Skip to main content
14 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 13, 2017 at 12:38 history edited CommunityBot
replaced http://english.stackexchange.com/ with https://english.stackexchange.com/
Mar 2, 2015 at 0:22 vote accept mac389
S Jan 5, 2014 at 1:59 history suggested Pete CC BY-SA 3.0
Put sentence in title of question so as to differentiate from similar questions about parsing a sentence.
Jan 5, 2014 at 0:21 review Suggested edits
S Jan 5, 2014 at 1:59
Jan 4, 2014 at 20:29 answer added Muffin timeline score: 1
Jan 3, 2014 at 17:34 answer added tastyminerals timeline score: 1
Oct 7, 2013 at 21:02 comment added mac389 @PElliott updated as to your first comment. As to the second, I agree completely. What would a reasonably alternate set of rules be to give 'here' scope over both but not the negation?
Oct 7, 2013 at 21:02 history edited mac389 CC BY-SA 3.0
responded to comments to clarify purpose of question
Oct 7, 2013 at 8:59 comment added P Elliott One consequence of the phrase structural rules you've given is that's impossible to have 'here' scoping over both the copular and the predicate without also scoping over the negation. You want the copular and the predicate to be a constituent to the exclusion of negation.
Oct 7, 2013 at 8:54 comment added P Elliott Can you clarify whether you're looking for a phrase structure tree, or a representation in first-order logic? In terms of the former, i'd generally treat 'here' as a VP-level adjunct, scoping below negation, but above the predicate. Also, i don't think the phrase-structural rules you give are broadly correct, as they assign the copular sentence a ternery branching structure. There's evidence that the copular+pred behave as a constituent to exclusion of the subject. See, e.g. clefting options: It is I who is not the alien here.
Oct 6, 2013 at 21:18 history tweeted twitter.com/#!/StackLinguist/status/386963686033981440
Oct 6, 2013 at 21:01 answer added Atamiri timeline score: 0
Oct 6, 2013 at 19:42 history edited Otavio Macedo CC BY-SA 3.0
Reformatted syntactic derivations as code.
Oct 6, 2013 at 17:31 history asked mac389 CC BY-SA 3.0