blob: ebdebcd134b867ca28df325a9e55bbcefc0af6a6 (
plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
|
concrete RelativeIna of Relative = CatIna ** open ResIna in {
flags optimize=all_subs ;
lin
RelCl cl = {
s = \\t,a,p,agr =>
(case agr.n of {Sg => "tal"; Pl => "tales"}) ++
"que" ++ cl.s ! t ! a ! p ! ODir ;
c = Nom
} ;
RelVP rp vp = {
s = \\t,a,p,agr => (mkClause (rp.s!Nom) agr vp).s ! t ! a ! p ! ODir;
c = Nom
} ;
-- !!! person agreement is probably bad here; see below.
---- Pied piping: "a que tu invia flores"
RelSlash rp slash = {
s = \\t,a,p,agr => slash.p2 ++ rp.s ! slash.c2 ++ slash.s ! t ! a ! p ! ODir ;
c = slash.c2;
} ;
-- !!! In the above The agreement feature of the RP does not match
-- the the (parametric!) agreement of the resulting clause.
-- Is it a bug? I believe there is the same behaviour in the english grammar.
FunRP p np rp = {
s = \\c => np.s ! Acc ++ p.s ++ rp.s ! p.c ;
a = np.a
} ;
IdRP = {
-- TODO: variant: "le qual"
a = {p = P3; n = variants {Sg; Pl}};
s = table {
Nom => quique; -- Le ultime traino que pote portar me ibi a tempore parti in cinque minutas
Gen => "cuje"; -- Le documentos cuje importantia esseva dubitose incriminava le spia
Acc => "que"; -- Le documentos que le spia portava con se esseva multo importante
Dat => "a" ++ quique;
Abl => "de" ++ quique
}} ;
oper
quique = variants {"qui"; -- !!! Only for humans, only after a preposition.
-- This is extremely strange, because it does not match any Romance language I know.
-- For now just be lax and make it a variant of "que"
"que"};
}
|
