: Refers to the prenominal or postnominal positions of determiners which distinguish different forms. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1931)
EAGLES, NPFunction="premodifying", cf. http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1943 (preModifier, but without reference to nominal heads)
Premodifying is a function of an adjective that can modify a following noun. (EAGLES) modificationType: Refers to the prenominal or postnominal positions of determiners which distinguish different forms. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1931)
added in conformance to the TIGER scheme
A nominal is modified by a demonstrative. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#demonstrativeModifier)
A nominal is modified by an adjective. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#adjectivalModifier)
A nominal is modified by a numeral. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#numeralModifier)
voice where the subject causes someone or something else to do or be something
An intransitive verb is derived from a basically transitive one with the direct object of the transitive verb corresponding to the subject of the intransitive [Siewierska 1988: 267].
voice that promotes an oblique argument of a verb to the role of subject
voice which subsumes both the middle voice and the passive voice
voice in a specify passive construction (different from the regular passive) where the patient is the syntactic subject and agent is the syntactic object
voice which promotes an oblique argument of a verb to the core patient argument and indicates the oblique role within the meaning of the verb
voice for a construction where the subject of the verb is not an agent of the action denoted by the verb but is assisting an unstated agent in performing the action
When the subject is the agent or actor of the verb, the verb is in the active voice. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_voice 17.11.06) Associated with transitivity, when the action is performed by an agent (subject) on another participant (object), or with intransitivity (McIntosh 1984:108). Refers to the category of underived verb forms associated with the basic diathesis: Diathesis=D0:(X=SUBabs/nom) (Y=DIROBacc) (Shibatani 1995:7) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Active)
When the subject is the patient, target or undergoer of the action, it is said to be in the passive voice. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grammatical_voice 17.11.06) When the subject is the agent or actor of the verb, the verb is said to be in the active voice. When the subject is the patient, target or undergoer of the action, it is said to be in the passive voice. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#passiveVoice) Passive is often not clearly distinguished from Inverse: According to Givón (1988), Inverse is characterized by obligatory realization of the suppressed agent, whereas the realization of the agent in a passive construction is optional (or impossible). This restrictive definition of passive does, however, conflict with the use of the term "passive" for European languages. Then, English and German "Passive" would be Inverses. Therefore, Inverse is a subconcept of Passive here. Givón's original Passive is NonInversePassive.
A verb that appears active but expresses a passive action may be called middle voice, e.g. 'The chicken cooked in the oven'. In Greek the middle voice is often reflexive expressing a causative reading or that the action is performed for one's own benefit. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#middleVoice)
The reflexive voice is a grammatical voice in which the subject is both the agent and the patient or recipient. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#reflexiveVoice)
Derives an intransitive verb from a transitive stem whereby the original agent (only) is cross-referrenced by the absolutive markers on the verb and the original patient, if it appears, is in an oblique phrase. (England 1983:110) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Antipassive)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ReflexiveMiddle, but the definition given there ("Subjects perform action to self") may be oversimplistic as it entails that ReflectiveMiddle is the *same* as Reflexive. In my current understanding, reflexive middle is a middle construction that makes use of grammatical devices that normally indicate reflexivity, cf. the definition of ReflexivePassive. The definition given below is a generalization that covers the original definition as well.
Reflexive middle makes use of grammatical devices that normally indicate reflexivity. (Ch. Chiarcos)
Action denotes physical/mental disposition of subject. (Siewierska 1988:257) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/DeponentMiddle)
Referents of plural subject do action to one another. (Siewierska 1988:257) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ReciprocalMiddle)
Results of action occur to subject. (Siewierska 1988:257) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PlainMiddle)
Object of action belongs to. Moves into, or moves from sphere of subject. (Siewierska 1988:257) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NucleonicMiddle)
A Passive construction which contains reflexive markings. (Siewierska 1988:257) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ReflexivePassive)
A Passive in which the argument mapped to Object in a basic structural configuration assumes the Subject relation in a corresponding nonbasic configuration. (Klaiman 1991:23) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PersonalPassive)
The object of the active retains its old case-marking in the passive, the subject of the active cannot appear in the passive clause, and the passive tends to be semantically active. (Givon 1988:419) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/AgentDeletionPassive)
Signals when actions proceed from ontologically less salient to more salient participants (Klaiman 1991:32) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/InverseVoice)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Passive Unlike the GOLD definition, Passive is often not clearly distinguished from Inverse: According to Givón (1988), Inverse is characterized by obligatory realization of the suppressed agent, whereas the realization of the agent in a passive construction is optional (or impossible). This restrictive definition of passive does, however, conflict with the use of the term "passive" for European languages. Then, English and German "Passive" would be Inverses. Therefore, Inverse is a subconcept of Passive here. Givón's original Passive is NonInversePassive.
An agent-demoting voice construction where the realization of the demoted agent is not obligatory (against Inverse). In terminological systems that distinguish "InverseVoice" from "Passive" (e.g., Givon, 1988), this is the "Passive" concept. (Ch. Chiarcos) Associated with actions performed on the subject by an unspecified agent. (McIntosh 1984:108) Refers to the category of verb forms, typically identifies with a specific morphological marking, that encode the derived diatheses in which the agent role is not linked with a subject noun phrase (Shibatani 1995:7) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Passive)
Involves promotion of the topical proximate-patient to subjecthood. (Givon 1994:24) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PromotionalInverse)
A Passive that alters the mapping of a nominal to the Subject relation in a basic intransitive structure (Klaiman 1991:23) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ImpersonalPassive)
An oblique locative nominal assumes the subject relation. (Klaiman 1991:17) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/LocativePassive)
If the agent is more topical than the patient, the direct-active clause is used. If norm is reversed and the patient is more topical, the inverse clause is used. (Givon 1994:23) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/PragmaticInverse)
A passive in Irish in which the preposition "with" is used, and a semantic meaning of necessity is added. (Noonan 1994:280) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NecessitativePassive)
A Passive in which a basic Oblique nominal assumes the Subject relation in a corresponding nonbasic configuration. Can include locative passives, benefactive passives and instrumental passives. (Klaiman 1991:23) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ObliquePassive)
Involves demotion of the non-topical obviate-agent from subjecthood. (Givon 1994:24) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NonpromotionalInverse)
If the agent outranks the patient on the relevant generic topic hierarchy, the direct-active clause is used. If the relevant norm is reversed and the patient outranks the agent on the relevant hierarchy, the inverse clause is used. (Givon 1994:23) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/SemanticInverse)
A passive in Irish in which the preposition "at" is used, and a semantic meaning of progressive tense is found (Noonan 1994:280) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ProgressivePassive)
An Antipassive in which the P or logical object is suppressed or overtly absent. (Klaiman 1991:232) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/AbsolutiveAntipassive)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ReferentialVoice, classified as Antipassive here in analogy with ObliquePassive
entails assignment of the absolutive to certain kinds of arguments other than the logical subjects (A) and objects (P), including the dative, benefactive, malefactive, and possessor. (Klaiman 1991:239) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/ReferentialVoice)
Blocks the P or logical object (basic absolutive) nominal from being assigned Focus salience. Topic salience is available for assignment to various arguments, including the P, but Focus salience is always assigned to A, and is therefore inaccessible to P or any other nominal. (Klaiman 1991:236) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/FocusAntipassive)
An Antipassive in which the P or logical object is overtly downgraded. (Klaiman 1991:232) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/NonabsolutiveAntipassive)
Blocks the P or logical object (basic absolutive) nominal from being assigned Focus salience. This correlates with the P's morphosyntactic downgrading, whereby it becomes insusceptible to any informational salience assignment. (Klaiman 1991:236) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/IncorporatingAntipassive)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Anticausative This is a semantic manipulation of the verb frame (and thus limited to a specific semantic class of verbs) rather than a grammatical device for the manipulation of argument structure, therefore classified as Active here.
An intransitive verb is derived from a basically transitive one with the direct object of the transitive verb corresponding to the subject of the intransitive. (Siewierska 1988:267) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Anticausative)
Signals that the action proceeds in an ontologically salient way, i.e. that salience is assigned to nominals based on their referent's relative real-world capacities to control situations. (Klaiman 1991:32) (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/DirectVoice)
http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Causative, cf. Anticausative
Expressing the causation of an action. (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Causative)
A predicate/verb that takes no argument. English "to rain" is semantically atransitive, hence, an expletive is to be used in "it's raining", cf. van Valin and Lapolla (1997).
A predicate/verb that takes one argument, e.g., English "to go", cf. van Valin and Lapolla (1997).
A predicate/verb that takes two arguments, e.g., English "to kiss", cf. van Valin and Lapolla (1997).
A predicate/verb that takes two arguments, e.g., English "to give", cf. van Valin and Lapolla (1997).
Relation to be used when the syntactic function of a constituent is different from its morphosyntactic type, cf. FormFunctionDiscrepancy in the PTB bracketing guidelines, Bies et al. (1995, §2.2.1)
TODO: apply this to primitive concepts, too
In annotation schemes for morphosyntax, "valency" normally means syntactic valency, i.e., the number of syntactic arguments a verb/clause takes.
ValencyFeature cannot be reflexive, because hasSyntacticValency is distinguished from hasSemanticValency
A morpheme is the smallest meaningful unit in the grammar of a language. (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAMorpheme.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1330)
added in accordance with TIGER MorphologicalParticle
a morpheme indicating that the element it marks is the focus of the utterance.
In compliance with ISOcat, this is defined here as a morpheme. However, focus markers can be independent words, as well.
base of a word (MIRACL & LSCA; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2231)
An element of language used to change the form of a word (noun, adjective) by declension, and (verbs) by conjugation. (Sue Ellen Wright; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-292)
Letter or group of letters which are added to a word to make a new word. (Sue Ellen Wright; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1234)
Affix inserted in the middle of a word to change its meaning or part of speech value. (Sue Ellen Wright; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1313)
Inclusion of zu. (DFKI; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1954)
Affix added before a word to change its meaning or part of speech. (Sue Ellen Wright + Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1365)
separable verb prefix, e.g., "Auch die Vertreter der AfB [stimmten] den 86 Millionen [zu]."
Affix added at the end of the word to change its meaning or part of speech. (Sue Ellen Wright + Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1395)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1903 (cliticness), http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Cliticness
Deprecated: Note that the original MULTEXT-East definition of cliticness conflates four different aspects under this label: (a) whether an element *is* a clitic, (b) whether an element *contains* a clitic, (c) whether an element *should contain* a clitic that is, however, represented as a separate token, and (d) whether an element is part of a collocation. In the MULTEXT-East ontology (and here), this is made explicit by CliticElement, NoncliticElement, ElementWithClitic, ElementWithoutClitic and Collocation. Instead of the original "Clitic", CliticElement (state of being a clitic) and Cliticization (process of adding a clitic) are to be used
Categorization of the different types of clitics (MultText-East; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1903)
Note that Clitic covers only one aspect of the original MULTEXT-East (and ISOcat) definitions of cliticness, i.e., that an element is a clitic
http://www.glottopedia.de/index.php/Cliticization; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1903 (cliticness), http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Cliticness. Note that Cliticization covers only one aspect of the original MULTEXT-East (and ISOcat) definitions of cliticness, i.e., that an element is a clitic
In morphosyntax, cliticization is a process by which a complex word is formed by attaching a clitic to a fully inflected word. Exsmple: In Je t'aime, t' is the clitic attached to aime. (http://www.glottopedia.de/index.php/Cliticization) Note that cliticization can also be understood as the process of an independent word developing into a clitic. This is not the meaning intended here, as the OLiA ontologies are currently not applied to the description of diachronic processes. (Chiarcos)
Expression representing a lexeme together with its clitics (Chiarcos)
Expression representing a lexeme without any clitics (i.e. because of the absence of cliticization or because the clitic is represented separately) (Chiarcos)
Expression representing a lexeme with cliticization whose clitics are, however, represented as a separate token
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1933 (bound as value of cliticness http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1933), originally from MULTEXT-East, see http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#BoundClitic, but note that as it is used in MULTEXT-East, BoundClitic is ambiguous between "being" a bound clitic and "containing a bound clitic". Here, only the first aspect is preserved, is is thus a subclass of CliticElement.
Linked to a particular element. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1933)
subClassOf cliticness (dcif:conceptualDomain)
Root of a word, together with any derivational affixes, to which inflectional affixes are added. (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAStem.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1389)
Change in the form of a linguistic unit, usually modification in the base/root or affixation to create a new word. (Sue Ellen Wright + Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1271)
In linguistics, a compound is a lexeme (less precisely, a word) that consists of more than one stem. Compounding or composition is the word formation that creates compound lexemes (the other word-formation process being derivation). Compounding or Word-compounding refers to the faculty and device of language to form new words by combining or putting together old words. In other words, compound, compounding or word-compounding occurs when a person attaches two or more words together to make them one word. The meanings of the words interrelate in such a way that a new meaning comes out which is very different from the meanings of the words in isolation. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compound_%28linguistics%29) Compound: A lexical unit that combines two or sometimes more different words, frequently such that the sense of the new lexical unit is not clearly derivable from the combination of its parts. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-352)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2346 (reduplication)
process to modify the sense of a word by some operations to repeat the sound of a word. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2346)
adopted from Ancorra for Indian languages, http://purl.org/olia/ancorra.owl#EchoWord
The word is a copy of a previous word. In Hindi, this would add the meaning of distribution ("one rupee each"), separation ("sit separately"), variety, diversity or just emphasis. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-4209, reduplicative) Echo word is a linguistic term that refers to a particular kind of reduplication which is a widespread areal feature in the languages of South Asia. Echo words are characterized by reduplication of a complete word or phrase, with the initial segment or syllable of the reduplicant being overwritten by a fixed segment or syllable. In most languages in which this phenomenon is present, echo words serve to express a meaning of "... and such; and things like that." In some cases the echo word may express a depreciative meaning as well. Echo words in Hindi are typically created with a fixed initial v: aam "mango" aam vaam "mangoes and the like" tras "grief" tras vras "grief and the like" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echo_word)
Normally realized by derivation rather than inflection, unless other evidence is provided, OLiA follows *both* the modelling of EAGLES (Collective rdf:type Number) and the modelling of the MTE ontology (Collective rdf:type MorphologicalDerivation, cf. http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Collective)
TODO: compare against Lehmann, Handbuch Relativsätze
Nominalization is the process of forming a noun from (mostly) a verbal form, often marked morphologically or via zero derivation. (Hasmik Sargsian and Christian Chiarcos)
A diminutive is a formation of a word used to convey a slight degree of the root meaning, smallness of the object or quality named, encapsulation, intimacy, or endearment. It is the opposite of an augmentative. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diminutive)
http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Diminuitive, in MTE v.4 originally modelled as an aspect of Degree, but this is a misplacement. There are languages where Degree and Diminuitivity are independent. In Latvian, for example, the diminutive suffix may be attached to an adjective, not only in the positive but in the comparative and superlative degrees (Ruke-Dravina 1953). Velta Ruke-Dravina (1953), Adjectival Diminuitives in Latvian. The Slavonic and East European Review 31(77): 452-465
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3094 (augmentativeSize)
A special form of a noun that signals that the object being referred to is large relative to the usual size of such an object [Crystal 1980: 34].
modelled as a derivational process analoguously to Diminuitive
In this category, different inflection-relevant features are assembled. Typically, inflection phenomena are language-specific and pertain to different grammatial categories; therefore, this collection is neither to be supposed exhaustive nor are the features necessarily disjoint (e.g., InflectedWithOvertMarker overlaps with StrongInflection or WeakInflection)
In German (and other Germanic languages), when gender, number and case are not expressed by a determiner, the adjective takes the endings of the strong inflection. (http://www.canoo.net/services/OnlineGrammar/Wort/Adjektiv/Deklinationstyp/Stark.html 20.11.06) Strong inflection is a characteristic of lexemes, not individual tokens.
Strong inflection is a characteristic of lexemes, not individual tokens. In traditional English tagsets, e.g., SUSANNE or the PennTreeBank tagset, surface ambiguities are normally not resolved. Uninflected forms and forms that have the same form (e.g., "be" as an imperative) are tagged as BaseForm. (Ch. Chiarcos) Since it is impractical (...) to resolve automatically the ambiguity of these six morphological functions, it is a common practice to assign a single value to the base form, or else to assign two values, one for the finite and one for the non-finite functions. Because of this, the tables below show two tagsets: one tagset representing the 6 attribute-values above, and a reduced tagset (`RTags'), which resembles most tagsets so far used for the English language in reducing the six values to two. http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/morphsyn/node150.html#SECTION00054000000000000000 BaseForm is not a characteristic of lexemes, but specific to certain forms in a complex paradigm.
Chiarcos, cf. BaseForm in Susanne (Sampson 1995) and related schemes, and http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#UnmarkedForGender
In many inflecting languages, there occur lexemes whose form does not change throughout the paradigm, e.g., Russian papa "dad". For such forms, the category uninflected may be assigned. However, Uninflected is not to be confused with BaseForm that applies to forms in a paradigm where overt marking exists. Uninflected is a characteristic of lexemes, not individual tokens.
For the EMILLE tagset (for Urdu, Hardi 2003), we need the possibility to specify that a lexeme is (un)inflected ([un]marked) *for a specific feature* (e.g., Gender, http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#GenderMarking). At the moment, this cannot be expressed.
Property of a verbal form when inflected (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2207)
Chiarcos, motivated by BaseForm in SUSANNE (Sampson 1995) and related schemes; cf. http://purl.org/olia/emille.owl#MarkedForGender
An inflected form with overt morphological marking (as opposed to the base form and lexemes that do not inflect at all).
German mixed inflection takes its name from the fact that it has endings from both the strong inflection and the weak inflection. The mixed inflection is used after the indefinite article "ein" and after "irgendein" e.g. "(irgend) ein kleines Kind", after "kein" or after possessive pronouns e.g. "ihr kleines Kind". (http://www.canoo.net/services/OnlineGrammar/Wort/Adjektiv/Deklinationstyp/Gemischt.html?MenuId=Word3132 20.11.06) Mixed inflection is a characteristic of lexemes, not individual tokens.
German adjectives take the endings of the weak inflection when a determiner expresses number, gender and case. The weak adjective inflection has only two endings: –e and –en. (http://www.canoo.net/services/OnlineGrammar/Wort/Adjektiv/Deklinationstyp/Schwach.html 20.11.06) In other Germanic languages, similar systems exist. Weak inflection is a characteristic of lexemes, not individual tokens.
EAGLES; note that UbyPos extends separability to particles
Non-separable verbs are not composed of a verb stem and a separable affix. (cf. SeparabilityFeature: Separable)
A separable verb is a verb that is composed of a verb stem and a separable affix. In some verb forms, the verb appears in one word, whilst in others the verb stem and the affix are separated. German and Dutch are notable for having many separable verbs. For example, the Dutch verb "aankomen" is a separable verb. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separable_verb 20.11.06)
merged with http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#AdjectiveFormation, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#ReductionFeature: reduced vs. full inflection
Nonreduced adjective inflection of Slavic languages, e.g., Czech nejubožejšími/ubohý, nejvyspělejších/vyspělý, nejvyšších/vysoký, nejvznešenějšímu/vznešený, nejvážnějšímu/vážný, nejvýznamnějších/významný, nejvýznamnějšími/významný, nejvýznamnějšímu/významný, největšími/velký (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#CompoundAdjective)
Reduced adjective inflection of Slavic languages, e.g., Czech e.g., brillská/brillský, neznámo/neznámý, samo/sám, samy/sám (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#NominalAdjective)
Weak pronouns are helping pronouns many languages have for easily explaining the possessive status of something, to which something belongs. Many languages have different ways to express this. For example, English has distinctive words for all of these: "my", "mine". Germanic languages and Romance languages have the same, but inflect them for gender: (Spanish example) "mío", "mía", "míos" and "mías" ("mine", in the masculine singular, feminine singular, masculine plural, and feminine plural form, respectively). (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_pronoun 20.11.06)
Strong pronouns are different from the weak pronouns (cf. StrengthFeature:Weak)
cf. http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2240
introduced as a generalization over Lexeme, Phraseme (as opposed to phrase) and Proverb (as opposed to utterance) with the extension to lexical-semantic resources like Uby and lexinfo
A LexicalUnit is a grammatical expression that is known to the speakers of that language as a conventional expression of a particular concept. It consists of a single lexeme or a conventional combination of lexemes with certain unchangeable characteristics (CC).
Ideophones are marked words that depict sensory imagery.
Introduced to account for semantic frames in lexinfo, note that full-fledged semantic role annotation is subject to specialized resources (FrameNet, Verbnet, etc.) and beyond the scope of OLiA. For compliance with lexinfo, however, these have been added to OLiA.
According to "Frame Semantics, deriving from the work of Charles J. Fillmore and colleagues (Fillmore 1976, 1977, 1982, 1985, Fillmore and Baker 2001, 2010) ... [,] the meanings of most words can best be understood on the basis of a semantic frame: a description of a type of event, relation, or entity and the participants in it. For example, the concept of cooking typically involves a person doing the cooking (Cook), the food that is to be cooked (Food), something to hold the food while cooking (Container) and a source of heat (Heating_instrument)." (https://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/fndrupal/about)
http://purl.org/olia/ubyPos.owl#phraseme (phraseme, no definition), http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-339 (phraseologicalUnit)
Conventional lexical unit consisting of a particular phrase (CC) Any group of two or more words that form a unit, the meaning of which frequently cannot be deduced based on the combined sense of the words making up the phrase. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-339)
A collocation is any habitually linked group of words - a kind of lexical partnership, e.g. 'fish and chips', 'salt and pepper', 'don't mention it', 'it's nothing...', 'Oh well!', 'bangers and mash'... and so on. Many idioms or idiomatic phrases exhibit collocation, e.g. in a jiffy. (http://www.englishbiz.co.uk/grammar/main_files/definitionsa-m.htm)
A group of words in a fixed order that have a particular meaning that is different from the meanings of each word understood on its own. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-351)
Some forms can only be used in a fixed context, e.g., polsku in po polsku. They are classified as special kinds of adjectives in the IPIC. In the MTE version this information is preserved in the status of a "burkinostka". This term is devised by Magdalena Derwojedowa and refers to dependent words like Burkina which only make sense and can be morphosyntactically identified in a fixed combination (Burkina Faso).
Corresponds to MTE Burkinostka (Adverb/Clitic="burkinostka"; Polish) "Burkinostka was a local joke :). IsPartOfFixedExpression, to be more precise. Or somehow shorter." (Natalia Kotsyba, email 2010/06/21, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#PartOfFixedExpression)
A fixed, lexicalized phrase. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-341) A set phrase or fixed phrase is a phrase whose parts are fixed in a certain order, even if the phrase could be changed without harming the literal meaning. This is because a set phrase is a culturally accepted phrase. A set phrase does not necessarily have any literal meaning in and of itself. Set phrases may function as idioms (e.g. red herring) or as words with a unique referent (e.g. Red Sea). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_phrase, with reference to McArthur, TomsamDam. (1992) The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.)
Minimal unit of language which : has a semantic interpretation and embodies a distinct cultural concept. (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsALexeme.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1325)
deprecated, as merely a shorthand for Lexeme and hasModality some InterrogativeModality
A proform that is used in questions to stand for the item questioned.
Perceived as alive. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1911)
subClassOf animacy (dcif:conceptualDomain)
Perceived as not living. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1952)
Perceived as related to animacy, but without specific reference to the previous items. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1953)
For Slavic languages, animacy, and in particular, Humanness, defines so-called "sub-genders" that manifest themselves in the accusative ending of masculine and neuter singular nouns. Humans are by definition animate. (http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Human)
An evaluative property of a noun that indicates the speaker regards the person or object being referred to with favor or admiration.
An evaluative property of a noun that indicates the speaker regards the person or object being referred to with distaste, contempt, or displeasure [Valentine 2001: 190-193].
EAGLES, remodelling of MassNoun vs. CommonNoun
TODO: Check subcategorization in MacroRoles. Currently, this follows the TDS ontology, but the strict assignment of semantic roles to macroroles contradicts the selection algorithm as described by van Valin and Lapolla (1997): MacroRoles are not assigned a priori, but on on the basis of *relative agentivity* among the arguments.
One may consider modelling SemanticRoles and discourse relations within the same dimension. In particular, the semantics of adverbial modifiers (causal, temporal, 3al, etc.) closely resembles discourse relations.
The most agentive semantic role of the current clause (van Valin and Lapolla 1997), designated subject (from a semantic point of view)
added in conformance with PTB vocative, Bies et al. 1995
-VOC (vocative) — marks nouns of address, regardless of their position in the sentence. It is not coindexed to the subject and does not get -TPC when it is sentence-initial. (SQ (NP-VOC Mike) , would (NP-SBJ you) (INTJ please) (VP close (NP the door)) ?) (Bies et al. 1995)
added in conformance with TIGER edge labels, this is explicitly not defined as a grammatical case
TODO: Check whether to be merged with ComitativeCase
Comitative carries the meaning 'with' or 'accompanied by' (Anderson, Stephen 1985: 186; Pei and Gaynor 1954: 42;Dixon, R. 1972: 12; Gove, et al. 1966: 455). (http://purl.org/linguistics/gold/Comitative) Comitative applies to an animate entity that accompanies a participant of the action. (Dipper et al. 2007, §5.3.12)
added in conformance with PTB bracketing guidelines, Bies et al. (1995)
-DIR (direction) â ´ marks adverbials that answer the questions â ¼from where?â ½ and â ¼to where?â ½ It implies motion, which can be metaphorical as in â ¼...rose 5 pts. to 57-1/2â ½ or â ¼increased 70% to 5.8 billion yenâ ½ (see section 23 [â ¼Financialspeakâ ½ Conventions]). -DIR is most often used with verbs of motion/transit and financial verbs: (S (NP-SBJ I) (VP flew (PP-DIR from (NP Tokyo)) (PP-DIR to (NP New York)))) (Bies et al. 1995)
-EXT (extent) â ´ marks adverbial phrases that describe the spatial extent of an activity. -EXT was incorporated primarily for cases of movement in financial space, but is also used in analogous situations elsewhere. (S (NP-SBJ the Dow Jones Industrial Average) (VP plunged (NP-EXT 190.58 points))) (S (NP-SBJ She) (VP walked (NP-EXT 5 miles))) Obligatory complements do not receive -EXT: (S (NP-SBJ The sumo wrestler) (VP gained (NP 80 pounds))) Words such as fully and completely are absolutes and do not receive -EXT. (Bies et al. 1995)
A goal role instantiates the (intended) end location (directional path) of an event. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#goalRole)
http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#instrumentRole, cf. TIGER edge label "Instrumental"
SemanticRole added in conformance with TIGER
http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#locationRole, cf. the TIGER edge label "Locative"
Semantic role for the final location of action or a time of the action. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1326) Adverbials that indicate place/setting of the event. (PP-LOC on (NP the moon)) May also indicate metaphorical location: (PP-LOC amongst (NP yourselves)) (Bies et al. 1995)
A semantic role which is not straightforward. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#obliqueCase)
added in accordance with TIGER way (directional modifier)
added in conformance with Stanford Parser Dependency Labels
Semantic role as used by the Stanford Dependency Parser
-PRP (purpose or reason) â ´ marks purpose or reason clauses and PPs. (Bies et al. 1995)
added in conformance with PTB bracketing guidelines (Bies et al. 1995)
A source role instantiates the origin of an event or entity. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#sourceRole)
added as counterpart of SourceRole, see there
The target role instantiates the destination of an event or entity.
added in conformance with Stanford Parser Dependency Label TIME and SFB632 annotation guidelines (Dipper et al. 2007)
Semantic role corresponding to the label "TIME" used by the Stanford Dependency Parser. Time covers a point or an interval of time at which the action takes place. (Dipper et al. 2007, §5.3.9) -TMP (temporal) — marks temporal or aspectual adverbials that answer the questions when, how often, or how long. It has some uses that are not strictly adverbial, such as with dates that modify other NPs (see section 11 [Modification of NP]). (Bies et al. 1995)
Manner applies to constituents that denote how something is carried out. Adverbs may also denote manner, however, they are not annotated at any of the syntactic layers. (Dipper et al. 2007, §5.3.11)
added in conformance with the SFB632 annotation scheme (Dipper et al. 2007)
Cause indicates the reason why something happens and is often expressed by a PP (because of, with, through etc.). Sometimes this role is close to the role of Instrument. The criterion for the choice of tag CAUSE is if the expression can be paraphrased through a clausal subordinate clause. (Dipper et al. 2007, 5.3.10)
The least agentive argument of the current clause (van Valin and Lapolla 1997), the designated object (from a semantic perspective).
Adverbial that denotes a condition. (Petrova and Odebrecht 2011)
http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#experiencerRole, originally a subconcept of UndergoerMacroRole
An experiencer instantiates the role of an entity (usually animate) who takes the event in through sensory means in some way. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#experiencerRole)
A beneficiary (benefactor) instantiates the role of an entity (usually animate) who stands to benefit in some way from the event. Prototypically “benefit” here means “to do or be good to, to be of advantage or profit to; to improve, help forward” in some way. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#beneficiaryRole)
The entity that undergoes a Process (Dik, 1997:118). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#processedRole)
A patient instantiates the role of an entity which undergoes a change of state (Cruse 2000:284) http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#patientRole
A maleficiary (malefactor) instantiates the role of an entity (usually animate) who stands to undergoe a misfortune, or be at a disadvantage in some way from the event. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#maleficiaryRole)
A recipient instantiates the role of an entity (usually animate) who recieves an entity in some way from the event. Prototypically “recieve” here means “to take in one’s hand, or into one’s possession (something held out or offered by another); to take delivery of (a thing) from another” in some way. (OED) (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#recipientRole)
TODO: check definition, AFAIK Theme also applies to the third (non-ACTOR, non-UNDERGOER) argument (Ch. Chiarcos)
Theme is a general term covering the notions of patient that means an entity affected by the action, of result that means an entity effected by the action, i.e. which emerges out of the action, or of theme that means an entity effected by the action, i.e. which emerges out of the action. (Dipper et al. 2007: §5.3.3)
The entity controlling a Position (Dik, 1997:118) (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#positionerRole)
A force role is one in which the instantiator (the “force”) exerts some degree of energy which initiates (or impacts on) the execution of the event. In contrast to an agent, an instantitor of a force may be an inanimate entity, such as a climactic condition. The non-controlling entity instigating a Process (=Dynamism or Change) (Dik, 1997:118) (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#forceRole)
An agentive role is one in which the actor exerts some degree of will(-power) in the execution of the event. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#agentRole)
Word that sounds the same and is written the same as another word but is different in meaning.
Word that sounds like another word, but is different in writiing or meaning.
Word that is written like another, but that has a different pronunciation, meaning, and/or origin.
Description of the kind of variation between full and abbreviated forms.
Semantic valency pertains to the number of semantic arguments a predicate takes. This is not necessarily the same as syntactic valency: In English, expletive "it" is used as a syntactic argument if no semantic argument is available, cf. van Valin and Lapolla (1997).
Mood feature pertains to grammaticalized moods (as expressed in verbal inflection), Modality refers to the underlying concept that can also be manifested by other grammatical or orthographic markers
note that Modality overlaps with SentenceType (cf. InterrogativeModality besides Question, DeclarativeModality vs. DeclarativeSentence, etc.). The main difference between both is the restriction of SentenceType to full sentences as a basis of analysis. Any updates should maintain this relationship.
modality expressed by AbilitativeMood: Abilitative is a mood that indicates ability, comparable to the use of "can" in English. (http://zbb.spinnwebe.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=34901)
PhysicalAbilitiveModality indicates that an agent has the physical capacity to perform some action. [Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 192; Palmer 2001: 77]
ActionalForce indicates that the speaker or hearer is to undertake some action. Actional force subsumes Imperative, Commissive and Hortatory force.
A term sometimes used in the grammatical analysis of verbs, to refer to a type of modal meaning in which an exhortation is made. An example of a hortative usage ('a hortative') is the 'let us' construction in English ('let us pray'). [Crystal 2008: 232] (http://linguistics-ontology.org/gold/2010/HortatoryForce)
CommissiveForce indicates that the speaker promises or threatens to perform some action [Palmer 2001: 10, 72].
VolitiveForce indicates that the speaker is willing to perform some action [Palmer 2001: 76].
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-3184 (EvaluativeProperty)
EvaluativeProperty: A term used in semantics for a type of modality where propositions express the speaker's attitude (e.g. surprise, regret) towards what is being said. [Crystal 2003: 168]
PermissiveModality indicates that an agent has permission to perform the action expressed by the predicate [Palmer 2001: 10, 71].
MentalAbilitiveModality indicates that an agent has the capacity to perform some mental action [Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 192; Palmer 2001: 77].
ObligativeModality indicates that an agent is required to perform the action expressed by the predicate [Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 177; Palmer 2001: 71].
WeakObligativeModality indicates that an agent is under a moral obligation to perform the action expressed by the predicate [Bybee, Perkins and Pagliuca 1994: 186-187].
EpistemicPossibilityModality indicates that the designated state of affairs is not known not to be true.
EpistemicNecessityModality indicates that the expressed proposition is known to be true. Also known as CategoricalModality [Palmer 2001: 37, 68-69].
Expression of warning (Bybee 1985:22) (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#admonitiveModality)
Pertaining to the mood or mode of a verb form or clause such that it predicates a type of (formal) assertion (OED). (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#declarativeModality)
The interrogative modality serves to indicate interrogative quality. (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/LinguisticOntology.owl#interrogativeModality)
denotes the negation or the absence (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1839) http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#Negated: Negative="yes" encodes negative verbal word-forms in Slavic languages and Estonian. (MTE v4) In Slovak, for example, verbs form negative by prefix 'ne-', with the exception of the verb "byť" (E. "to be") which forms the negative in indicative by using separate particle "nie", e.g. "nie je" (is not). Here, Slovak "je" would be marked as negative, despite having positive form. In Resian, negative is always marked as 'n' except for two verbs: 'nïman' / not to have, 'nïsi' / not to be. (MTE v4)
Non-negated verbs carry no morphological marks of negation. In Resian, negative is always marked as 'no' except for two verbs: 'nïman' / not to have, 'nïsi' / not to be. In Slovak, verbs form negative by prefix 'ne-', with the exception of the verb "byť" (E. "to be") which forms the negative in indicative by using separate particle "nie", e.g. "nie je" (is not). Here, "je" would be marked as negative, despite having positive form. (MTE v4, http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl#NonNegated)
Set of graphic characters used for the written form of one or more languages.
A basic identifiable component of every CJKV character, often found on the left side of the character, that sometimes gives a rough indication of meaning and is used for collating lexical and terminological resources. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-296)
TODO: consider creating an olia:PhonologicalCategory for syllables
A unit of spoken language that is next bigger than a speech sound and consists of one or more vowel sounds alone or of a syllabic consonant alone or of either with one or more consonant sounds preceding or following. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-297)
Empty area between words, lines or columns (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2189)
Character string that appears between two written forms
Letter. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1889)
Character string to be interpreted in context
Introduced as a generalization over numeralRoman which is orthographically defined but not a single character
can be defined either in terms of morphosyntax (MorphosyntacticCategory) or in terms of orthography (OrthographicEntity), compare both definitions
Mark placed over a long vowel to mark quantity. (www.southwestern.edu/~carlg/Latin_Web/glossary.html; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1327)
Character string surrounded by separators. (Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1403)
Series of sentences expressed in a natural language. (Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1847)
The omission of a syllable or vowel at the beginning or end of a word, esp. when a word ending with a vowel is next to one beginning with a vowel. (www.wordreference.com/English/definition.asp?en=elision; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1277)
deletion of the final element in a word (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2254)
if two asymmetric discourse relations are equivalent in their definition and differ only in their nuclearity, they should be connected by this relation. This is used systematically to capture the dependencies between argument roles in ISO.
inverse of
Relation between linguistic expressions and their semantic content.
denotates
has attribution source
has bridging type
has definiteness
Relation between discourse entities and pragmatic features, and (mediated by the denotates relationship) between markables and pragmatic features.
has pragmatic feature
has discourse function
has discourse structural pattern
has entity type
has factuality
Relation between discourse referents and information status, and (mediated by the denotates relationship) between referring expressions and information status.
has information status
has polarity
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1376 (referentType)
has referentiality
Classification indicating the relative level of language individually assigned to a lexeme or term or to a text type. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1988)
has semantic feature
has source
has structural focus type
has target
The relative commonness with which a term occurs. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1965)
A cognitive and informational unit a hearer needs to construct in order to interpret a given stretch of discourse correctly.
Often, discourse entity is used as a synonym of discourse referent (e.g., Prince 1982), but here, a more general definition is adopted for the generalization over discourse referents, propositions and discourse segments.
discourse entity
Note that "pragmatics" is used in a broad sense as opposed to semantics, hence discourse annotations are in its scope.
pragmatic feature
Text structure relates to the physical features of text as it is laid out for reading. This includes the arrangement of sentences and paragraphs, and other aspects of the ordering of information in reading materials. (https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/Text_structure)
Structural elements of the organization of a text, such as a title, author, signature block, or the body of the text itself. (Carlson and Marcu 2001, definition of "Schema" in Rhetorical Structure Theory, cf. Mann and Thompson 1988)
text structural unit
extended to also serve as generalization over Boilerplate, Headline etc.
subClasses adopted from classification of RST schemata by Marcu and Carlson (2001)
The entity that an utterance is construed about. (Reinhart 1982, Lambrecht 1994)
aboutness topic
When a separate section of a document contains an abstract or summary of the document, this schema should be used. If, within the text of the article, a sentence or paragraph adequately summarizes the document, then the relation SUMMARY-S or SUMMARY-N should be selected. The schema ABSTRACT is reserved for a summary which is separate from the body of the text itself. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
abstract
Categories specified for referring expressions (Poesio & Artstein 2006): Abstract, Animate, Concrete, Person, Plan, Space, Time It is not quite clear how Poesio and Artstein defined the category, but we assume that is applies to situations rather than entities proper. According, nerd:Event is assumed to be a sub-class.
abstract entity
A referent is accessible if it has not been previously mentioned, but the hearer has a representation of the referent at the moment the referring expression is encountered. (Prince 1988: "discourse-new, but hearer old")
accessible
ISO Manner is an asymmetric discourse relation in which the means (Arg1) is a way in which the achievement (Arg2) comes about or occurs. Corresponds to ISO Manner with argument achievement. Nucleus is the means.
achievement
A referent is active if it belongs to a small group of given referents which are particularly salient ("in the focus/center of attention"), typically indicated by pronouns (Chafe 1976, cf. Gundel et al. 1993 "in focus", Levelt 1989 "in focus").
active
introduced as a generalization over various NERD "products" that denote different forms of or are parts of an address.
for nerd:AdministrativeRegion
administrative division
gouvernmental jurisdiction
administrative region
adverbial focus
for nerd:Aircraft
for nerd:Airline, classified as Company here, but in NERD a subclass of Organozation
for nerd:Airport
for nerd:Album sub nerd:Product
The connective indicates that its two arguments denote alternative situations. (Prasad et al. 2007)
alternative
Alternative lexicalization: a discourse relation is inferred, but insertion of an Implicit connective leads to redundancy in its expression due to the relation being alternatively lexicalized by some other expression. These are cases where a discourse relation is inferred between adjacent sentences but where providing an Implicit connective leads to redundancy in the expression of the relation. This is because the relation is alternatively lexicalized by some “non-connective expression”. Such expressions include (1) those which have two parts, one referring to the relation and another anaphorically to Arg1; (2) those which have just one part referring anaphorically to Arg1; (3) those which have just one part referring to the relation.
alternative lexicalization
for nerd:Ambassador, originally sub Person, here sub Politician; cf. extractic:AMBASSADOR
for NERD core class Amount
In an ANALOGY relation, two textual spans, often quite dissimilar, are set in correspondence in some respects. An analogy contains an inference that if two or more things agree with one another in some respects, they will probably agree in other respects. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
analogy (RST)
anaphoric relation
for NERD core class Animal
animate entity
RST: The situation presented in the nucleus comes in contrast with the situation presented in the satellite. The contrast may happen in only one or few respects, while everything else can remain the same in other respects. An ANTITHESIS relation is always mononuclear -- it is a contrastive relation that distinguishes clearly between the nuclearity of its arguments. It differs from the mononuclear CONCESSION relation, which is characterized by a violated expectation. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Markers are "although", "however", and "while". Axiomatization follows SemDok
antithesis
Supersedes Antithesis_RST. Also used in SemDok.
superseded by Antithesis, maintained only for backward-compatibility.
antithesis (RST)
A designation that represents an individual concept. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-347) A verbal designation of an individual, unique concept, e. g. Mount Everest, Nobel Prize (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appellation_(disambiguation))
for nerd:Architect. As this is not supported by an external extractor, it is deprecated.
introduced as generalization over nerd:Space subclasses that describe buildings, groups of buldings or functional spaces within cities (e.g., park, which results from landscape architecture). Unlike GeographicalFeatures (which are mostly natural) and PoliticalUnits (which are abstract), architectural features result from manual construction efforts. Note that we include roads (as a result of planned human activity, and often, construction, but not channels (all waterways are considered geographical; a channel is a natural body of water that is only redirected by means of a manual construction).
Narrow focus on one single non-verbal constituent in the focus. Corresponding to "narrow focus" (van Valin & Lapolla 1997), or "argument focus" (Lambrecht 1994). "Term focus" as suggested by Güldemann & Fiedler would be more precise (adverbials also fall in this group, but no verbs).
argument focus
article top level schema
for nerd:Artist, zemanata:artist
Assertion proposition AOs are associated with a communication type of attribution (“Comm” for short), conveyed by standard verbs of communication (Levin, 1993) such as say, mention, claim, argue, explain etc. (Prasad et al. 2007)
assertion
Assessment is introduced here as a generalization over RST relations like COMMENT, EVALUATION, INTERPRETATION etc. where a subjective, objective or neutral assessment of the information represented in the nucleus is expressed in the satellite. (Ch. Chiarcos) It corresponds to SemDok InterpretativeEvaluation, except that assessment is underspecified with respect to nuclearity whereas .
assessment
for nerd:Astronaut. As this is not supported by an external extractor, it is deprecated.
The situations described in the two arguments are temporally ordered. (Prasad et al. 2007)
asynchronous relation
introduced as generalization over nerd:SoccerPlayer, nerd:TennisPlayer. As these are, however, not supported by an external extractor, it is deprecated.
The relation of attribution is a relation of “ownership” between abstract objects and individuals or agents. That is, attribution has to do with ascribing beliefs and assertions expressed in text to the agent(s) holding or making them (Riloff and Wiebe, 2003; Wiebe et al., 2004, 2005). (Prasad et al. 2007) Instances of reported speech, both direct and indirect, should be marked for the rhetorical relation of ATTRIBUTION. The satellite is the source of the attribution (a clause con- taining a reporting verb, or a phrase beginning with according to), and the nucleus is the content of the reported message (which must be in a separate clause). The ATTRIBUTION relation is also used with cognitive predicates, to include feelings, thoughts, hopes, etc. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) The Satellite attributes the Nucleus to a source. (Wolf et al. 2003) Note that SemDok groups Attribution and Citation with Support and thus not a textual, but a presentational relation. However, we adopt the PDTB perspective in that attribution is to be modelled separately, and in accordance with its usage in text, consider it a textual device rather than a presentational relation. cf. SemDok Attribution
attribution
Classification of Attribute relations with respect to different types of agents that act as source of Attribution. (Prasad et al. 2007)
attribution source
Most of the time, the WSJ articles in our corpus did not include title and author information. However, in a small number of cases, a line about the author was included at the end of the text. In such cases, the schema Author was used to link this with the rest of the text. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
author
Source is writer of text (Prasad et al. 2007)
author attribution source
for nerd:Automobile
automobile model
automobile
EXPANSION.Background applies when the argument that is syntactically associated with the connective describes prior eventualities which are background information of the other argument. (Al-Saif and Markert 2010) cf. RST Background: In a BACKGROUND relation, the satellite establishes the context or the grounds with respect to which the nucleus is to be interpreted. Understanding the satellite helps the reader understand the nucleus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) We follow SemDok in assuming that Background is an interpersonal (presentational) relation.
background
In a BACKGROUND relation, the satellite establishes the context or the grounds with respect to which the nucleus is to be interpreted. Understanding the satellite helps the reader understand the nucleus. The satellite IS NOT the cause/reason/motivation of the situation pre- sented in the nucleus. The reader/writer intentions are irrelevant in determining whether such a relation holds. In contrast with the CIRCUMSTANCE relation, the information or the context of the BACKGROUND relation is not always specified clearly or delimited sharply. Hence, the CIRCUM- STANCE relation is stronger than BACKGROUND. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Equivalent to SemDok Background. The superclass Background is more generic than the SemDok class in that it also covers the SemDok class Preparation. However, SemDoc concepts are undefined, so details are hard to make out.
background (RST)
for nerd:Band
music group
band
Belief proposition AOs are associated with a “belief” type of attribution, conveyed by propositional attitude verbs (Hintikka, 1971) such as believe, think, expect, suppose, imagine, etc. (Prasad et al. 2007, for PDTB)
belief
Register of terms used in applications-oriented as opposed to theoretical or academic levels of language. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1989, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-427)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1989, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-427
subClassOf register (dcif:conceptualDomain)
for nerd:Bird and extractiv:BIRD
A fixed chunk of recurring text. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-343) Boilerplate text, or simply boilerplate, is any written text (copy) that can be reused in new contexts or applications without significant changes to the original. The term is used in reference to statements, contracts and computer code ... In contract law, the term "boilerplate language" or "boilerplate clause" describes the parts of a contract that are considered standard. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boilerplate_text)
Textbaustein
boilerplate text
standard text
for nerd:Book sub nerd;Product
for nerd:Bridge
bridging relation
Types of textual inference, presupposes Inferrable InformationStatus
bridging type
for nerd:Broadcast sub nerd:Organization Note: As there is no definition given, it is not fully clear what this is supposed to mean. I assume this means Broadcast*er*, not the Broadcast itself, but if so, RatioStation and TVStation should be sub-classes. Because of the unclear semantics and the lack of a link within NERD, this is marked as deprecated.
Generalization over nerd:TVStation and nerd:RadioStation. nerd:Broadcast may have meant the same, but it has unclear semantics in NERD.
for nerd:Canal
As the semantics/pragmatics differentiation of PDTB relations does not exactly correspond to the subject-matter/presentational distinction in RST, Cause is introduced as a generalization over SemanticCause and PragmaticCause. This generalization is in line with (and inspired by) the ISO Core DRels (Bunt and Prasad, ISA-12).
cause
PDTB "Result": The situation in Arg2 is the effect brought about by the situation described in Arg1. (Prasad et al. 2007)
cause precedes effect (PDTB)
This is a causal relation in which two EDUs, one representing the cause and the other representing the result, are of equal importance or weight. The multinuclear relations CAUSE-RESULT and CONSEQUENCE are similar. The former should be selected when the causality is perceived as being more direct, while the latter is reserved for a more indirect causal connection. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Corresponds to SemDok CauseResult-multi
cause result (RST)
RST "CAUSE": The situation presented in the nucleus is the cause of the situation presented in the satellite. The cause, which is the nucleus, is the most important part. The satellite represents the result of the action. The intention of the writer is to emphasize the cause. When the result is the nucleus, the mononuclear relation RESULT should be selected. When it is not clear whether the cause or result is more important, select the multinuclear relation CAUSE-RESULT. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
cause (RST)
for nerd:Celebrity. As this is not supported by an external extractor, it is deprecated.
The connective indicates that two alternatives are evoked in the discourse but only one is taken. (Prasad et al. 2007)
chosen alternative (PDTB)
The situation presented in the satellite provides the context in which the situation presented in the nucleus should be interpreted. The satellite IS NOT the cause/reason/motivation of the situation presented in the nucleus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) S is not unrealized; S sets a framework in the subject matter within which R is intended to interpret N (Mann and Taboada 2010) Note that this is not an RST-specific relation because of its use in SemDok. Axiomatization follows SemDok
circumstance
Defined as a SynchronousRelation because of its association with the discourse marker "while", cf. Prasad et al. (2007)
superseded by Circumstance, maintained for backward compatibility
circumstance (RST)
introduced for SemDok Citation. However, we consider Citation not as a rhetorical relation, but as a structural element in the text that can serve different purposes (discourse relations). These purposes correspond to the subclasses of Citation in SemDok, and these subclasses are thus in the intersection between OLiA Citation and the discourse relation that corresponds to their respective function,
citation
citation attribution
citation evidence
SemDok Citation-self, subclass of Support
citation self
for nerd:City
CoherenceRelation is used here as a synonym of PDTB "coherence relation". RST "discourse relation", however, is broader.
coherence relation
This schema refers to the name of a regularly featured column in the paper, and should be used when the paper begins by presenting a TITLE, COLUMN-TITLE and AUTHOR. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
column title
for nerd:ComicsCharacter. As this is not supported by an external extractor, it is deprecated.
introduced in analogy with TopicComment as generalization over CommentTopic_RST
comment topic
A specific remark is made on a topic or statement, after which the topic itself is identified. This relation is always multinuclear, as both spans are necessary to understand the context. When the spans occur in the reverse order, with the topic preceding the comment, the relation TOPIC-COMMENT is selected. While COMMENT-TOPIC is not a frequently used device in English, it is seen in news reporting, for example, when someone makes a statement, after which a reference is given to help the reader interpret the context of the statement. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
comment topic (RST)
In a COMMENT relation, the satellite constitutes a subjective remark on a previous segment of the text. It is not an evaluation or an interpretation. The comment is usually presented from a perspective that is outside of the elements in focus in the nucleus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
comment (RST)
Said of a term that appears frequently. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1984)
subClassOf frequency (dcif:conceptualDomain)
for nerd:Company
company name
company
The connective indicates that a discourse relation is established between Arg1 and Arg2 in order to highlight prominent differences between the two situations. Semantically, the truth of both arguments is independent of the connective or the established relation. (Prasad et al. 2007) cf. Resemblance (Wolf et al. 2003): Resemblance relations establish commonalities and contrasts between corresponding (sets of) discourse entities or properties (Kehler (2002)). Corresponding (sets of) discourse entities or properties are usually syntactically and / or semantically parallel.
comparison
Two textual spans are compared along some dimension, which can be abstract. The relations can convey that some abstract entities that pertain to the comparison relation are similar, different, greater-than, less-than, etc. In the case of a comparison relation, the spans, entities, etc. are not in contrast. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
comparison (RST)
from SemDok SemDok also defines three sub-classes: CDS-block, CDS-div, CDS-doc. It seems these refer to the structure of XML documents, and without definitions, these have not been adopted here.
complex discourse segment
One of the arguments describes a situation A which causes C, while the other asserts (or implies) the complement of C. (Prasad et al. 2007) The situation indicated in the nucleus is contrary to expectation in the light of the information presented in the satellite. In other words, a CONCESSION relation is always characterized by a violated expectation. In some cases, which text span is the satellite and which is the nucleus do not depend on the semantics of the spans, but rather on the intention of the writer. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) A typical marker is "although" (in PTDB and RSTDTB). Axiomatization follows SemDok Concession (subclass of Contrast). We follow SemDok in assuming that Concession is always hypotactic (mononuclear), although this is not explicit in the PDTB definitions.
concession
In a CONCLUSION relation, the satellite presents a final statement that wraps up the situation presented in the nucleus. A CONCLUSION satellite is a reasoned judgment, inference, necessary consequence, or final decision with respect to the situation presented in the nucleus. When the nucleus and satellite are of equal importance, select the multinuclear CONCLUSION. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
conclusion (RST)
Categories specified for referring expressions (Poesio & Artstein 2006): Abstract, Animate, Concrete, Person, Plan, Space, Time
concrete entity
Note that Condition is undefined with respect to nuclearity. Mononuclear relations are Consequence (condition is nucleus) and Pragmatic / Semantic Condition (condition is satellite). RST-DTB: In a CONDITION relation, the truth of the proposition associated with the nucleus is a consequence of the fulfillment of the condition in the satellite. The satellite presents a situation that is not realized. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) PDGB: the event described in the Nucleus can only take place if the event described in the Satellite also takes place (before or simultaneously with the event described in the Nucleus) (Wolf et al. 2003) PDTB: As the semantics/pragmatics differentiation of PDTB relations does not exactly correspond to the subject-matter/presentational distinction in RST, Condition was originally introduced as a generalization over SemanticCondition and PragmaticCondition. Both SemanticCondition and PragmaticCondition take the condition to be the satellite. ISO: Condition and Negative Condition describe the relation between both arguments, the RST/PDTB/PDGB condition relations correspond to an ISO (Negative) Condition with argument (Negated) Antecedent.
condition
The situation described in Arg2 provides additional, discourse new, information that is related to the situation described in Arg1. Typical connectives for “Conjunction” are also, in addition, additionally, further, etc. (Prasad et al. 2007) The items are conjoined to form a unit in which each item plays a comparable role. (Mann and Taboada 2010) We follow Bunt and Prasad (ISA-12) in assuming that (ISO) conjunction is a superclass of (PDTB) list. HOWEVER, in terms of the PDTB v2.0 definitions, both are more likely to be taken as sibling concepts.
The connective indicates that both alternatives hold or are possible. (Prasad et al. 2007)
conjunctive (PDTB)
ISO DR-Core: Condition or Negated Condition, argument Consequent This is an annotation that marks a condition at the consequent rather than the condition, itself. We expect such a relation to require both a consequent and a condition, and that the type of condition is marked at the condition rather at the consequent. Accordinly, Consequence does not have further subclasses, but should be coupled with Condition annotations. Axiomatization follows SemDok Consequence
consequence
In a consequence relation, the situation presented in one span is a consequence of the situation presented in the other span. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) SemDok distinguishes three subtypes, which, however, only differ in nuclearity.
consequence (RST)
Variation on a particular usage or immediate proximity of words.
The situations are (assumed to be) related by an abstract notion of recurrence or habituality (Carlson and Marcu 2001), often, one of the situations described in Arg1 and Arg2 causally influences the other. (Prasad et al. 2007). cf. Wolf et al.'s "Cause-Effect": Cause-Effect relations establish a causal inference path between discourse segments. Roughly corresponding to SemDok CauseResult. However, this is limited to ideational relations (subject-matter relations), whereas here, we follow PDTB to also include presentaitonal (interpersonal) relations (PragmaticCause).
contigency
In a CONTINGENCY relation, the satellite suggests an abstract notion of recurrence or habituality. Hence, the expression of time, place, or condition is not the primary focus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
contigency (RST)
for nerd:Continent
PDTB COMPARISON/Concession/contra-expectation: Arg1 creates an expectation that Arg2 denies. (Prasad et al. 2007) ISO DR-Core: Concession, argument expectation-denier (Bunt & Prasad, ISA-12)
contra expectation
The situations presented in the arguments come in contrast with each other along some dimension. The contrast may happen in only one or few respects, while everything else can remain the same in other respects. Typically, a CONTRAST relation includes a contrastive discourse cue, such as "but", "however", "while". (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Distinguished from PDTB "Contrast" as a generalization over PDTB "Contrast" and "Pragmatic Contrast" (Ch. Chiarcos), This definition is in line with the ISO relation "Contrast" and corresponds to it notably in the exclusion of Concessions,
contrast
In a CONTRAST relation, two or more nuclei come in contrast with each other along some dimension. The contrast may happen in only one or few respects, while everything else can remain the same in other respects. Typically, a CONTRAST relation includes a contrastive discourse cue, such as but, however, while, whereas a COMPARISON does not. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) No more than two nuclei; the situations in these two nuclei are (a) comprehended as the same in many respects (b) comprehended as differing in a few respects and (c) compared with respect to one or more of these differences (Mann and Taboada 2010). Corresponds to SemDok Contrast-multi
contrast (RST)
Generalization over RST/PDTB contrast and concession. Cf. Contrast as defined by Wolf et al. (2003): Infer a set of entities from DS0, E(DS0), and a set of entities from DS1, E(DS1). Then infer contrasts between members of E(DS0) and E(DS1). • Contrast-1 is a contrast between corresponding predicates in DS0 and DS1. The arguments of these contrasting predicates are identical. • Contrast-2 is a contrast between the arguments of corresponding predicates in DS0 and DS1. The predicates over these contrasting arguments are identical. Corresponds to SemDok Contrast (generalization over Concession, Antithesis and Contrast).
contrastive comparison
The contrastive focus (cf) is that element of the sentence that evokes a notion of contrast to (an element of) another utterance. (SFB632 guidelines) Contrastive focus may also extend over different domains of an utterance. In alternative questions and the answers to them it covers the whole CP. E.g. WORDS: Is it raining or not ? CFocus: [ _cf It is raining] or [ _cf not]. WORDS: Yes , it is . NFocus: Yes, [ _nf it is]. CFocus: Yes, [ _cf it is]. (5.3) Also referred to as "identificational focus", or "alternative focus".
contrastive focus
cf. SemDok List-coordination. No definition provided, but this could be meant for cases of (otherwise uninterpreted) syntactic coordination between discourse units.
coordination
for nerd:Country
for nerd:Criminal and extractiv:CRIMINAL
When a date is provided at the beginning of the document, and it refers to the rest of the article, the DATE schema should be used. It may also be used for subsections of the document. It should be linked to a TEXT or SECTIONTEXT schema. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
date
definite
(Semantic) definiteness means that an expression is morphosyntactically marked as hearer-known (definite or pronominal) and the hearer can infer exactly one entity to which this description applies at the current point in discourse, either because it is unique (Russel 1937), or it is the most salient entity in the current situation to which the referring expression may apply (Lewis 1979, v. Heusinger 1996). In particular, most pronuns are also definite as they refer to one particular antecedent.
definiteness
Introduced as generalization over Definition_RST and ElaborationDefinition (from SemDok). In fact, these may just be equivalent.
definition
In a DEFINITION relation, the satellite gives a definition of the nucleus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
definition (RST)
Krifka distinguishes between ‘expression focus’ and ‘denotation focus.’ Differences in meaning are only found in the latter kind of focus, on which we concentrate here. ... Some semantic uses of focus are focus-sensitive particles (socalled ‘association with focus’ cases), negations, reason clauses and restrictors of quantifiers. It is important to understand which subclasses of focus can be expressed by grammatical means, even if the distinction is only realized in a small group of languages. In the SFB annotation guidelines, ‘focus’ is subcategorized into new and contrastive. (Féry et al. 2007)
denotation focus
Deprecated Term: A term rated according to the scale of a term acceptability rating as undesired. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-378) Superseded Term: A term that is no longer preferred or admitted. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-379) Obsolete Form: A term or lexeme which is no longer in common use. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-506)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-378, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-379
Classification of Attribute relations with respect to their "determinacy", which signals a context that cancels what would otherwise be an entailment of attribution. The determinacy feature captures the fact that the attribution over a relation or argument can itself be cancelled in particular contexts, such as within negated, conditional, and infinitive contexts. Determinate contexts are simply marked by the default “Null”. (Prasad et al. 2007)
determinate attribution
Register that is specific to a dialect. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1990)
added as generalization over ISO FunctionalDependence (response from one interlocutor) and FeedbackDependence (questions, answers and meta communication). Extended to quasi-dialoguous relations (rhetorical questions). Note that PDTB, CCR and RST don't cover dialogue acts. Likewise, SemDok doesn't address dialogs. However, dialog relations clearly have an interpersonal function. Because of the modelling of dialog relations as interpersonal, this entails that they are presentational.
dialog relation
discourse adverbial
discourse function
A prototypical object that is referred to in discourse (Karttunen 1972).
discourse referent
corresponds to SemDok RhetoricalRelation (but not DiscourseRelation)
Relation between discourse segments. (Mann and Thompson 1988) In order to distangle discourse-syntactic (paratactic/hypotactic) and functional-semantic aspects, DiscourseRelation is distinguished from DiscourseStructuralPattern: DiscourseRelations defined discourse relations in terms of their communicative function and underlying semantics. An RST antithesis, for example, is thus to be defined both as a ContrastRelation (subclass of DiscourseRelation) and as a HypotacticDiscourseRelation (subclass of DiscourseStructuralPattern). Note that Attribution is modelled here as a relation (as in RST), not as a feature (as in PDTB).
discourse relation
The taxonomy of DiscourseRelations follows roughly the Penn Discourse Treebank (Prasad et al. 2007), with additions in accordance to the Hindi Discourse Relation Bank (HDRB, Oza et al. 2009), the Italian LUNA corpus (Tonelli et al. 2010), the Leeds Arabic Discourse Treebank (LADTB, Al-Saif and Markert 2010) and an alignment with Carlson and Marcu's (2001) RST relations and with Wolf et al.'s (2003, PDGB) coherence relations. Unaligned relations are marked by suffixes RST (for classical RST and RDTDTB relations) on the one hand and PDTB, HDRB, LUNA and LADTB on the other hand. No indices are used are used if a relation can be confirmed for at least two families of annotation schemes (PDTB, RSTDTB, PDGB). We provide two, intersection subclassifications of discourse relations: - ideational, interpersonal and textual (following SemDoc, i.e., the RST tradition) - entity relations and (other) coherence relations (following PDTB) With the following overlaps: - entity relations are ideational relations - interpersonal relations are coherence relations - textual relations (not addressed in PDTB) are disjoint from both entity and coherence relations However, the RST-style classification is encoded via subclasses of discourse function, the PDTB-style classification (along with additional concepts for textual patterns and dialog relations) is encoded via subclasses of discourse relation.
roughly corresponds to the notion of "Arguments" in PDTB: Argument of a Relation, e.g., a connective. Syntactically characterized as Simple clauses, certain VP coordinations (the conjunction in a coordinated verb phase is not annotated as a distinct discourse connective, but one or more verb phrases within the coordinated structure can be annotated as the argument of another connective), certain nominalizations, anaphoric expressions denoting abstract objects (like "this", or "that" or "so"), responses to questions (Prasad et al. 2007)
Cognitive representation representing a longer stretch of discourse (Grosz and Sidner 1986), defined by a particular "discourse segment purpose" (Grosz and Sidner 1986), a specific propositional content of the relation between dependent DiscourseSegments, or the propositional content of the text contained in a minimal discourse segment (Mann and Thompson 1988). DiscourseSegments are interconnected by DiscourseRelations in a hierarchical and sequential structure.
Discourse segment (discourse unit) is a segment of discourse that represents either an elementary discourse unit (e.g., a clause, proposition) or a complex discourse unit (constituted by several discourse units). Depending on theory, discourse segments reflect the scope of quantifiers and discourse connectives (Kamp 1982, Asher and Lascarides 2003), turn- or paragraph-like structures (Grosz and Sidner 1986) or range and domain of discourse relations (cf. Mann and Thompson 1988, Carlson et al. 2003).
Near-synonyms in RST literature are "discourse unit" (Carlsson et al. 2003) and "text span" (Mann and Thompson 1988).
discourse segment
The feature DiscourseStructuralPattern was introduced to characterize discourse relations according to their "discourse-syntactic" function as opposed to their functional-semantic function (that is formalized in DiscourseRelation). We distinguish paratactic (SDRT: coordinating, RST: multinuclear) and hypotactic (SDRT: subordinating, RST: mononuclear) relations.
discourse structural pattern
ISO Substitution with argument disfavoured alternative,
disfavoured alternative
PDTB: Two situations are evoked in the discourse but only one of them holds. (Prasad et al. 2007) Note that PDTB distinguishes Disjunction and Disjunctive. RST-DTB: DISJUNCTION is a multinuclear relation whose elements can be listed as alternatives, either positive or negative. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) RST: An item presents a (not necessarily exclusive) alternative for the other(s). (Mann and Taboada 2010)
disjunctive
document
for nerd:Drug
for nerd:EducationalInstitution
educational ORG
educational organization
educational institution
PDTB "Reason": The situation described in Arg2 is the cause and the situation described in Arg1 is the effect. (Prasad et al. 2007)
effect precedes cause (PDTB)
R recognizes S as providing additional detail for N. R identifies the element of subject matter for which detail is provided. (Mann and Taboada 2010) Infer a set of coherent entities, E(DS0, DS1) from DS0 and DS1. The members of E(DS0, DS1) are centered around a common event or entity, e01. (Wolf et al. 2003) A classical discourse relation that has been applied to different kinds of dependency relations, e.g., between a set and its member(s), an abstraction and its instance(s), whole and part, process and step, object and attribute, or generalization and specific. Since Knott et al. (2001), it seems generally accepted that elaboration is to be circumscribed by entity-based coherence, e.g., EntRel relationships as defined by Prasad et al. (2007): "no discourse relation can be inferred and where the second sentence only serves to provide some further description of an entity in the first sentence". Although Elaboration is thus closely entangled with anaphora and textual inferences, both phenomena are to be modelled separately: Elaboration is a relationship between discourse segments, whereas anaphora and bridging are relationships between discourse referents. The subclassification of Elaboration follows SemDok. Note that we do not express directionSatellite value "left" as we do not explicitly encode positioning. Our modelling follows Webber and Knott (2001) in assuming that elaboration is *always* mediated by an entity relation. However, in some cases relations grouped under elaboration in one framework are grouped with other discourse relations in the PDTB tradition (e.g., ElaborationSpecification is Elaboration in RST and SemDok, but a special case of Specification/Expansion in PDTB). In these cases, we provide double classification.
elaboration
In an ELABORATION-ADDITIONAL relation, the satellite gives additional infor- mation or detail about the situation presented in the nucleus. This relation is extremely common at all levels of the discourse structure, and is especially popular to show relations across large spans of information. It is the default for the family of elaboration relations, and should be used when none of the other, more specific, elaboration relations apply. When an elaborating satellite is an embedded unit, the relation ELABORATION-ADDI- TIONAL-E is used. Generally, the embedded satellite of this relation is separated from the nucleus by a comma and represents a nonrestrictive relative clause, whereas an ELABORATION-OBJECT- ATTRIBUTE-E represents a restrictive relative clause (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
elaboration additional (RST)
SemDok Elaboration-assign. Note that we skipped the subclass Elaboration-assign-other, as its definition is unclear.
elaboration assign
elaboration assign abbreviation
elaboration class instance
elaboration class subclass
SemDok Elaboration-continuation. We omitted the subclass Elaboration-continuation-other because it is unclear how this is defined. Its subclasses are, however, preserved. SemDok treats all topic continuity relations as subclasses of elaboration, but this comes with the assumption of hypotactic relation, whereas other topic continuity relations in RST are paratactic or underdefined (see TopicContinuityRelation). We thus add these SemDok elaborations as subclasses of TopicContinuityRelation rather than merging them into a single concept.
elaboration continuation
from SemDok Elaboration-definition, no definition given We assume that this is (near-) identical to RST Definition.
elaboration definition
elaboration derivation
elaboration drift
SemDok Elaboration-example We assume that this is a mononuclear subclass of Example.
elaboration example
ELABORATION-GENERAL-SPECIFIC: The satellite provides specific information to help define a very general con- cept introduced in the nucleus. (Carlson et al. 2001)
elaboration generic specific (RST)
elaboration identity
SemDok Elaboration-integration No definition is given. By analogy with ElaborationWholePart, we assume that this may stand for ElaborationPartWhole, but this is unconfirmed. Based on this interpretation, however, we define it as subclass of Generalization. As a SemDok Elaboration, this is a subject-matter relation. This seems to be the main difference to SemDok Summary, which is interpersonal.
elaboration integration
ELABORATION-OBJECT-ATTRIBUTE is a relation involving a clause, usually a postmodifier of a noun phrase, that is required to give meaning to an animate or inanimate object. The modifying clause is the satellite, and the object it modifies is the nucleus. The satellite is intrinsic to the meaning of the nucleus, and/or essential to understanding the context, and is almost always an embedded unit. This relation is almost always embedded In embedded units, ELABORATION-OBJECT-ATTRIBUTE-E is much more common than ELABORATION-ADDITIONAL-E. The way to distinguish between ELABORATION-OBJECT- ATTRIBUTE-E and ELABORATION-ADDITIONAL-E is that the former is intrinsic to the object it is modifying in the nucleus, while the latter is extrinsic, i.e. it contains information that is incidental and which could be omitted without loss of understanding. Usually, an ELABORATION-ADDI- TIONAL-E is separated from the nucleus by a comma and represents a nonrestrictive relative clause, whereas an ELABORATION-OBJECT-ATTRIBUTE-E represents a restrictive relative clause. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
elaboration object attribute (RST)
The Satellite gives details about an entity involved in the event described by the Nucleus. The details cannot be captured by any of the relations above. (Wolf et al. 2003)
elaboration of detail (PDGB)
The Satellite gives information about the location where the Nucleus took place (Wolf et al. 2003)
elaboration of location (PDGB)
The Satellite gives information about the time at which the Nucleus took place (???) (Wolf et al. 2003)
elaboration of number (PDGB)
The Satellite gives information about an organization involved in the event described by the Nucleus (Wolf et al. 2003)
elaboration of organization (PDGB)
The Satellite gives information about a person involved in the event described by the Nucleus (Wolf et al. 2003)
elaboration of person (PDGB)
The Satellite gives information about the time at which the Nucleus took place (Wolf et al. 2003)
elaboration of time (PDGB)
In an ELABORATION-PART-WHOLE relation, the satellite specifies or elaborates on a portion or part of the nucleus. Since this relation is most often appropriate for representing parts of objects, it is only occasionally found to hold between EDUs. Most typically, this would be in a parenthetical modifier. It is distinguished from ELABORATION-SET-MEMBER, in which each member is representative of the entire set in a similar way. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
elaboration part whole (RST)
ELABORATION-PROCESS-STEP: In this elaboration relation, the nucleus introduces an activity or event (a pro- cess). The satellite then enumerates the steps involved in carrying out the process, usually in chro- nological order. Thus, the steps are most often represented in a multinuclear SEQUENCE relationship. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) SemDok Elaboration-process-step
elaboration process step
elaboration process step (RST)
SemDok Elaboration-Restatement Apparently, this is a mononuclear version of Restatement as found in other frameworks.
elaboration restatement
ELABORATION-SET-MEMBER: In this elaboration relation, the nucleus introduces a finite set (which may be generic or a named entity) or a list of information. The satellite then specifically elaborates on at least one member of the set. Typically, the members themselves are represented in a multinuclear LIST relationship. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) SemDok Elaboration-set-member
elaboration set member
elaboration set member (RST)
SemDok Elaboration-specification Apparently, this is a mononuclear version of Specification.
elaboration specification
elaboration theme rheme
SemDok Elaboration-theme-theme Unfortunately, SemDok doesn't provide definitions, so it is unclear whether this is meant to be comparable to TopicShift. At least, it would be surprising to see that modelled as an Elaboration.
elaboration theme theme
elaboration whole part
element of
edu
A discourse segment that does not contain dependent discourse segments. Elementary element of discourse structure defined by a variety of grammatical criteria (Carlsson et al. 2003).
An elementary discourse unit is a terminal element in a hierarchical model of discourse structure. (Note that here, the term "discourse segment" is used, as discourse unit is potentially ambiguous in comparison with "discourse entity".) (cf. Carlson et al. 2003)
elementary discourse unit
minimal discourse unit
for nerd:EmailAddress, sub nerd:Product
email
email address
ISO Purpose with argument enablement. The nucleus is the the goal (intended result).
enablement
In an ENABLEMENT relation, the situation presented in the nucleus is unreal- ized. The action presented in the satellite increases the chances of the situation in the nucleus being realized. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
enablement (RST)
No discourse relation can be inferred and where the second sentence only serves to provide some further description of an entity in the first sentence. (Prasad et al. 2007) Entity relations (which include Elaboration) are grouped with IdeationalRelations in SemDok, hence also a subclass of SubjectMatterRelation. Note that we follow Webber and Knott (2001) to assume that Elaboration is always an entity relation (even though this entity may be abstract or implicit), however, many types of elaboration (taxonomy following SemDok) are put under Expansion in the PDTB tradition. Entity relations proper are thus only elaborations which have no other discourse relation assigned. These are (only) the sublasses of ElaborationDerivation.
entity based relation
entity type
An extension of the PDTB scheme suggested by Oza et al. (2009). Each pragmatic sense at the type level is further distinguished into three subtypes: “epis- temic” (Sweetser 1990), “speech-act” (Sweetser 1990), and “propositional”. (Oza et al. 2009)
epistemic cause (HDRB)
Suggested as an extension of the PDTB scheme by Oza et al. (2009) and Tonelli et al. (2010). Each pragmatic sense at the type level is further distinguished into three subtypes: “epis- temic” (Sweetser 1990), “speech-act” (Sweetser 1990), and “propositional”. (Oza et al. 2009)
epistemic concession (HDRB)
epistemic condition
epistemic condition (HDRB)
Sara Tonelli, Giuseppe Riccardi, Rashmi Prasad and Aravind Joshi (2010), Annotation of Discourse Relations for Conversational Spoken Dialogs, Proceedings of the Seventh conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'10), May, 19-21, Valletta, Malta
epistemic condition (LUNA)
Suggested as an extension of the PDTB scheme by Oza et al. (2009). Each pragmatic sense at the type level is further distinguished into three subtypes: “epis- temic” (Sweetser 1990), “speech-act” (Sweetser 1990), and “propositional”. (Oza et al. 2009)
epistemic contrast (HDRB)
PDTB Restatement/equivalence. ISO Restatement (which does not include generalization/specialization relations, as these are in Elaboration, etc).
equivalent restatement
Arg1 and Arg2 describe the same situation from different perspectives. (Prasad et al. 2007)
equivalent restatement (PDTB)
In an evaluation relationship, one span assesses the situation presented in the other span of the relationship on a scale of good to bad. An evaluation can be an appraisal, estimation, rating, interpretation, or assessment of a situation. The evaluation can be the viewpoint of the writer or another agent in the text. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Cf. SemDok Evaluation
evaluation
evaluation (RST)
introduced for nerd:Event, a NERD core class.
When eventuality AOs occur with attribution, it conveys an agent’s intention/attitude towards a considered event, state or action. Eventuality AOs occur with “control” types of attribution (“Ctrl” for short), conveyed by any of three different classes of control verbs (Sag and Pollard, 1991). The first kind is anchored by a verb of influence like persuade, permit, order, and involve one agent influencing another agent to perform (or not perform) an action. The second kind is anchored by a verb of commitment like promise, agree, try, intend, refuse, decline, and involve an agent committing to perform (or not perform) an action. The third kind is anchored by a verb of orientation like want, expect, wish, yearn, and involve desire, expectation, or some similar mental orientation towards some state(s) of affairs. These sub-distinctions are not encoded in the annotation, but we have used the definitions as a guide for identifying these predicates. (Prasad et al. 2007, for PDTB)
eventual factuality
Generalization over RST Evidence, SemDok Citation-evidence and SemDok Evidence
evidence
In an EVIDENCE relation, the situation presented in the satellite provides evi- dence or justification for the situation presented in the nucleus. Usually EVIDENCE relations per- tain to actions and situations that are independent of the will of an animate agent. Evidence is data on which judgment of a conclusion may be based, and is presented by the writer or an agent in the article to convince the reader of a point. An evidence satellite increases the chance of the reader accepting the information presented in the nucleus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
evidence (RST)
RST "Example": The satellite provides an example with respect to the information presented in the nucleus. If the example is a member of a set which may be enumerable but not all of whose elements are known or specified, then choose the relation EXAMPLE. If the example is a member of an enumerable set whose elements are known or specified, select the relation ELABORATION-SET- MEMBER. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Infer a set of entities from DS0, E(DS0), and a set of entities from DS1, E(DS1). Then find some element in E(DS1) that is a member or subset of the corresponding element in E(DS0). • Infer a set of entities from DS0, E(DS0), and a set of entities from DS1, E(DS1). Then find some element in E(DS1) that is a new instantiation of an entity in E(DS0). (Wolf et al. 2003) cf. Al-Saif and Markert (2010) "Exemplification" in the LADTB corpus
example
exception
Arg2 specifies an exception to the generalization specified by Arg1. In other words, Arg1 is false because Arg2 is true, but if Arg2 were false, Arg1 would be true. (Prasad et al. 2007)
exception (PDTB)
Relations which expand the discourse and move its narrative or exposition forward. (Prasad et al. 2007) Note that Expansion in the sense of ISO has been equated by Bunt & Prasad (ISA-12) with PDTB EntRel rather than PDTB Expansion. We follow this assessment
expansion
PDTB COMPARISON/Concession/expectation: Arg2 creates an expectation that Arg1 denies. (Prasad et al. 2007) ISO Core-DR: Concession, argument Expectation-raiser (Bunt & Prasad, ISA-12)
expectation
An EXPLANATION-ARGUMENTATIVE relation usually pertain to actions and situations that are independent of the will of an animate agent.The satellite provides a factual explanation for the situation presented in the nucleus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Explanation: Infer a causal relation between DS0 and DS1. (Wolf et al. 2003)
explanation
Explicit discourse connectives ... are drawn primarily from well-defined syntactic classes, i.e., Subordinating conjunctions (e.g., because, when, since, although), Coordinating conjunctions (e.g., and, or, nor):, (ADVP and PP) adverbials (e.g., however, otherwise, then, as a result, for example). (Prasad et al. 2007, PDTB)
explicit connective
Krifka distinguishes between ‘expression focus’ and ‘denotation focus.’ Differences in meaning are only found in the latter kind of focus, on which we concentrate here. The pragmatic use of focus (or ‘management of CG’) does not involve any change in the truth-value of the sentence. Only the semantic use of focus (or ‘content of CG’) has such an effect. Pragmatic uses of focus include answers to wh-questions, corrections, confirmations, parallel expressions and delimitations. (Féry et al. 2007)
expression focus
extra
Register related to an expression that is intended to be clever and funny but that is really silly and annoying. (Longma DCE; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1991)
Facts AOs involve attribution to an agent of an evaluation towards or knowledge of a proposition whose truth is taken for granted (i.e., presupposed). Fact AOs are associated with a “factive” type of attribution (“Ftv” for short), conveyed by “factive” and “semi-factive verbs” (Kiparsky and Kiparsky, 1971; Karttunen, 1971) such as regret, forget, remember, know, see, hear, etc. (Prasad et al. 2007, PDTB)
factive factuality
factual condition
Oza et al. (2009) suggested to abandon the PDTB distinction between FactualPastCondition and FactualPresentCondition.
factual condition (HDRB)
Arg2 describes a situation that is assumed to have taken place at a time in the past, and in Arg1, a consequence that may subsequently occur assuming Arg2 holds. (Prasad et al. 2007)
factual past condition (PDTB)
Arg2 is a situation that has either been presented as a fact in the prior discourse or is believed by somebody other than the speaker/writer. “Factual present” is really a special case of the subtype “hypothetical”. (Prasad et al. 2007)
factual present condition (PDTB)
PDTB (applied to AttributionObjects) Classification of Attribute relations with respect to the "Type", i.e., the nature of the relationship between agents and AOs, leading to different inferences about the degree of factuality of the AO (Prasad et al. 2007).
factuality
ISO Substitution with argument favoured alternative
favoured alternative
Mononuclear relation linking a dialogue act with a responsive communicative function (feedback act) with its scope. The nucleus is the scope. Corresponds to ISO Feedback Dependence with argument feedback act.
feedback act
Mononuclear relation linking the scope of a feedback act with the feedback act. The nucleus is the feedback act. Corresponds to ISO Feedback Dependence with argument Feedback Scope.
feedback scope
for nerd:FictionalCharacter. As this is not supported by an external extractor, it is deprecated.
Focus indicates the presence of alternatives that are relevant for the interpretation of linguistic expressions. (Féry et al. 2007) That part of an expression which provides the most relevant information in a particular context as opposed to the (not so relevant) rest of information making up the background of the utterance. Typically, focus on a subexpression indicates that it is selected from possible alternatives that are either implicit or given explicitly, whereas the background can be derived from the context of the utterance. (SFB632 Guidelines) Foci are classified here according to their discourse function (independently from their structural realization).
focus
Structural domain that corresponds to the scope of the focus. (van Valin & Lapolla 1997)
focus domain
Supplementary information given outside of the body of the text, usually at the end of a document in this corpus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
footnote
Formal register. (12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1992)
An element that is realized at a particularly prominent (sentence-initial) position and defines a spatio-temporal context with reference to which an utterance is to be interpreted (Erteschik-Shir 1994).
frame setting topic
For nerd:Function (=opencalais:Position, dbo:PersonFunction), a NERD core class that seems to designate ranks and professions, albeit some of these are subsumed under nerd:Person. Because of the unclear definition and the unclear relation with nerd:Person, this is marked as deprecated.
FONC
function
person function
position
Every time that ||Arg2|| holds true , ||Arg1|| is also caused to be true. (Prasad et al. 2007)
general condition (PDTB)
Arg2 summarizes Arg1, or in some cases expresses a conclusion based on Arg1. Typical connectives for “generalization” are in sum, overall, finally, etc. (Prasad et al. 2007) Infer a set of entities from DS0, E(DS0), and a set of entities from DS1, E(DS1). Then find some element in E(DS0) that is a member or subset of the corresponding element in E(DS1). • Infer a set of entities from DS0, E(DS0), and a set of entities from DS1, E(DS1). Then find some element in E(DS0) that is a new instantiation of an entity in E(DS1). (Wolf et al. 2003)
generalization
A referent is accessible to a hearer on grounds of the hearer's world knowledge or knowledge the speaker presupposes the hearer to have. (Lambrecht 1994)
generally accessible
introduced as a generalization over nerd:Space subclasses pertaining to natural features and waterways (canals and lakes can be artificial)
Description of a specific form used in a certain region as opposed to another form used in another region (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1851)
A referent is given it is mentioned in the previous discourse, cf. Prince (1982) "textually evoked", Prince (1988) "discourse old". For given referents, different hierarchies of cognitive states and corresponding referring expressions have been proposed (e.g. Levelt 1989, Ariel 1990, Gundel et al. 1993, Chafe 1996). As these conceptualizations are, however, often incompatible with each other, I only propose one subcategory here, i.e. referents that are particularly prominent (salient, active, in focus).
given
ISO Purpose: Asymmetric relation in which Arg2 is the goal or purpose of Arg1. Mononuclear relation that corresponds to ISO Purpose with argument goal ("purpose"). The goal is the satellite. Cf. SemDok Purpose-n
goal
The “Goal” sense: Under the “Contingency” class, we have added a new type “Goal”, which applies to relations where the situation described in one of the arguments is the goal of the situation described in the other argument (which enables the achievement of the goal). (Oza et al. 2009, also adopted by Tonelli et al. 2010)
goal (HDRB)
habitual cooccurrence
The WSJ articles in our corpus did not include headings, so this schema was not used in tagging the corpus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
heading
-HLN (headline) — marks headlines and datelines. Note that headlines and datelines always constitute a unit of text that is structurally independent from the following sentence. (Bies et al. 1995)
introduced for nerd:Holiday, subclass of nerd:Time
special form of language used when talking about those in positions of social situation (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2347)
for nerd:Hospital
Subordinating or Mononuclear Relations (RST): The most frequent structural pattern is that two spans of text (virtually always adjacent, but exceptions can be found) are related such that one of them has a specific role relative to the other. A paradigm case is a claim followed by evidence for the claim. RST posits an "Evidence" relation between the two spans. It also says that the claim is more essential to the text than the particular evidence, and this essentiality is represented by calling the claim span a nucleus and the evidence span a satellite. (Mann and Taboada 2010)
hypotactic discourse relation
If Arg2 holds true, Arg1 is caused to hold at some instant in all possible futures. However, Arg1 can be true in the future independently of Arg2. (Prasad et al. 2007) In a HYPOTHETICAL relation, the satellite presents a situation that is not fac- tual, but that one supposes or conjectures to be true. The nucleus presents the consequences that would arise should the situation come true. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
hypothetical condition
Designation of a unique entity or a singleton concept (CC)
introduced as generalization over NamedEntity, Apellation and lexinfo:partNumber
Implicit discourse connectives (...) are inserted between paragraph-internal adjacent sentence pairs not related explicitly by any of the syntactically-defined set of Explicit connectives. (...) the reader must attempt to infer a discourse relation between the adjacent sentences, and “annotation” consists of inserting a connective expression that best conveys the inferred relation. Connectives inserted in this way to express inferred relations are called Implicit connectives. Multiple discourse relations (Webber et al., 1999) can also be inferred, and are annotated by inserting multiple Implicit connectives. The goal of annotating Implicit connectives in the PDTB is to capture relations between abstract objects that are not realized explicitly in the text (by one of a set of the lexically-defined Explicit connectives) and are left to be inferred by the reader. (Prasad et al. 2007, PDTB)
implicit connective
In PDTB: Two kinds of implicit relations are distinguished: ImplicitConnectives (where a connective and an associated relation can be inferred) and EntityRelations (where neither connective nor relation can be inferred but referential coherence is observed). While the former is actually annotated in PDTB, the latter is not, hence no subclass here. PDTB Entity Relation: no discourse relation can be inferred and where the second sentence only serves to provide some further description of an entity in the first sentence (akin to entity-based coherence (Knott et al., 2001)) Entity-based coherence captures cases where the implicit relation between adjacent sentences is not between their AO interpretations, but is rather a form of entity-based coherence (Knott et al., 2001) in which the same entity is realized in both sentences
PDTB Entity Relation: no discourse relation can be inferred and where the second sentence only serves to provide some further description of an entity in the first sentence (akin to entity-based coherence (Knott et al., 2001)) Entity-based coherence captures cases where the implicit relation between adjacent sentences is not between their AO interpretations, but is rather a form of entity-based coherence (Knott et al., 2001) in which the same entity is realized in both sentences
implicit relation
Special rhetorical uses of if-constructions when the intepretation of the conditional construction is an implicit assertion. (Prasad et al. 2007)
implicitly asserted condition (PDTB)
to denote something that cannot be considered as being correct in a given language
Register of terms that are company-specific and not readily recognized outside this environment. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1993)
indefinite
Classification of Attribute relations with respect to their "determinacy", which signals a context that cancels what would otherwise be an entailment of attribution. The determinacy feature captures the fact that the attribution over a relation or argument can itself be cancelled in particular contexts, such as within negated, conditional, and infinitive contexts. The attribution over a relation or argument can itself be cancelled in particular contexts, such as within negated, conditional, and infinitive contexts. Such indeterminacy is indicated by the value “Indet”. (Prasad et al. 2007)
indeterminate attribution
A referent is (textually) inferrable if the hearer constructs a mental representation of the referent on the basis of the earlier realization of another, related referent. Syn. "bridging" (Clark & Clark 1976)
inferrable
Givenness A feature X of an expression α is a Givenness feature iff X indicates whether the denotation of α is present in the CG or not, and/or indicates the degree to which it is present in the immediate CG. (Féry et al. 2007)
A property of discourse referents, hence referring expressions. This hierarchy is organized following the criteria of hearer new/hearer old and discourse new/discourse old of Prince (1988), the terminology is inspired by Lambrecht (1994) and Chafe (1996).
information status
Said of a term that does not appear frequently. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1985)
Since attribution can have scope over an entire relation, arguments can be annotated with a fourth value “Inh”, to indicate that their source value is inherited from the relation. (Prasad et al. 2007)
inherited attribution source
for nerd:Insect and extractiv:INSECT
Arg1 evokes a set and Arg2 describes it in further detail. Typical connectives often tagged as “Instantiation” are for example, for instance and specifically. (Prasad et al. 2007) ISO DR-Core Excemplification, argument Instance
instantiation
A term that has the same or nearly identical orthographic or phonemic form in many languages. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-320)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-320, TODO: check treatment as register feature
In interpretation relations, one side of the relation gives a different perspective on the situation presented in the other side. It is subjective, presenting the personal opinion of the writer or of a third party. An interpretation can be: 1) an explanation of what is not immediately plain or explicit; 2) an explanation of actions, events, or statements by pointing out or suggesting inner relationships, motives, or by relating particulars to general principles; or 3) an understanding or appreciation of a situation in light of individual belief, judgment, interest, or circumstance. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) cf. SemDok Interpretation
interpretation
interpretation (RST)
An INVERTED-SEQUENCE is a multinuclear list of events presented in reverse chronological order. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
inverted sequence
Register for irony. (12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1994)
for nerd:Island
generalization over SemDok Joint and RST Joint. As SemDok does not provide definitions, it is unclear whether these are equivalent,
joint
Joint represents the lack of a rhetorical relation between the nuclei. (Mann and Taboada 2010)
joint (RST)
Epistemic uses of the connective “because” are labelled as “Pragmatic cause:justification”. (Prasad et al. 2007) RST "Justify": R's comprehending S increases R's readiness to accept W's right to present N (Mann and Taboada 2010) Cf. SemDok Justify, subclass of Support.
justification
The values assigned to some shared property are taken to be alternatives (e.g., John paid $5 but Mary paid $10.) (Prasad et al. 2007)
juxtaposition (PDTB)
for nerd:Lake
Used for terms that are legally defined and used in legally binding documents. (cf. http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-380)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-380, but rendered as a feature of individual terms, there
for nerd:Legislature
for nerd:Lighthouse
An item comparable to others linked to it by the List relation. (Mann and Taboada 2010) Arg1 and Arg2 are members of a list, defined in the prior discourse. “List” does not require the situations specified in Arg1 and Arg2 to be directly related. (Prasad et al. 2007) A LIST is a multinuclear relation whose elements can be listed, but which are not in a comparison, contrast or other, stronger type of multinuclear relation. A LIST relation usually exhibits some sort of parallel structure between the units involved in the relation. At lower levels of the discourse structure, such as between clauses or sentences, a LIST relation is often selected when there is some sort of parallel syntactic or semantic structure between the units, such as in the examples below. At higher levels of the discourse structure, the relation may be found when there are paragraphs of items enumerated in a similar fashion. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Axiomatization follows SemDok. In particular, we assume that Lists do not follow any natural order, their order thus reflects an (implicit) purpose of the speaker. They are thus interpersonal (presentational) relations. Note that we skipped the SemDok subclass List-dm_other, as its definition is unclear.
list
Introduced as generalization over List and Sequence in analogy with SemDok. However, note that this is not a discourse relation proper, but a specific case of ParatacticDiscourseRelation for which no semantic relation except for paratactic organization can be provided.
list sequence
for nerd:Magazine sub nerd:Product
A manner satellite explains the way in which something is done. (It sometimes also expresses some sort of similarity/comparison.) The satellite answers the question “in what manner?” or “in what way?”. A MANNER relation is less “goal-oriented” than a MEANS relation, and often is more of a description of the style of an action. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
manner (RST)
NERD seems to have been designed for economic purposes, so all objects (non-animate, concrete entitites) are described as "product". Here, we go with the more neutral term "ManufacturedObject". for nerd:Product, subclass of nerd:Thing, not a NERD core class.
PROD
consumer product
product
manufactured object
An object on the map used for deictic references. Language expressions may also depend on the visual, as opposed to verbal, context. An utterance like Could you pass me the salt? , uttered, e.g., at a restaurant, is usually understandable even if salt hasn’t been mentioned before; the recipient can recover the referent of the expression the salt from the visual context. (An even clearer example is Could you please close the window? .) We will use the term deictic references to refer to these expressions. (Artstein & Poesio, 2006, ARRAU)
map object
A markable refers to an element that is subject to annotation. Annotation schemes for coreference annotation *applied to plain text* usually require explicitly defined markables, for example. The notion of Markable is somewhat problematic in its relation to DiscourseSegment. An RST elementary discourse unit (discourse segment) is basically a markable (almost-arbitrary plain String) together with a label, but an SDRT discourse segment is a structured semantic entity. Here, we remain agnostic. It is thus possible to define a joint subclass of DiscourseSegment and Markable for RST, for example.
markable
for nerd:Mayor, originally sub Person, here sub Politician. As this is not supported by an external extractor, it is deprecated.
ISO Manner is an asymmetric discourse relation in which the means (Arg1) is a way in which the achievement (Arg2) comes about or occurs. Corresponds to ISO Manner with argument means. Nucleus is the achievement. cf. SemDok Means: mononuclear, interpersonal
means
A means satellite specifies a method, mechanism, instrument, channel or con- duit for accomplishing some goal. It should tell you how something was or is to be accomplished. In other words, the satellite answers a “by which means?”or “how?” question that can be assigned to the nucleus. It is often indicated by the preposition by. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
means (RST)
introduced as a generalization over various nerd:Products
for nerd:MilitaryConflict
conflict
military conflict
Currently in use. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1962)
modern usage
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1962 (modern)
subClassOf dating (dcif:conceptualDomain)
Comprehending S increases R's desire to perform action in N (Mann and Taboada 2010)
motivation (RST)
for nerd:Mountain
for nerd:Movie sub nerd:Product
film
movie name
movie
for nerd:Museum
for nerd:MusicalArtist, there subclass of nerd:Person. Cf. yahoo:music_artist
introduced as a generalization over nerd:Band and related terms, e.g., orchestra. A musical ensemble, also known as a music group or musical group, is a group of people who perform instrumental or vocal music, with the ensemble typically known by a distinct name. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musical_ensemble)
segment of text for which one or many rigid designators stands for the referent (Gil Francopoulo; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2275)
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-2275, note that the definition refers to the text that designates the entity, not the entity itself; consider renaming to NameOfEntity
Wide focus and narrow focus represent an often-adopted, coarse-grained subclassification of foci according to their scope. Narrow focus means that one single constituent is in focus, whereas wide focus means that multiple constituents are in focus. (Fiedler & Chiarcos)
narrow focus
This relation marks a negative attribution. The negation must be in the satel- lite, or source, of the attribution in order for the ATTRIBUTION-N relation to hold. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) Verbs of attribution are negated on the surface - syntactically (e.g., didn’t say, don’t think) or lexically (e.g., denied), and the negation reverses the polarity of the attributed relation or argument content (Horn, 1978). The interpretation of the contrastive relation denoted by but requires that Arg2 should be interpreted under the scope of negation. (Prasad et al. 2007)
negated attribution
ISO: Asymmetric relation in which Arg1 is an unrealized situation which, when not realized, would lead to Arg2. Roughly comparable to UnrealPastCondition and UnrealPresentCondition in PDTB. For HDRB, Oza et al. (2009) suggested to abandon the original tense distinction of PDTB.
Introduced as a generalization over PDTB FactualPastCondition and FactualPresentCondition in accordance with HDRB. Roughly corresponds to ISO Condition with argument antecedent.
negative condition
The scopal polarity feature is annotated on relations and their arguments to identify cases where verbs of attribution are negated on the surface - syntactically (e.g., didn’t say, don’t think) or lexically (e.g., denied), but where the negation in fact reverses the polarity of the attributed relation or argument content (Horn, 1978). Example (162) illustrates such a case. The but clause entails an interpretation such as I think it’s not a main consideration, for which the negation must take narrow scope over the embedded clause rather than the higher clause. In particular, the interpretation of the contrastive relation denoted by but requires that Arg2 should be interpreted under the scope of negation. (162) “Having the dividend increases is a supportive element in the market outlook, but I don’t think it’s a main consideration,” he says. (0090) To capture such entailments with surface negations on attribution verbs, an argument of a connective is marked “Neg” for scopal polarity when the interpretation of the connective requires the surface negation to take semantic scope over the lower argument. Thus, in Example (162), scopal polarity is marked as “Neg” for Arg2. (Prasad et al. 2007)
negative polarity
The register appropriate to general texts or discourse. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1999)
A referent is new if at a given point in discourse, the hearer does not have a mental representation of this referent. (Prince 1988: "hearer-new")
new
New-information focus (nf) is that part of the utterance providing the new and missing information which serves to develop the discourse. (SFB632 Guidelines) WORDS: Who is reading a book? NFocus:[ _nf Who] is reading a book? WORDS: Mary is reading a book. NFocus: [ _nf Mary] is reading a book. (5.2.1) Also referred to as "assertive focus" or "completive focus".
new information focus
for nerd:Newspaper sub nerd:Product
non contrastive comparison
Instances of reported speech, both direct and indirect, should be marked for the rhetorical relation of ATTRIBUTION. The satellite is the source of the attribution (a clause containing a reporting verb, or a phrase beginning with according to), and the nucleus is the content of the reported message (which must be in a separate clause). The ATTRIBUTION relation is also used with cognitive predicates, to include feelings, thoughts, hopes, etc. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
non negated attribution
for nerd:NonProfitOrganization. As this is not supported by an external extractor, it is deprecated.
non referring
S, by means other than motivating a volitional action, caused N; without the presentation of S, R might not know the particular cause of the situation; a presentation of N is more central than S to W's purposes in putting forth the N-S combination. (Mann and Taboada 2010)
non volitional cause (RST)
N caused S; presentation of N is more central to W's purposes in putting forth the N-S combination than is the presentation of S. (Mann and Taboada 2010)
non volitional result (RST)
Source is some arbitrary individual(s) indicated via a non-specific reference in the text. (Prasad et al. 2007)
nonspecific attribution source
introduced as an abstraction over nerd:Product and :ManufacturedObject
Narrow focus on the object argument. (Fiedler)
object focus
Old: Used in the past. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1961) Outdated form: A term or lexeme that has fallen from fashion, but the meaning of which is readily recognizable.(Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-505)
old usage
http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1961, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-505
for nerd:OperatingSystem, subclass of nerd:Product
operating system
verb/predicate operator focus includes most importantly "verum" focus (truth value focus, polarity focus) (Güldemann et al. 2010)
operator focus
The values assigned to some shared property are the extremes of a gradable scale, e.g., tall-short, accept-reject etc. (Prasad et al. 2007)
opposition (PDTB)
for nerd:Organization, a NERD core class. As for organizations, we assume that this refers to organizations that are (or can be registered as) legal persons. In that sense, they are Concrete (because they are defined by a specific legal act)- In NERD, however, these are core concepts.
ORG
organization
A particular type of referent has been introduced before, the current referent specifies a new instantiation of this type, overtly marked by "other" (Poesio & Artstein 2006).
other
This is a mutually exclusive relation between two elements of equal importance. The situations presented by both the satellite and the nucleus are unrealized. Realizing the situation associated with the nucleus will prevent the realization of the consequences associated with the satellite. This relation may also be multinuclear. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
otherwise (RST)
Infer a set of entities from DS0, E(DS0), and a set of entities from DS1, E(DS1). Then infer commonalities between members of E(DS0) and E(DS1). (Wolf et al. 2003)
parallel
paratactic discourse relation
for nerd:Park
The referent is a part of another referent mentioned before (Poesio & Artstein 2006).
part of
A referent is a subset, an element, or a component of another referent mentioned before. (Stuttgart Guidelines)
part whole
Categories specified for referring expressions (Poesio & Artstein 2006): Abstract, Animate, Concrete, Person, Plan, Space, Time. Corresponds to nerd:Person
PERS
person
Property that refers to the person. (http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1946)
subClassOf referentType (dcif:conceptualDomain)
for nerd:PhoneNumber sub nerd:Product
A restatement relation is always mononuclear. The satellite and nucleus are of (roughly) comparable size. The satellite reiterates the information presented in the nucleus, typically with slightly different wording. It does not add to or interpret the information. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
plain restatement (RST)
plan
POINT-OF-ORIGIN refers to the geographic location in which the events in the story take place. Use this schema if this information is designated separately at the beginning or end of the article or section of the article. It should be linked to a TEXT or SECTIONTEXT schema. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
point of origin
PDTB: applied to attributions Classification of Attribute relations with respect to their "scopal polarity", marked when surface negated attribution reverses the polarity of the attributed AO. The scopal polarity feature is annotated on relations and their arguments to identify cases where verbs of attribution are negated on the surface - syntactically (e.g., didn’t say, don’t think) or lexically (e.g., denied), but where the negation in fact reverses the polarity of the attributed relation or argument content (Horn, 1978). (Prasad et al. 2007)
polarity
"truth value focus", "polarity focus" Context: I cannot imagine that the princess kissed the slippery frog. example: Yes, she DID kiss him. (Güldemann et al. 2010)
polarity focus
for nerd:PoliticalEvent
introduced as generalization over PoliticalParty and nerd:Legislature
missing from NERD, however, nerd:PoliticalEvent was subclass of alchemyapi:PoliticalParty. This seems to have been misunderstood.
political party
introduced as a generalization over nerd subclasses of Space that have a special political or social function, e.g., city, county, etc.
for nerd:Politician and zemanta:politician
Relative to the possession or association. (www.wordreference.com/English/definition.asp?en=possessive; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1355)
Value that denotes a linguistic situation considered as being correct in the given language
Arg1 expresses a claim and Arg2 provides justification for this claim. There is no causal influence between the two situations. (Prasad et al. 2007)
pragmatic cause
Suggested as an extension of the PDTB scheme by Oza et al. (2009).
pragmatic concession (HDRB)
In the LUNA corpus (Tonelli et al. 2010), PragmaticConcession is a sibling concept of SpeechActConcession, EpistemicConcession and PropositionalConcession. Apparently, PragmaticConcession_LUNA has more specific semantics than just being a generalization over these types so that it is represented independently here.
pragmatic concession (LUNA)
Conditional constructions whose interpretation deviates from that of the semantics of “Condition”. Arg1 and Arg2 are causally related. In all cases, Arg1 holds true independently of Arg2. (Prasad et al. 2007)
pragmatic condition
The connective indicates a contrast between one of the arguments and an inference that can be drawn from the other, in many cases at the speech act level: The contrast is not between the situations described in Arg1 and Arg2. (Prasad et al. 2007)
pragmatic contrast (PDTB)
PragmaticRelations are anaphoric, inferential or discourse-structural links between PragmaticCategories, e.g., DiscourseEntities, or AnnotationUnits. Here, these are represented by an individual that represents the relation, and two properties hasSource and hasTarget that link is with the individuals that actually are connected by this relationship. Note that "pragmatics" is used in a broad sense as opposed to semantics, hence discourse annotations are in its scope.
cf. SemDok DiscourseRelation, which comprises both BridgingRelation and RhetoricalRelation.
pragmatic relation
PragmaticCategory covers different information-structural, discourse-structural and classical pragmatic categories, structures and entities. Note that "pragmatics" is used in a broad sense as opposed to semantics, hence discourse annotations are in its scope.
pragmatic unit
The connective indicates that the situation in Arg1 precedes the situation described in Arg2. (Prasad et al. 2007)
precedence relation
Narrow focus on the predicate. (Fiedler) predicate is the host of two major functions relating to focus (a) it instantiates an illocutionary act which relates to different operators (b) it identifies/selects a state of affairs (Güldemann et al. 2010) Not to be confused with "predicate focus", as this is applied here to wide verb phrase focus following Lambrecht (1994)
predicate centered focus
Following Lambrecht (1994), predicate focus is wide verb phrase focus. Not to be confused with PredicateCenteredFocus.
predicate focus
The relation compares two situations, acts, events, etc., and assigns a clear preference for one of the situations, acts, events, etc. The preferred situation, act, event, etc. is the nucleus. (Lynn Carlson and Daniel Marcu. 2001. Discourse Tagging Manual. ISI Tech Report ISI-TR-545. July 2001. http://www.isi.edu/~marcu/discourse/tagging-ref-manual.pdf)
preference (RST)
Preferred Term: A term rated according to the scale of a term acceptability rating as the primary term for a given concept. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-376)
RST-DTB Preference relation: The relation compares two situations, acts, events, etc., and assigns a clear preference for one of the situations, acts, events, etc. The preferred situation, act, event, etc. is the nucleus. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
preferred alternative (RST)
introduced as generalization over Preparation in RST and SemDok. Axiomatization follows SemDok
preparation
for SemDok Preparation-question I assume that this is basically equivalent with RhetoricalQuestion_RST, but note that SemDok does not provide explicit definitions.
preparation question
preparation title
S precedes N in the text; S tends to make R more ready, interested or oriented for reading N (Mann and Taboada 2010)
preparation (RST)
"[In RST] a distinction is made between Subject-Matter relations and Presentational relations. Subject-Matter relations express parts of the subject matter of the text. The Presentational relations facilitate the presentation process." (http://www.sfu.ca/rst/01intro/intro.html)
cf. SemDok InterpersonalRelation, no definition given there, but the conventional definition alludes to RST "presentational relations". Conventional definition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metafunction#Ideational_function): The interpersonal function refers to the grammatical choices that enable speakers to enact their complex and diverse interpersonal relations. This tenet of systemic functional linguistics is based on the claim that a speaker not only talks about something, but is always talking to and with others.
presentational relation
Introduced as generalization over Problem-Solution in RST-DTB and SemDok. In a problem-solution relation, one textual span presents a problem, and the other text span presents a solution. The relation may be mononuclear or multinuclear, depending on the context. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) RST "Solutionhood": R recognizes N as a solution to the problem presented in S. (Mann and Taboada 2010)
problem solution
problem solution (RST)
for nerd:ProgrammingLanguage sub nerd:Product. Marked as deprecated as its qualification as a product is hardly justifiable. after renaming Product to "Manufactured Object", this is a valid concept, again
A PROPORTION relation expresses a proportionality or equivalence of tendency or degree between two nuclei. It is always multinuclear. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
proportion (RST)
Cognitive representation of the information conveyed in a particular clause or sentence. Not to be confused with "proposition" in semantics (Kintsch REF).
proposition
An extension of the PDTB scheme suggested by Oza et al. (2009). Each pragmatic sense at the type level is further distinguished into three subtypes: “epis- temic” (Sweetser 1990), “speech-act” (Sweetser 1990), and “propositional”. The propositional subtype involves the inference of a complete proposition. The relation is then taken to hold between this inferred proposition and the propo- sitional content of one of the arguments. (Oza et al. 2009)
propositional cause (HDRB)
Suggested as an extension of the PDTB scheme by Oza et al. (2009) and Tonelli et al. (2010). Each pragmatic sense at the type level is further distinguished into three subtypes: “epis- temic” (Sweetser 1990), “speech-act” (Sweetser 1990), and “propositional”. The propositional subtype involves the inference of a complete proposition. The relation is then taken to hold between this inferred proposition and the propo- sitional content of one of the arguments. (Oza et al. 2009)
propositional concession (HDRB)
propositional condition (HDRB)
Suggested as an extension of the PDTB scheme by Oza et al. (2009). Each pragmatic sense at the type level is further distinguished into three subtypes: “epis- temic” (Sweetser 1990), “speech-act” (Sweetser 1990), and “propositional”. The propositional subtype involves the inference of a complete proposition. The relation is then taken to hold between this inferred proposition and the propo- sitional content of one of the arguments. (Oza et al. 2009)
propositional contrast (HDRB)
Proposition AOs involve attribution to an agent of his/her commitment towards the truth of a proposition. A further distinction captures differences in the degree of that commitment, by distinguishing between “assertions” and “beliefs”. (Prasad et al. 2007, PDTB)
propositional factuality
A brief popular axiom or saying. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-353)
purpose-s (SemDok)
The situation presented in the satellite of a purpose relation is only putative, i.e., it is yet to be achieved. Most often it can be paraphrased as “in order to”. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) cf. SemDok Purpose-n
purpose (RST)
In a question-answer relation, one textual span poses a question (not necessarily realized as an interrogative sentence), and the other text span answers the question. The relation may be mononuclear or multinuclear, depending on the context. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
question answer (RST)
for nerd:RadioProgram sub nerd:Product
for nerd:RadioStation sub nerd:Organization
Said of a term that is almost never used. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1986)
PDTB Reason. This is introduced as a generalization over RST Reason because it does not come with assumptions about nuclearity.
reason
The nucleus must be an action carried out by an animate agent. Only animate agents can have reasons for performing actions. You can paraphrase it as “Satellite is the reason for Nucleus.” (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
reason (RST)
referentiality
referring
referring expression
In PDTB, Relations are organized according to their structural type (material manifestation). To avoid a terminological clash, these are referred to as RelationCue here. EntityRelations, however, do not represent a RelationCue as they are not physically materialized, but need to be inferred.
relation cue
The conditional clause in the “relevance” conditional (Arg2) provides the context in which the description of the situation in Arg1 is relevant. There is no causal relation between the two arguments. (Prasad et al. 2007)
relevance conditional (PDTB)
Mononuclear solicited response relation that links the antecedent act, e.g., a question, to the dependent act, i.e., the response. The nucleus is the response. Corresponds to ISO Functional Dependency with argument role "anteceent act".
request for comment
Mononuclear solicited response relation that links the dependent act, e.g., an answer or another response act, to the antececent act, e.g., a question. The nucleus is the antecedent act. Corresponds to ISO Functional Dependency with argument role "dependent act".
response act
The semantics of Arg2 restates the semantics of Arg1. It is inferred that the situations described in Arg1 and Arg2 hold true at the same time. (Prasad et al. 2007) An item is primarily a reexpression of one linked to it (Mann and Taboada 2010). cf. Al-Saif and Markert (2010) "Reformulation" in the LADTB corpus
restatement
for nerd:Restaurant
Result corresponds to ISO Cause with argument Result. Note that the other argument can be either a pragmatic cause (Justification) or a semantic cause (Reason), so we expect the difference between different kinds of causes to be expressed in the cause argument. PDTB Result, also generalizes over RST Result, but doesn't come with constraints on nuclearity. Corresponds to SemDoc ResultPurpose
result
The situation presented in the satellite is the cause of the situation presented in the nucleus. The result, which is the nucleus, is the most important part. Without presenting the satellite, the reader may not know what caused the result in the nucleus. In contrast to a PURPOSE relation, the situation presented in the nucleus of a result relation is factual, i.e., it is achieved. The intention of the writer is to emphasize the result. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) cf. SemDok Result.
result (RST)
In a RHETORICAL-QUESTION relation, the satellite poses a question vis-a-vis a segment of the text; the intention of the author is usually not to answer it, but rather, to raise an issue for the reader to consider, or to raise an issue for which the answer should be obvious. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
rhetorical question (RST)
for nerd:River
for nerd:Road
A referent represents another instantiation of the same type of another pre-mentioned referent. (Stuttgart Guidelines)
same type
A pseudo-relation used as a device for linking two discontinuous text fragments that are really a single EDU, but which are broken up by an embedded unit. Examples of embedded units that can break up other EDUs include: relative clauses, other nominal postmodifiers, parentheticals, participial clauses, etc. By convention, this relation is always multinuclear. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) If a DS has intervening material; the “Same” relation is no coherence relation, but a “trick” that allows dealing with DSs nested in other DSs. (Wolf et al. 2003)
same unit (RST)
for nerd:SchoolNewspaper, but this is a subclass of nerd:Product
Often, an article will be broken up structurally into distinct sections represent- ing different topics. In this case, the schema SectionText is used. Most often, each section will be labeled, so there will be a corresponding SECTIONTITLE and SECTIONTEXT. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
section text
Often, an article will be broken up structurally into distinct sections represent- ing different topics. Most often, each section will be labeled, so there will be a corresponding SECTIONTITLE and SECTIONTEXT. Usually, the section title occurs on a separate line. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
section title
semantic alternative (LUNA)
The situations described in Arg1 and Arg2 are causally influenced and the two are not in a conditional relation. (Prasad et al. 2007) PDTB Reason. This is introduced as a generalization over RST Reason because it does not come with assumptions about nuclearity. The classification of causal relations in RST/RSTDTB and PDTB is hard to be aligneable, further, hence original definitions preserved with suffixed relations Cf. SemDok CausePurpose (but this is limited to HypotacticDiscourseRelations).
semantic cause
Suggested as an extension of the PDTB scheme by Oza et al. (2009) and Tonelli et al. (2010).
semantic concession (HDRB)
The situation in Arg2 is taken to be the condition and the situation described in Arg1 is taken to be the consequence, i.e., the situation that holds when the condition is true. Unlike “Cause”, however, the truth value of the arguments of a “Condition” relation cannot be determined independently of the connective. (Prasad et al. 2007) In a CONDITION relation, the truth of the proposition associated with the nucleus is a consequence of the fulfillment of the condition in the satellite. The satellite presents a situation that is not realized. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
semantic condition
Identified with RST Condition because of its association with the markers "as long as", "until", and "if", cf. Prasad et al. (2007).
semantic conjunction (LUNA)
Arg1 and Arg2 share a predicate or property and a difference is highlighted with respect to the values assigned to the shared property. (Prasad et al. 2007)
semantic contrast (PDTB)
The SemanticFeatures enlisted here are drawn from discourse annotations. These are to move to the Reference Model
semantic feature
semantic goal (LUNA)
introduced to account for SemDok SententialDiscourseSegment
sentence
sentence focus
from SemDok It seems, however, that this conflates aspects of discourse structure with surface syntax, so whether this is a valid segment different from discourse segment or complex discourse segment may be debated.
sentential discourse segment
A SEQUENCE is a multinuclear list of events presented in chronological order. (Carlson and Marcu 2001) There is a succession relationship between the situations in the nuclei (Mann and Taboada 2010). cf. SemDok Sequence. We follow SemDok in assuming that the difference between Sequence and List is that a sequence has a natural (i.e., spatio-temporal) order and is thus an ideational (subject-matter) relation, whereas a list has no such order and is thus compiled and organized for a particular purpose, i.e., interpersonal (presentational) in nature. This is a design decision that may be reconsidered.
sequence
The referent denotes a subset or an element of a set mentioned before (Poesio & Artstein 2006).
set
for nerd:ShoppingMall
A SIGNATURE-BLOCK is a section of the document that may contain a person’s name, title and company. If these occur on multiple lines, each line should be treated as a separate EDU, and all should be linked via a LIST relation before the SIGNATURE-BLOCK label is selected. This occurs in letters to the editor in the WSJ corpus. This schema is linked to the schema TEXT (if the entire article is a letter) or SECTIONTEXT (if only a portion of the article is a letter). (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
signature block
ISO: Similarity is a symmetric discourse relation in which one or more similarities between Arg1 and Arg2 are highlighted with respect to what each predicates as a whole or to some entities they mention. COMPARISON.Similarity applies when the connective indicates that the two arguments express similar abstract objects. It is therefore a complement to the contrast relation. (Al-Saif and Markert 2010, LADTB) Also applied in the HDRB (Oza et al. 2009).
similarity
A referent is situationally accessible, if it has not been mentioned before, but it is prominent in the given situational environment (Lambrecht 1994, Chafe 1996, cf. Prince 1982 "situationally evoked").
situationally accessible
An extremely informal register of a word, term, or text that is used in spoken and everyday language and less commonly in documents. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1995)
for nerd:SoccerClub sub nerd:Organization. However, this is probably too specific, hence marked as deprecated.
for nerd:SoccerPlayer, sub nerd:Person. Probably too specific, hence marked as deprecated.
for nerd:Software
ISO: Functional depenence is an asymmetric relation between a dialogue act with a responsive communicative function (dependent act) and the dialogue act(s) that it responds to (antecedent act). comment: "functional dependence" is an unfortunate term because both "dependency" and "functional" have very different definitions in linguistic syntax (dependency syntax, functional grammar). As a less ambiguous term, we thus propose "response relation". Moreover, as the difference between feedback and response relations *seems* to be that feedback is unsolicited whereas a response is solicited, this dichothomy is used as a naming pattern, here.
solicited response
for nerd:Song, zemanta:track
track
song
The schema SOURCE is used when an article, or section of an article, begins or ends by noting the source of the information presented in the article. It should be linked to a TEXT or SECTIONTEXT schema. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
source
Categories specified for referring expressions (Poesio & Artstein 2006): Abstract, Animate, Concrete, Person, Plan, Space, Time corresponds to nerd:Location
LOC
location
place
space
for nerd:Spacecraft
Arg2 describes the situation described in Arg1 in more detail. Typical connectives for “specification” are specifically, indeed and in fact. (Prasad et al. 2007)
specialized restatement (PDTB)
PDTB Specification ISO Elaboration, argument role SpecificPartOfElaboration
specification
speech act alternative (LUNA)
speech act cause (HDRB)
speech act concession (HDRB)
speech act condition (HDRB)
speech act conjunction (LUNA)
speech act contrast (HDRB)
speech act goal (LUNA)
for nerd:SportEvent
sports event
sport event
for nerd:SportsLeague sub nerd:Organization
introduced as generalization over nerd:SportsLeague, nerd:SportsTeam, nerd:SoccerClub. Note that "sports organization" is somewhat ambiguous. In a broader sense (as adopted here), it refers to any (NERD) organzation concerned with sports, in a stricter sense, it refers to "any organization that serves as the ruling body for an event for one or several sports." (https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/sports-organization)
for nerd:SportsTeam sub nerd:Organization
for nerd:Stadium
Standardized Term: A term that has been standardized by a standardizing body. (Sue Ellen Wright, http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-375)
StateOfAffairFocus, i.e., focus is often (but not necessarily) on a verbal lexeme e.g., Quaestio: What did the princess do with the frog ? Example: She KISSED him. (Güldemann et al. 2010)
state of affair focus
In a STATEMENT-RESPONSE relation, one textual span presents a statement and the other span makes some sort of response to it. The statement may be one actually spoken by someone or the author’s statement of a situation. Similarly, the response may be one actually spoken or a situational response to what is occurring in the statement portion. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
statement response (RST)
for nerd:Station
structural connective
By StructuralFocusType, we mean a classification of foci according to the structural characteristics, i.e., their scope. The subclassification of StructuralFocusType assumed here follows a suggestion by Ines Fiedler (2010, Oct 14).
structural focus type
sub set of
Narrow focus on the subject argument. (Fiedler)
subject focus
cf. SemDok IdeationalRelation, except for disjointness axions there is no definition given there, but the conventional definition alludes to RST "subject-matter relations". Conventional definition (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metafunction#Ideational_function): The ideational function is language concerned with building and maintaining a theory of experience. It includes the experiential function and the logical function. The experiential function refers to the grammatical choices that enable speakers to make meanings about the world around us and inside us ... Halliday describes the logical function as those systems "which set up logical–semantic relationships between one clausal unit and another"
subject matter relation
The connective indicates that the situation described in Arg1 follows the situation described in Arg2. (Prasad et al. 2007)
succession relation
introduced as generalization over RST Summary and SemDok Summary. Axiomatized according to the latter (mononuclear presentational relation).
summary
In a SUMMARY-S relation, the satellite summarizes the information presented in the nucleus. The emphasis is on the situation presented in the nucleus. The size of the summary (the satellite) is shorter than the size of the nucleus. In an SUMMARY-N relation, the nucleus summarizes the information presented in the satellite. The emphasis is on the summary. The size of the summary (the nucleus) is shorter than the size of the satellite. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
summary (RST)
for SemDok Support, mononuclear interpersonal relation
support
The situations described in Arg1 and Arg2 overlap. (Prasad et al. 2007)
synchronous relation
Focus with scope over a tense, aspect, or mood marker (Fiedler & Chiarcos) Quaestio: Is the princess kissing the frog (right now) ? example: She HAS kissed him. (Güldemann et al. 2010; note: example ambiguous with polarity focus)
t a m focus
for nerd:TVStation sub nerd:Organization
TV network
TV station
Register that expresses a situation that people avoid because it is extremely offensive or embarrassing. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1996)
The register appropriate to scientific texts or special languages. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1997)
In a TEMPORAL-AFTER relation, the situation presented in the nucleus (often realized as a superordinate clause) occurs after the situation presented in the satellite (often real- ized as a subordinate clause). When the relation is multinuclear, and the spans occur in temporal order -- i.e., the situation presented in the second segment occurs after the situation presented in the first segment -- select the multinuclear relation SEQUENCE. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
temporal after
In a TEMPORAL-BEFORE relation, the situation presented in the nucleus (often realized as a superordinate clause) occurs before or leading up to the situation in the satellite (often realized as a subordinate clause). When the relation is multinuclear but the spans occur in reverse temporal order -- i.e., the situation presented in the second span occurs before the situation presented in the first span -- select the multinuclear relation INVERTED-SEQUENCE. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
temporal before
The situations described in the arguments are related temporally. (Prasad et al. 2007) Infer a temporal sequence of the events described by DS0 and DS1. There is no causal relation between DS0 and DS1. If there is a causal relation, the relation between DS0 and DS1 should be described as a Cause-Effect relation. (Wolf et al. 2003)
temporal relation
In a TEMPORAL-SAME-TIME relation, the situations presented in the nucleus and satellite occur at approximately the same time, or at least there is an overlap between the two situations. This relation can be mononuclear or multinuclear. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
temporal same time
Indication specifying whether the usage is old or modern.
temporally defined usage
for nerd:TennisPlayer, sub nerd:Person. Probably too specific, hence marked as deprecated.
The schema Text is used to link the main body of the text to other structural elements of the document, such as a FOOTNOTE, SOURCE, HEADING, etc. This schema is used only if the entire body of the text should be linked to another schema. If only a subsection of the text is relevant, the schema SECTIONTEXT is used instead. Occasionally, a WSJ document contains more than one article. In that case, the schema TEXT may be used, for example to link a TITLE and TEXT for each of the three articles included within a single document (see example below under 13. Title). (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
text
This seems to roughly correspond to SemDok Schema (with sub-class ArticleTopLevelSchema). However, note that a schema is an n-ary relation whereas text-organizational relations are binary.
TEXTUAL-ORGANIZATION is a multinuclear relation used to link elements of the structure of the text, for example, to link a title with the body of the text, a section title with the text of a section, etc. The role of the relation is primarily that of enforcing a tree structure on the representation. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
textual organization (RST)
"Pseudo-relations" that represent conventional text-structural relationships between text spans, not strictly speaking discourse relations.
textual organizational relation
Categories specified for referring expressions (Poesio & Artstein 2006): Abstract, Animate, Concrete, Person, Plan, Space, Time. Corresponds to nerd:Time.
time
The WSJ documents from the LDC usually did not include titles. However, in a small number of cases, a WSJ document consisted of more than one article, each of which included a title. In that case the schemata TITLE and TEXT were used. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
title
-TTL (title) — is attached to the top node of a title when this title appears inside running text. -TTL implies -NOM. The internal structure of the title is bracketed as usual. (See section 12 [Titles] for more information about the bracketing of titles.) (Bies et al. 1995)
The topic constituent identifies the entity or set of entities under which the information expressed in the comment constituent should be stored in the CG content. The notion of topic is best understood as a kind of address or file card which specifies the individual or set about which the remainder of the sentence makes a comment (see Reinhart 1981 for such a concept of topicality). It has no truthconditional effect except that it presupposes the existence of that individual. In this sense, the complement of ‘topic’ is ‘comment,’ which can itself be partitioned into a focused and a backgrounded part. Sentences usually have only one topic, but can also have none, or more than one. Following Jacobs (2001), topics can be aboutness or frame-setting topics, and the means to express a topic in the grammar can be pinpointed rather precisely in terms of which syntactic and intonational preferences the topic displays, at least in an intonation language. However, according to Féry’s theses, none of these properties are definitional for topic. Rather they express preferences as to how a ‘good’ topic has to be realized (see also Jacobs 2001 for a similar view). (Féry et al. 2007)
"Topic" is a prominent notion in pragmatics, though often with varying definitions. For detailed definitions, compare the sub-classes.
topic
introduced as generalization over TopicComment_RST and ElaborationThemeRheme (from SemDok). These differ in nuclearity.
topic comment
A general statement or topic of discussion is introduced, after which a specific remark is made on the statement or topic. This relation is always multinuclear, as both spans are necessary to understand the context. When the spans occur in the reverse order, with the comment preceding the topic, the relation COMMENT-TOPIC is selected. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
topic comment (RST)
topic continuity relation
Introduced as a supercategory for RST-DTB relations topic-shift and topic-drift. Both connect large text spans that were no subject to annotation in PDTB. Note that C-TED introduced EXPANSION.Progression in an extension of the PDTB 3 schema. As progression in Chinese refers to aspects of topic continuity, this concept, formerly a direct subclass of CoherenceRelation, has been reconceptualized as a subclass of Expansion.
introduced as generalization over ElaborationDrift (from SemDok) and TopicDrift_RST
topic drift
The relation TOPIC-DRIFT is used to link large textual spans when the topic drifts smoothly from the information presented in the first span to the information presented in the second. The same elements are in focus in both textual units. While this relation may be either mononuclear or multinuclear, it is usually multinuclear. Only select mononuclear if the relative size or importance of one of the spans is less significant than that of the other. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
topic drift (RST)
A topic expression is the expression that denotates the topic referent. (Lambrecht 1994)
topic expression
introduced in analogy to TopicDrift as a generalization over TopicShift_RST.
topic shift
The relation TOPIC-SHIFT is used to link large textual spans when there is a sharp change in focus going from one segment to the other. The same elements are NOT in focus in the two spans. While this relation may be either mononuclear or multinuclear, it is usually multinuclear. Only select mononuclear if the relative size or importance of one of the spans is less significant than that of the other. (Carlson and Marcu 2001)
topic shift (RST)
for nerd:URL sub nerd:Product
S conceivably could affect the realization of N, N does not depend on S. R recognizes that N does not depend on S. (Mann and Taboada 2010) cf. Wolf et al.'s (2003) "ViolatedExpectation": Infer that normally there is a causal relation between DS0 and DS1 but that causal relation is absent between DS0 and DS1.
unconditional
for nerd:University, originally subclass of Organization
S affects the realization of N; N is realized provided that S is not realized. (Mann and Taboada 2010)
unless (RST)
In the absence of an independent occurrence of attribution on an argument, as for Arg2 of Example (158), a “Null” value for the type on the argument means that it needs to be derived by independent (here, undefined) considerations under the scope of the relation. (158) When Mr. Green won a $240,000 verdict in a land condemnation case against the State in June 1983, he says Judge O’Kicki unexpectedly awarded him an additional $100,000. (0267) Note that unlike the “Inh” value of the source feature, “Null” does not indicate inheritance. In a subordinate clause, for example, while the relation denoted by the subordinating conjunction may be asserted, the clause content itself may be “presupposed”, as seems to be the case in (158). However, we found these differences difficult to determine at times, and consequently leave this undefined in the scheme. (Prasad et al. 2007, for PDTB)
unmarked factuality
"Null" marking in PDTB, i.e. Default (or NonNegated)
unmarked polarity
Oza et al. (2009) suggested to abandon the PDTB distinction between UnrealPastCondition and UnrealPresentCondition.
unreal condition (HDRB)
Arg2 describes a situation that did not occur in the past and Arg1 expresses what the consequence would have been if it had. It is inferred from the semantics of this subtype of “Condition” that the situations described in Arg1 and Arg2 did not hold. (Prasad et al. 2007)
unreal past condition (PDTB)
Arg2 describes a condition that either does not hold at present. Arg1 describes what would also hold if Arg2 were true. “Unreal present” represents the semantics of conditional relations also known in the lingustic literature as present counterfactuals (Iatridou, 2000). The semantics for “unreal present” is a special case of the semantics for hypothetical. (Prasad et al. 2007)
unreal present condition (PDTB)
ISO: Asymmetric relation of a feedback act with its scope: Feedback act is a dialogue act with a responsive communicative function; Feedback scope is the dialogue act(s) that the feedback act responds to. Comment: Note that "Dependence" implies an ordering here (in analogy with dependency syntax), however, Bunt and Prasad explicitly argue against such an interpretation in their schema (when comparing it with RST nuclearity). As a less ambigous term, we thus introduce the label "feedback relation". Moreover, as the difference between feedback and response relations *seems* to be that feedback is unsolicited whereas a response is solicited, this dichothomy is used as a naming pattern, here.
unsolicited response
Complete unit of talk, bounded by the speaker's silence. (www.sil.org/linguistics/GlossaryOfLinguisticTerms/WhatIsAnUtterance.htm; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1409)
for nerd:Valley
introduced as a generalization over various nerd:Products that designate means of transportation
for nerd:VideoGame sub nerd:Product
video game
An expression referring to a person to which the utterance is addressed, e.g. Old High German "truhtin", "meistar" or "fater". The vocative expression typically occurs outside of the clause and not in an argument position selected by the predicate. (Petrova 2008, see http://purl.org/olia/tcodex.owl)
R recognizes S as a cause for the volitional action in N (Mann and Taboada 2010)
volitional cause (RST)
R recognizes that N could be a cause for the action or situation in S (Mann and Taboada 2010)
volitional result (RST)
Register of a term or text type that can be characterized as profane or socially unacceptable. (ISO12620; http://www.isocat.org/datcat/DC-1998)
for nerd:Weapon
for nerd:Website, sub nerd:Product
A referent represents a superset, a class, type or environment to which another pre-mentioned referent belongs (Stuttgart Guidelines).
whole part
wide focus
AnnotationUnit was introduced to account for annotating strings (selected according to certain criteria) directly with discourse information. Where structured elements (e.g., from syntax or semantics) represent the basis of annotation, the annotations should be directly anchored with them. Here, we are concerned with discourse annotation only. Syntactically or semantically defined units of annotations are thus considered opaque objects, as these are to be described in terms of the OLiA Reference Model.
annotation unit
subordinating conjunction with comparative
subordinating conjunction with finite clause
subordinating conjunction without negation
2005-10-xx created by Christian Chiarcos 2006-2008 maintained by Christian Chiarcos and Angelika Adam 2008-05-23 OLiA-InfoStruct (experimental) created, for information structure and coreference only 2008-2013 maintained by Christian Chiarcos 2010-01-08 updated by Christian Chiarcos 2010-01-25 added SyntacticUnit categorization (from GOLD [http:// www.linguistics-ontology.org/gold/2008] and EAGLES recommendations [http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/node29.html# SECTION00052000000000000000]) 2010-01-28 removed all owl:disjointWith and owl:complementOf, these are language-specific and have to be represented in a separate language model. 2010-02-17 extended SyntacticUnit categorization in accordance with the TDS ontologies (http://languagelink.let.uu.nl/tds/onto/ LinguisticOntology.owl) Christian 2010-02-18 adopted TIGER edge labels as syntactic role and semantic role 2010-03-11 manual restructuring of OWL file begun 2010-03-23 morphosyntactic classes revised 2010-03-24 AspectFeature extended in accordance with TDS aspectProperty and GOLD AspectValue; Habitual remodelled as Aspect 2010-03-24 CaseFeature extended by TDS grammaticalCase, GOLD CaseValue and DCR case features 2010-03-24 DefinitenessFeature checked against TDS definitenessProperty and DCR (missing in GOLD) 2010-03-24 DegreeFeature checked against DCR (missing in GOLD and TDS) 2010-03-24 GenderFeature checked against TDS case and GOLD GenderValue (DCR not yet) 2010-03-24 MoodFeature extended in accordance with TDS modalityProperty and GOLD MoodValue 2010-03-24 PersonFeature checked and extended against GOLD and TDS 2010-03-24 SemanticRole extended in accordance with TDS semanticRoleProperty (missing in GOLD, merged with grammatical case there) 2010-03-24 TenseFeature extended in accordance with TDS tenseProperty and GOLD TenseValue (DCR not yet) 2010-03-25 SyntacticRole checked and extended against GOLD syntacticRole (properties) and DCR syntacticCategory, modifyingRelation 2010-03-25 VoiceFeature extended against GOLD VoiceValue and TDS grammaticalVoice; hierarchically structured 2010-04-06 extended InflectionType, added Countability and Valency as features and properties (in accordance with Sampson (1995), see susa.owl 2010-04-08 extensions with respect to constituent types, syntactic relations and semantic roles in accordance with Dipper et al. (2007), see sfb632.owl 2010-04-13 extension wrt. the morphosyntactic profile of the DCR (ISOcat, www.isocat.org) 2010-04-14 validation, PossessiveFeature removed 2010-04-18 additions in accordance to the PTB Bracketing Guidelines (Santorini 1991, Bies et al. 1995) 2010-11-26 introduced NounHeadedPhrase for improved compatibility with dependency parsing schemes (e.g., Connexor) 2010-11-29 added categories for topological fields in German (as used in TüBa-D/Z) 2010-12-02 added DeterminerPhrase, ForeignPhrase, subclasses of ExpletivePronoun (TüBa-D/Z) 2011-07-29 replaced url http://purl.org/olia with purl http:// purl.olcl.org/olia 2011-08-04 eliminated redundancy of olia-top:SyntacticRelation and olia:SyntacticRelation 2011-08-04 linking with MULTEXT-East (http://nl.ijs.si/ME/owl/ multext-east.owl = http://purl.org/olia/mte/multext-east.owl); Clitic deprecated (replaced by CliticElement because of the ambiguity of the category in MULTEXT-East and ISOcat); additions: hasProximity, Distal, Proximal, CliticElement, CliticDefiniteArticle, SpecificArticle, CliticSpecificArticle, hasSpecificity, Specific, Nonspecific, Cliticization, ElementWithClitic, ElementWithoutClitic, ElementDemandingClitic, DistributiveCase, FactiveCase, DirectCase, FormalCase, MultiplicativeCase, TemporalisCase, ElativeDegree, CountNumber, AspectParticle, SubjunctiveParticle, VerbalParticle, LightVerb, VerbalAdverb, NegativeAdverb, ModifierAdverb, AdjectivalAdverb, NonspecificPronoun, DeterminalPronoun, AttributivePronoun, EmphaticDeterminer, NegativeDeterminer, UniquitiveDeterminer, PossessiveArticle, hasConjunct, hasWordConjunct, hasSentenceConjunct, RepetitiveCoordinatingConjunction, SubordinatingConjunctionWithNegation, SubordinatingConjunctionWithoutNegation, RelationalAdjective, PossessiveAdjective, NonreducedInflection, ReducedInflection, CollectiveNumeral, hasNumeralAgreement, DualQuantifier, PaucalQuantifier, SingularQuantifier, PluralQuantifier, Fraction, ApproximateNumeral, MultipleNumeral, ProQuantifier, InterrogativeQuantifier, IndefiniteQuantifier, DemonstrativeQuantifier, RelativeQuantifier, QuotativeVerb, QuotativeMood, NonNegated, Diminuitive, Human, AbbreviatedPronoun, FixedExpression, Adjectival, Typo, Verbal, hasObjectNumber, hasNumeralForm, ExistentialParticle 2011-08-04 SubordType, CoordType deprecated, remodelled as subconcepts of Sub/CoordinatingConjunction 2011-08-05 validation 2011-08-11 VoiceParticle (from Portuguese EAGLES) 2011-08-12 linking with T-CODEX (Old High German): VocativeExpression, Fronting, ConditionRole, HangingTopic (for Old High German, T-CODEX), CausalAdverb deprecated (= Adverb and hasSemanticRole some CauseRole), DeclarativeSentence = Sentence and hasMood some DeclarativeMood, PresentParticiple (= Sentence and hasTense some Present), PastParticiple (= Sentence and hasTense some Past) 2011-08-15 CausalMood (from Nowak 1996, for Inuktitut), MannerAdverb (= Adverb and hasSemanticRole some MannerRole) {introduced as deprecated}, LocationAdverb (= Adverb and hasSemanticRole some LocationRole) {introduced as deprecated}, HabitualMood (= HabitualAspect) 2011-08-15 linking with Ancorra and IIIT tagset (for Indian languages): GerundVerbPhrase, SpatiotemporalNoun, InfinitiveVerbPhrase, EchoWord, Composition, Intensifier 2011-08-15 linking with ILPOSTS (for Indian languages): added PurposiveCase, PurposiveAspect, DistributivePronoun, ConditionalParticiple, ConditionalRealisMood, ConditionalIrrealisMood, PresumptiveMood, Sequel, AbilitativeMood, SecondHonorific, SecondNonHonorific, hasEmphasis, Emphatic, NonEmphatic, SimpleAspect, EmphaticDeterminer, EmphaticPronoun deprecated 2011-08-15 linking with Urdu tagset (Sajjad 2007): TitleNoun, UnitNoun, AspectMarkingAuxiliary, TenseMarkingAuxiliary, Date added 2011-08-15 olia_top:PhonologicalProcess introduced (reorganization of MorphologicalProcess) 2011-08-16 linking with Dzongkha tagset (Chungku et al. 2010) :added AspirationalVerb, AgentiveVerb, TenseMarkingParticle, NonAgentiveVerb, LocativePronoun, NominalNumber, CaseMarker, PeriodicAdjective, CharacteristicAdjective, DifferentialPronoun, NominalQuantifier, HonorificVerb, HonorificCommonNoun added (=> Honorificity to be remodelled) 2011-08-16 linking with EMILLE Urdu tagset (Hardie 2003): AdjectivalParticle, ModalityMarkingAdverb, OpenQuote, CloseQuote, ContrastiveParticle, EmphaticParticle, MultiplicativeMarker, ExclusiveEmphaticParticle, InclusiveEmphaticParticle, ReflexivePossessiveDeterminer, Izafat, RelativeAdjective added; ContrastiveEmphaticParticle (= ContrastiveParticle and EmphaticParticle) 2013-03-03 linking with Uby Pos annotation model (http:// www.ukp.tu-darmstadt.de/data/lexical-resources/uby/): added GivenName, FamilyName, comments for PersonalPronoun, Separability 2013-03-03 partial hasFeature Self-modeling for ...Feature concepts: not inferable through Fact++ or Hermit, though, hence incomplete 2013-03-04 linking with Uby Pos annotation model (http:// www.ukp.tu-darmstadt.de/data/lexical-resources/uby/): Contraction, Phraseme, LexicalUnit (as generalization over Phraseme and Lexeme), Initialism 2013-03-04 olia-top:XYFeature olia:hasXY Self for most XYFeatures 2013-06-24 additions from ISOcat morphosyntactic profile: FusedPrepositionPronoun, ElativeNoun, InterrogativeMultiplicativeQuantifier, FocusMarker, AdjutativeVoice, AversiveCase 2013-06-25 additions from ISOcat morphosyntactic profile: VisualEvidentiality, OtherSourceEvidentiality, DeductiveEvidentiality, Exclusive, Inclusive, Homonym, Homophone, CircumstantialVoice 2013-06-27 ISOcat additions: MannerNoun (deprecated), QuestionWord (extended to be a generalization over InterrogativeXY, deprecated), GeneralizationWord, EpistemicPossibilityModality, DebitiveMood, InchoativeAspect, PresentativePronoun, IndefiniteCardinalQuantifier, NumeralBoth (deprecated), GraphicalSeparator, Impossible, Possible, EpistemicNecessityModality, TemporallyDefinedUsage, PrepositionalAdverb, DeclarativePunctuation, Multal, ObligativeModality, RomanNumeral, DigitNumeral, Script, ParticleAdverb (deprecrated), ApplicativeVoice, EvaluativeModality, PlaceNoun (deprecated), String [generalized as orthographical anchor point for RomanNumeral] 2013-06-28 ISOcat additions: Masdar, Ideophone, DeficientVerb (deprecated), IndefiniteMultiplicativeQuantifier, PermissiveModality, WeakObligativeModality, ExistentialPronoun (deprecated), InstrumentNoun, PhysicalAbilitiveModality, MedioPassiveVoice, InterrogativeCardinalQuantifier, CompletiveAspect, PseudopassiveVoice, LetterNumeral, ContextualVariation, Homograph, CollectivePronoun, PossessiveRelativePronoun, ExpansionVariation, CausativeVoice, Augmentative, FusedPronounAuxiliary, AntiCausativeVoice, StatusConstructus, PreferredEvaluative, PejorativeEvaluative, CommissiveForce, ActionalForce, VolitiveForce; hasEvaluativeFeature (for ISOcat PreferredEvaluative and PejorativeEvaluative), HortativeModality (from GOLD, missing in the corresponding ISOcat export); disentangled Modality and Mood: for every Mood, created a corresponding Modality as superclass; XYMood is subconcept of Mood and XYModality concept, hasMood only for Mood, hasModality for Modality 2014-2017 maintained by Christian Chiarcos and Maria Sukhareva 2016-04-18 selected French labels for the Bambara Reference Corpus (BRC): added OnomatopoeticWord, QualitativeVerb, PredicativeMarker; OWL /DL validation 2016-08-29 added Frame, hasMovementFeature, Control and Raising for compliance with lexinfo 2017-06-26 fixed occasional type errors at owl:deprecated 2018-01-08 added Converb (for Eastern Armenian National Corpus) 2018-2022 maintained by Christian Chiarcos, GU Frankfurt 2019-07-27 lexinfo linking: added DeverbalAdjective as a generalization over (and superclass of) ParticipleAdjective, DenominalAdjective (for lexinfo:adjective-na), GenericNumeral (for lexinfo:genericNumeral), InflectionElement (for lexinfo:inflectionElement), Radical (for lexinfo:radical), Syllable (for lexinfo:syllable), ClippedTerm, Appellation, Idiom, Internationalism, SetPhrase, Boilerplate (for lexinfo:standardText), Deprecated (for lexinfo:deprecatedTerm), LegalRegister (for lexinfo:legalTerm), Deprecated (for lexinfo:deprecatedTerm), Preferred (for lexinfo:preferredTerm), Standardized (for lexinfo:standardizedTerm); revised Contraction, Composition; introduced Identifier as generalization over Appellation, NamedEntity and lexinfo:partNumber; introduced TextStructuralElement as generalization over Headline, Boilerplate, etc. 2020-02-24 add Chunk (from Ancorra tagset), JussiveMood (from Arabic, Khoja et al. 2008) 2020-02-27 clarify definition of Unique 2022-05-23 rdfs:labels added (automatically) 2023- maintained by Christian Chiarcos, U Augsburg 2024-11-22 modularization 2024-11-22 OLiA-graphon extracted from olia.owl; olia:Numeral re-defined as an OrthographicEntity 2024-11-22 OLiA-Morph extracted from olia.owl 2024-11-22 OLiA-Morphosyntax extracted from olia.owl 2024-11-22 OLiA-SemLex extracted from olia.owl 2024-11-22 OLiA Syntax extracted from olia.owl 2024-11-25 OLiA Discourse Extensions integrated into OLiA Reference Model