this is for holding javascript data
test1234567 deleted Id_ger_par_tex_v_1__.tex
about 9 years ago
Commit id: 393c343a86f7ecd43bc6e32fd4b3d0c2279c8a3e
deletions | additions
diff --git a/Id_ger_par_tex_v_1__.tex b/Id_ger_par_tex_v_1__.tex
deleted file mode 100644
index 52fe239..0000000
--- a/Id_ger_par_tex_v_1__.tex
+++ /dev/null
...
% $Id: ger_par.tex,v 1.37 1994/12/13 04:48:09 fergus Exp $
%\input{stuff}
%\makeindex
%\begin{document}
\section{Gerunds and Participles} \index{gerunds} \index{participles}
\label{list:gp}
%Gerunds and participles, or "They Might be Gerunds"
%I.
\subsection{General remarks}
%A.
\subsubsection{Distributional distinction} \index{gerunds!and participles,
distinction betw.} \index{participles!and gerunds, distinction betw.}
\label{list:gp:gen:distributional-distinction}
It was decided that a theory-based distinction between nominal {\it -ing}\/
clauses (gerunds) and other present participles would be too difficult to
make consistently across annotators and throughout the corpus. Therefore,
the distinction made in Treebank bracketing is a purely distributional one:
{\it -ing}\/ clauses are labeled S-NOM in subject position and as the object
of a preposition, VP as the complement of {\it be}\/, S as the complement of
other verbs, and S-ADV (or other appropriate adverbial tag) when modifying
the matrix VP or sentence. \index{S-ADV}
Since {\it -ing}\/ clauses labeled S-NOM, S, and S-ADV/etc. are at least
partly sentential in nature, like all other sentences they have subjects,
either overt subjects or null * subjects when there is no overt subject
present. They may also have VP-level complements and/or modifiers. The
annotation of present and past participles is such that predicate-argument
structure can be extracted from them as with ordinary sentences.
Past participles are labeled S (never S-NOM), with coindexing of the
subject and adverbial function tags as appropriate.
(For the sake of convenience, the term ``gerund'' is used below to refer
loosely to {\it -ing}\/ clauses in general.)
%B.
\subsubsection{Function tags} \index{NOM@-NOM!and {\it -ing}\/ clauses}
{\it -ing}\/ clauses labeled S may receive the following tags: S-NOM-SBJ in
subject position; S-NOM after prepositions; S after verbs and subordinating
conjunctions; S-ADV (or -TMP, -LOC, -PRP, etc.) for adverbial functions.
\index{S-ADV}
%C.
\subsubsection{Coindexation of null subjects} \index{coindexing!and {\it
-ing}\/ clauses}
If there is no overt subject of the {\it -ing} clause, a null subject is
present in the annotation: (NP-SBJ *). The null subject of an {\it -ing}\/
clause is coindexed to another NP in the sentence if a coindexed
interpretation is available. Coindexation proceeds as usual, according to
pragmatic coreference as well as syntactic binding and control, and
independent of the S-NOM/S distinction. However, null subjects of gerund
complements of PP modifiers of NPs are coindexed only if there is a
particularly strong coindexed interpretation. See \RefNulls\ for
more on the coindexation of null elements.
%II.
\subsection{Present progressive} \index{present progressive}
Any {\it -ing}\/ form after auxiliary {\it be}\/ is labeled VP and
annotated as a complement. See section \ref{list:gp:pres-ptc} for the
annotation of present participles following other verbs.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP am
(VP baking
(NP cookies))))
\end{verbatim}
%III.
\subsection{Present participles} \index{participles!present}
\label{list:gp:pres-ptc}
%A.
\subsubsection{Subjects}
Overt subjects, whether possessive or not, are bracketed as the subject of
the {\it -ing}\/ clause if the clause is labeled S. (If the clause is a
gerund labeled S-NOM, the possessive is treated like any other possessive
in NP.)
\begin{enumerate}
%a.
\item Subject of sentence
\begin{verbatim}
(S (SBAR-PRP Because
(S (NP-SBJ-6 he)
(VP should
(VP have
(VP been
(VP disqualified
(NP *-6)))))))
,
(S-NOM-SBJ (NP-SBJ his)
(VP playing
(ADVP at all)))
(VP stinks))
\end{verbatim}
%b.
\item {\it -ing} clause following verb
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP do
n't
(VP mind
(S (NP-SBJ you)
(VP washing
(NP the car))))))
\end{verbatim}
\end{enumerate}
%B.
\subsubsection{S-NOM vs. S} \index{NOM@-NOM!S-NOM vs. S|(}
For the most part, there is not a theory-based distinction between nominal
{\it -ing}\/ clauses and other present participles, but rather a
distributional one (see section
\ref{list:gp:gen:distributional-distinction}
for the distributional distinction that is made). This section addresses
the way in which S-NOM and S are used.
The S-NOM vs. S distinction for {\it -ing}\/ clauses is made according to
the following distributional criteria:
\begin{description}
%1.
\item [S-NOM.] ~
{\it -ing}\/ clauses are labeled S-NOM when they occur in the following
positions:
\begin{enumerate}
%(i)
\item as subjects of S (labeled S-NOM-SBJ)
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-NOM-SBJ (NP-SBJ *)
(VP Baking
(NP pies)))
(VP is
(ADJP-PRD fun)))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-NOM-SBJ (NP-SBJ *)
(VP Walking
(ADVP-MNR quickly)))
(VP is
(NP-PRD good exercise)))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (SBAR-PRP Because
(S (NP-SBJ-6 he)
(VP should
(VP have
(VP been
(VP disqualified
(NP *-6)))))))
,
(S-NOM-SBJ (NP-SBJ his)
(VP playing
(ADVP at all)))
(VP stinks))
\end{verbatim}
%(ii)
\item as objects of prepositions (labeled S-NOM).
Note that ``preposition'' here means any preposition that takes an NP on at
least one of its uses. So {\it of, by, after, before, with, as, in,}\/
etc. all head PPs when followed by an {\it -ing}\/ clause, but {\it while,
if}\/ and other necessarily sentential subordinators are always SBAR.
\label{list:gp:s-nom/s:s-nom:PPobj:def-of-PP}
Note that all {\it -ing}\/ clause objects of PP are S-NOM.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-MNR That way)
(NP-SBJ-7 investors)
(VP can
(ADVP essentially)
(VP buy
(NP the funds)
(PP without
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-7)
(VP paying
(NP the premium)))))))
\end{verbatim}
% I deleted ``[note] also that prepositions never have objects labeled
% simply S;'' (used to precede ``all {\it ing} clause objects of PP are
% S-NOM) because there may actually be some instances of S objects of
% PP. For instance, in the sentence, IT WAS A CASE OF ``GIVE MORE THAN YOU
% GET AND YOU'RE BETTER OFF'', where the object of OF is an S, I think we
% would just label it S. -k.
If an {\it -ing}\/ clause has a null * subject, and there is a pragmatic
coindexed interpretation, the subject is coindexed.
Note that there is generally coindexation when the PP is an adjoined
postmodifier of NP only if there is a particularly strong coindexed
interpretation.
%gross numbers:
%overall c. 50% of the relevant cases have a coindexed interpretation,
%however, only c. 10% overall are bracketed with coindexation.
%Coindexation seems to occur especially with fixed phrases such as ``in
%addition to S-NOM...'' and when the 'controlling' NP is nearby or is the
%subject of the sentence.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ the company)
(VP has
(NP (NP no intention)
(PP of
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
(VP tapping
(NP its short-term bank lines)))))
(PP-TMP for
(NP (NP a good part)
(PP of
(NP 1990))))))
\end{verbatim}
Some examples:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\it about}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP no squeamishness)
(PP about
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
(VP admitting
(NP this)))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it after}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (PP-TMP After
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP winning
(NP the race))))
,
(NP-SBJ-1 she)
(VP ran
(NP a victory lap)))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it as}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (ADVP-TMP Often)
(NP-SBJ the displeased parties)
(VP interpreted
(NP our decision)
(PP-CLR as
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
(VP implying
(NP (NP favoritism)
(PP toward
(NP the other))))))))
\end{verbatim}
% I think I woulda co-indexed ``decision'' to the null subj. here. -m.
% I woulda too. -k.
% Don't think I would've, but ya never know.-R.
\item {\it at}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-6 The government)
(VP aimed
(PP-CLR at
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-6)
(VP stimulating
(NP (NP a faster rate)
(PP of
(NP (NP economic growth)
(PP of
(NP the country))))))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it before}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (PP-TMP Before
(S (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP leaving
(PP-CLR for
(NP school)))))
,
(NP-SBJ-1 *)
(VP eat
(NP a good breakfast)))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it by}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 He)
(VP inherited
(NP a fortune)
(PP-MNR by
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-1)
(ADVP-MNR brutally)
(VP murdering
(NP his brother))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it for}
\begin{verbatim}
(SINV (ADVP-LOC-PRD-TPC-1 Here)
(VP would
(VP be
(ADVP-LOC-PRD *T*-1)))
(NP-SBJ (NP a powerful force)
(PP for
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
(VP raising
(NP business activity))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it from}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ The police)
(VP kept
(NP-1 him)
(PP-CLR from
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-1)
(ADVP actually)
(VP collecting
(NP the money))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it in}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ This)
(VP results
(PP-CLR in
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ-1 a separate record)
(VP being
(VP made
(NP *-1)))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it of}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-6 I)
(VP am
(ADJP-PRD tired
(PP of
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-6)
(VP writing
(NP lists)))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it since}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 I)
(VP have
(VP worked
(NP several odd jobs)
(PP-TMP since
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP leaving
(NP school)))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it while}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 The committee)
(VP continued
(NP its meeting)
(SBAR-TMP while
(S (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP eating
(NP lunch))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it with}\/ (in absolute {\it with}\/-constructions)
\begin{verbatim}
(S (PP With
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ interest rates)
(VP rising)))
,
(NP-SBJ the market)
(VP is
(VP moving
(ADVP-MNR slowly))))
\end{verbatim}
Note that {\it with}\/ is bracketed as SBAR if it is not followed by
an S-NOM (present participle).
\begin{verbatim}
(SBAR-ADV with
(S (NP-SBJ-1 the new understudy)
(VP hired
(NP *-1))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(SBAR-ADV with
(S (NP-SBJ his boyfriend)
(ADJP-PRD abroad)))
\end{verbatim}
%hey, can we change these to something else, like ``with the deadline
%ignored'' or ``with the project dead'' (or whatever)? -m.
% I changed them to whatever. -k.
\end{itemize}
%(iii)
\item as a child of the VP coordinated with other NP objects.
In this case, the {\it -ing}\/ clause is labeled S-NOM so that the bracket
label at the level of coordination is NP rather than UCP (see section
\ref{list:gp:coordination} on coordination below).
\end{enumerate}
%2.
\item [S.] ~
{\it -ing}\/ clauses are labeled S when they occur in the following
positions:
\begin{enumerate}
%(i)
\item as children of VP.
Complements are labeled S, while adjuncts receive an appropriate tag:
S-ADV, S-MNR, etc. See section \ref{list:gp:pres-ptc:s/s-adv}.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP do
n't
(VP mind
(S (NP-SBJ your)
(VP washing
(NP the car))))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S (SBAR-ADV If
(S (NP-SBJ it)
(VP promotes
(NP fashion)
(ADVP-MNR too much))))
,
(NP-SBJ-1 the shop)
(VP risks
(S (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP alienating
(NP its old-line customers)))))
;
(S (PP-MNR by
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-2)
(VP emphasizing
``
(NP value))))
,
''
(NP-SBJ-2 it)
(VP risks
(S (NP-SBJ *-2)
(VP watering
(PRT down)
(NP its high-minded mystique))))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 Mrs. Ward)
(VP took
(PRT over)
(PP-TMP in
(NP 1986))
,
(S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP becoming
(NP (NP (NP the school 's)
seventh principal)
(PP-TMP in
(NP 15 years)))))))
\end{verbatim}
Exception: if the gerund is a child of the VP but is coordinated with other
NP objects, it is labeled S-NOM so that the bracket label at the level of
coordination is NP rather than UCP (see section \ref{list:gp:coordination}
on coordination below).
%(ii)
\item after subordinating conjunctions (labeled S, with no adverbial tag)
Note that ``subordinating conjunction'' here means any subordinator that
can never take an ordinary NP object (e.g., {\it while, when, if,}\/ etc.)
Subordinating conjunctions are never followed by S-NOM.
% The wording of (ii) was confusing given how I used the
% term ``subordinating conjunction'' in the subordinating conjunction list.
% The qualifying definition makes it less confusing, but maybe not enough.
% So prefaced ``subordinating conjunctions'' in the header with
% ``after non-NP-taking'', and deleted the part that said ``Here,
% 'subordinating conjunction' means any subordinator that never takes an
% ordinary NP object''. -K.
% I found Karen's wording confusing, and so I rewrote the definition in
% subord and went back to Ann's wording. I think it's good enough, given
% what's said under ``preposition'' far above. The whole thing might be
% clearer if the rules were next to each other, followed by the examples.
% But I dunno if we'll have time for that...-R.
%(iii)
\item at S-level in preverbal position (labeled S-ADV/etc.).
\end{enumerate}
\end{description}
\index{NOM@-NOM!S-NOM vs. S|)}
%C.
\subsubsection{S vs. S-ADV} \index{S!vs. S-ADV} \index{S-ADV}
\label{list:gp:pres-ptc:s/s-adv}
The S/S-ADV, etc. distinction is made according to the following
distributional criteria:
\begin{description}
%1.
\item [S.] ~ \index{S!with {\it -ing}}
An {\it -ing}\/ clause is labeled S with no adverbial function tag if it is
the complement of a verb or occurs in a ``serial verb'' construction.
All {\it -ing}\/ complements of verbs other than {\it be}\/ (e.g., {\it
begin, come, continue, deny, get, go, justify, keep, like, permit, sit,
stand, start, stop,}\/ etc.) are bracketed in this way. As usual, the null
subject is coindexed with the matrix subject if there is a coindexed
interpretation.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 I)
(VP like
(S (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP helping
(NP children)))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 he)
(VP (VP broke
(PRT out)
(NP the go codes))
and
(VP tried
(S (NP-SBJ-2 *-1)
(VP to
(VP start
(S (NP-SBJ *-2)
(VP transmitting
(NP one)))))))))
\end{verbatim}
Note that this parallels the treatment of infinitival complements of some
of these verbs:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-2 He)
(VP tried
(S (NP-SBJ-3 *-2)
(VP to
(VP start
(S (NP-SBJ *-3)
(VP to
(VP transmit
(NP one)))))))))
\end{verbatim}
%2.
\item [S-ADV.] ~ \index{S-ADV}
{\it -ing} clauses are given adverbial function tags if they behave as
adverbial modifiers of the matrix VP or S.
\begin{enumerate}
%a.
\item The appropriate adverbial tag is used (instead of -ADV) if applicable:
-TMP, -PRP, -LOC, -MNR.
%b.
\item -CLR is used in some rare cases, listed here:
\begin{itemize}
%i.
\item {\it spend/waste time/money} X-{\it ing} \index{spend@{\it spend/waste
time/money} X-{\it ing}}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 Digital)
(VP has
(VP spent
(NP (QP almost $ 1 billion) *U*)
(S-CLR (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP developing
(NP the new technology))))))
\end{verbatim}
%ii.
\item {\it have problems/difficulty/trouble} X-{\it ing}\/.
\index{have@{\it have problems/difficulty/trouble} X-{\it ing}}
The most recent annotation policy for this construction is represented here
in (a), but some occurrences of this construction may be annotated
according to an older policy, as given in (b). About half of the (a)
analyses include the coindexing shown here.
% 10 out of 22.-R.
\begin{verbatim}
(a) (S (NP-SBJ-1 everybody)
(VP will
(VP have
(NP (NP a difficult time)
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP reaching
(NP their profit objectives)))))))
\end{verbatim}
%hmmm... I was under the impression we were to coindexing these, even
%though there is an NP ``in the way.'' Not sure why. Uh-oh. What did I
%do? (I mean that question literally) What did you others do? -m.
\begin{verbatim}
(b) (S (NP-SBJ-1 everybody)
(VP will
(VP have
(NP a difficult time)
(S-CLR (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP reaching
(NP their profit objectives))))))
\end{verbatim}
\end{itemize}
%c.
\item -ADV is used if no other adverbial tag applies. \index{ADV@-ADV}
This is especially common with floating participles, including dangling
participles (see section \ref{list:gp:rrc-fp:fp} for more details on floating
participles).
\index{participles!floating@``floating''}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ God)
(VP willing))
,
(NP-SBJ we)
(VP will
(VP arrive
(PP-LOC at
(NP our destination))
(ADVP-MNR safely))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP Having
(ADVP-MNR carefully)
(VP considered
(NP his options))))
,
(NP-SBJ-1 he)
(VP decided
(S (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP to
(VP take
(NP the job))))))
\end{verbatim}
%d.
\item All past participles that modify S or VP are labeled S-ADV/etc.
\index{S-ADV}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ-1 *-2)
(VP Given
(NP *-1)
(NP the chance)))
,
(NP-SBJ-2 I)
(VP 'd
(VP do
(NP it)
(ADVP-TMP again))))
\end{verbatim}
%e.
\item Dangling participles. ``Floating participles'' here includes dangling
participles. They are labeled S-ADV and a null * subject is coindexed as
appropriate. \index{participles!dangling}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP Living
(PP-LOC-CLR in
(NP this house))))
,
(NP-SBJ the noise)
(VP is
(VP driving
(S (NP-SBJ-1 me)
(ADJP-PRD buggy))))
!)
\end{verbatim}
%watch it...
\end{enumerate}
\end{description}
%D.
\subsubsection{NP vs. S or S-NOM} \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
Single-word nominal {\it -ing}\/ clauses are labeled NP; the only exception
is for those with a strong event reading. Gerunds that have an overt
subject or a complement or are modified by an adverbial are bracketed as VP
dominated by S or S-NOM.
\begin{enumerate}
%1.
\item Distinguishing between NP and S or S-NOM \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
A distinction is made between nouns ending in {\it -ing}\/ (labeled NP, with
the head generally POS-tagged NN) and {\it -ing}\/ clauses (labeled S or
S-NOM, with the head generally POS-tagged VBG), according to the following
criteria:
\begin{enumerate}
%a.
\item An {\it -ing}\/ form is labeled NP if it:
\begin{enumerate}
%(i)
\item is a single word (e.g., {\it running}\/), except when it has a
strong event reading (see page
\pageref{list:gp:pres-ptc:s/s-nom:strong-event-reading}).
%(ii)
\item has a determiner (e.g., {\it some teaching}\/)
%(iii)
\item has an {\it of}\/ PP object (e.g., {\it teaching of difficult
students}\/)
%(iv)
\item has other modifiers that could be modifying an ordinary noun
(e.g., {\it world-class running}\/), as opposed to adverbial
modifiers, which suggest VP. \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
\end{enumerate}
\begin{itemize}
\item Subject position:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ Baking)
(VP is
(ADJP-PRD fun)))
\end{verbatim}
\item Object position:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP like
(NP (NP field hockey)
and
(NP swimming))))
\end{verbatim}
\item With an NP possessive:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ The men)
(VP were
(ADJP-PRD tired)
(PP from
(NP (NP a night 's)
drinking))))
\end{verbatim}
\item With a possessive pronoun:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ We)
(VP kicked
(NP him)
(PP-CLR out
(PP of
(NP the band)))
(SBAR-PRP because
(S (NP-SBJ his playing)
(VP stinks)))))
\end{verbatim}
\item With quantifiers: \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ There)
(VP is
(NP-PRD no smoking)
(PP-LOC on
(NP this flight))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ There)
(VP will
(VP be
(NP-PRD no talking)
(PP-TMP during
(NP the movie)))))
\end{verbatim}
\item With PP postmodifiers: \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ There)
(VP 's
(VP been
(NP-PRD (NP no finding)
(PP by
(NP anybody))
(PP of
(NP (NP any substantive violation)
(PP of
(NP any antitrust laws))))))))
\end{verbatim}
Gerunds with {\it of}\/ complements and other adjectival and PP modifiers of
NP are bracketed just like ordinary NPs: \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ (NP The taking)
(PP of
(NP Iwo Jima)))
(VP was
(NP-PRD no easy feat)))
\end{verbatim}
contrast with:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-NOM-SBJ (NP-SBJ *)
(VP Taking
(NP Iwo Jima)))
(VP was
(NP-PRD no easy feat)))
\end{verbatim}
\item With a non-PP postmodifier: \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ (NP The dancing)
,
(SBAR (WHNP-7 which)
(S (NP-SBJ *T*-7)
(VP was
(ADJP-PRD very good))))
,)
(VP began
(PP-TMP at
(NP 8:00))))
\end{verbatim}
\end{itemize}
%b.
\item An {\it -ing}\/ form with a strong event reading may be labeled S or
S-NOM: \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
\label{list:gp:pres-ptc:s/s-nom:strong-event-reading}
Single-word gerund objects of verbs are normally labeled NP, but in
sentences with strong event readings they may be labeled S or S-NOM. The
null subjects of these gerunds are coindexed if appropriate.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ Apple)
(ADVP allegedly)
(VP discouraged
(NP-2 retailers)
(PP-CLR from
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *-2)
(VP discounting)))))
\end{verbatim}
The {\sc default} is to label as NP, as in (a) below. For example, the
expression {\it I hate lying} has both an NP (``I hate it when others
lie'') interpretation, as in (a), and an S interpretation (``I hate to
lie''), as in (b): \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
(a) ``I hate it when others lie''
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP hate
(NP lying)))
\end{verbatim}
(b) ``I hate to lie''
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 I)
(VP hate
(S (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP lying))))
\end{verbatim}
\end{enumerate}
%2.
\item Overt subjects \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
When the gerund has an overt genitive subject, as in {\it They liked our
singing}\/, it is labeled NP unless it clearly warrants a clausal
interpretation.
\begin{enumerate}
%(a)
\item ``They liked the way we sang''
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ They)
(VP liked
(NP our singing)))
\end{verbatim}
%(b)
\item ``They liked the fact that we sang''
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ They)
(VP liked
(S (NP-SBJ our)
(VP singing))))
\end{verbatim}
\item However, if the subject is not possessive, it is always bracketed S:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ we)
(VP have
(S (NP-SBJ them)
(VP waiting))))
\end{verbatim}
\end{enumerate}
%3.
\item Additional complements, modifiers, etc. \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
In cases where the gerund occurs with complements, modifiers, etc., S or
S-NOM is used only when the structure is unambiguously clausal because the
gerund has a direct object. Otherwise, NP is used.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ They)
(VP liked
(S (NP-SBJ our)
(VP singing
(NP folk songs)))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-NOM-SBJ (NP-SBJ *)
(VP Taking
(NP Iwo Jima)))
(VP was
(NP-PRD no easy feat)))
\end{verbatim}
%4.
\item Quantifiers. \index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
Any quantifier can be a determiner for an S-NOM {\it -ing}\/ clause. If the
gerund is labeled S-NOM, the S-NOM and the (unlabeled) quantifier are both
children of an outer NP label.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ There)
(VP was
(ADVP certainly)
(NP-PRD no
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
(VP stopping
(NP (NP the tide)
(PP of
(NP emotion))))))))
\end{verbatim}
%more examples:
%
% (S (NP-SBJ There)
% (VP was
% (NP-PRD no
% (S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
% (VP turning
% (ADVP-DIR back))))))
%
% (FRAG (NP-ADV (NP The way)
% (SBAR (WHADVP-6 0)
% (S (NP-SBJ Hoag)
% (VP was
% (ADVP-PRD *T*-6)))))
% ,
% (NP no
% (S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
% (VP telling
% (SBAR (WHNP-2 what)
% (S (NP-SBJ he)
% (VP might
% (VP say or do
% (NP *T*-2)))))))))
\end{enumerate}
\index{NP!vs. S or S-NOM}
%E.
\subsubsection{ADJP vs. S} \index{S!vs. ADJP (as noun modifier)}
\index{adjectives!ADJP vs. S (as noun modifier)}
A gerund may be ambiguous between two interpretations: adjectival noun
phrase modifier (ADJP), and gerund clause (S). For instance, the sentence
{\it Flying planes can be dangerous}\/ has at least two interpretations in
isolation, paraphrased below. When it is not clear whether a gerund should
be analyzed as ADJP or S, the {\sc default}\/ is to analyze it as an
adjective, as in (a).
(a) ``Planes which are flying (overhead) can be dangerous''
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ Flying planes)
(VP can
(VP be
(ADJP-PRD dangerous))))
\end{verbatim}
(b) ``The act of flying planes can be dangerous''
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-NOM-SBJ (NP-SBJ *)
(VP Flying
(NP planes)))
(VP can
(VP be
(ADJP-PRD dangerous))))
\end{verbatim}
%F.
\subsubsection{Pseudo-prepositions} \index{pseudo-prepositions|(}
\index{prepositional phrases!pseudo-prepositions|(}
``Pseudo-prepositions'' are words that behave like prepositions but are
historically or apparently verb participles.
Tests for deciding whether a gerund is a ``pseudo-preposition'':
\begin{enumerate}
%1.
\item Pied-piping. \index{pied-piping}
Members of the class of ``pseudo-prepositions'' are admitted if they can
undergo pied piping, and only if the annotator has a strong intuition that
the item in question is behaving as a preposition.
%2.
\item Lack of verbal content.
These pseudo-prepositions either have no real verbal meaning or have a
meaning other than their ordinary verbal usage.
%3.
\item POS tagging.
While these pseudo-prepositions are {\bf bracketed}\/ with a PP label, the
Part of Speech tags associated with these words are still VBG (gerund verb)
or VBN (past participle verb), as described in \posmanual.
%regularize with other ref to this: Santorini 1990, p. 11 ``IN or VBG,
%VBN''
\index{pseudo-prepositions}
\begin{verbatim}
(PP (VBG including)
(NP (DT the)
(NN kitchen)
(NN sink)))
\end{verbatim}
%3.5.
\item Real prepositions. Note that while {\it during}\/ and {\it pending}\/
may at first glance look like participles, they lack corresponding verbs,
so these should be POS-tagged IN or JJ, according to usage. However,
automatic tagging tools tend to assign a VBG tag, so these may occasionally
be erroneously analyzed as verbs.
%4.
\item Examples. The following is a partial list of items annotated as
pseudo-prepositions:
\begin{quote}
{\it according to,
barring,
based on,
combined with,
compared with,
concerning,
depending on,
excluding,
following,
given,
including,
provided (that),
regarding}
\end{quote}
\begin{itemize}
\item {\it according to}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (PP According
(PP to
(NP (NP sources)
(PP-LOC in
(NP the White House)))))
,
(NP-SBJ the President)
(VP has
(VP been
(ADJP-PRD depressed)
(PP-TMP since
(NP the election)))))
\end{verbatim}
Test: According to whom has the President been depressed?
\item {\it barring}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (PP barring
(NP (NP a recession)
and
(NP (NP a further strengthening)
(PP of
(NP the dollar))
(PP against
(NP foreign currencies)))))
,
(NP-SBJ the industry)
(VP is n't
(VP headed
(PP-CLR for
(NP a prolonged slump)))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it based on}
\begin{verbatim}
(VP staggering
(NP rates)
(PP based
(PP on
(NP (NP the size)
(PP of
(NP deposit))))))
\end{verbatim}
%oh no! I think ``staggering'' should be bracketed as a verb, someone
%please fix it, I'm leaving it for now 'cause it's funny. -m.
% Hee, hee, hee-R.
\item {\it combined with}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ (NP The
(NX (NX glut)
and
(NX consequent lower prices)))
,
(PP combined
(PP with
(NP cancer fears)))
,)
(VP was
(NP-PRD (NP a (ADJP very serious) blow)
(PP to
(NP growers)))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it compared with}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ IBM stock)
(VP sold
(PP-CLR at
(NP $1.25))
,
(PP compared
(PP with
(NP (NP $1.32)
(ADVP-TMP (NP a month)
ago))))))
\end{verbatim}
Test: Compared with what did IBM stock sell at \$1.25? Note also
that this use of {\it compared with} differs from its verbal
meaning.
\item {\it concerning} (when equivalent to {\it about})
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ Imogen)
(VP admitted
(NP (NP a mild curiosity)
(PP concerning
(NP Flavia)))))
\end{verbatim}
Test: Concerning whom did Imogen admit a mild curiosity?
\item {\it depending on}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (PP Depending
(PP on
(NP the organism)))
,
(NP-SBJ there)
(VP may
(VP be
(NP-PRD multiplication)
(PP-LOC in
(NP some food or beverage products)))))
\end{verbatim}
Contrast with its verbal use:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP Depending
(PP-CLR on
(NP (NP the babysitter 's)
reliability))))
,
(NP-SBJ-1 they)
(VP stayed
(ADVP-LOC-CLR out)
(ADVP-TMP late)))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it excluding}
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ (NP net sales)
(PP of
(NP (NP all mutual funds)
,
(PP excluding
(NP money market funds))
,)))
(VP fell
(PP-DIR to
(NP (QP $ 1.9 billion) *U*)
(PP-TMP in
(NP September)))
(PP-DIR from
(NP (QP $ 4.2 billion) *U*)
(PP-TMP in
(NP August)))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it following}\/ (when equivalent to {\it after}\/)
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ Soviet police)
(VP clashed
(PP-CLR with
(NP demonstrators))
(PP-LOC in
(NP Moscow))
(PP-TMP following
(NP (NP a candlelight vigil)
(PP-LOC around
(NP (NP the KGB 's)
Lubyanka headquarters))))))
\end{verbatim}
Test: Following what did the Soviet police clash with demonstrators?
Contrast with its verbal use:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP Following
(NP (NP the doctor 's)
directions)))
,
(NP-SBJ-1 she)
(VP took
(NP one pill)
(PP-TMP after
(NP each meal))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it given}\/ (when it means {\it in light of}\/ or {\it considering}\/)
\begin{verbatim}
(S (PP Given
(NP the present conditions))
,
(NP-SBJ I)
(VP think
(SBAR 0
(S (NP-SBJ she)
(VP 's
(VP done
(ADVP-MNR rather well)))))))
\end{verbatim}
Contrast with verbal use:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ-1 *-2)
(VP Given
(NP *-1)
(NP the chance)))
,
(NP-SBJ-2 I)
(VP 'd
(VP do
(NP it)
(ADVP-TMP again))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it including}
\begin{verbatim}
(PP including
(NP the kitchen sink))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it provided (that)}
Note that although the pied piping part of the
pseudo-prepostionhood test doesn't work with {\it that}\/-clauses,
the other criterion (``lack of verbal meaning'') is applicable. In
cases where the {\it that}\/ is absent but interpreted, SBAR 0 is
inserted:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ The prepaid plans)
(VP may
(VP be
(NP-PRD a good bet)
,
(PP provided
(SBAR 0
(S (NP-SBJ (NP the guarantee)
(PP of
(NP future tuition)))
(VP is
(ADJP-PRD secure))))))))
\end{verbatim}
\item {\it regarding}\/ (when it means {\it about}\/)
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP need
(NP (NP some information)
(PP regarding
(NP (NP flights)
(PP-DIR to
(NP Guam)))))))
\end{verbatim}
\end{itemize}
%5.
\item Multi-word prepositions.
The above pseudo-prepositions should not be confused with ``multi-word''
prepositions, which are bracketed flat. The following is an exhaustive
list of multi-word prepositions: {\it because of}\/, {\it instead of}\/,
{\it rather than}\/, and {\it such as}\/. (See section \RefOrph.)
\index{pseudo-prepositions|)} \index{prepositional
phrases!pseudo-prepositions|)}
\end{enumerate}
%IV.
\subsection{Past Participles} \index{participles!past|(}
Past participles are labeled S, and adverbial function tags are added if
appropriate.
%A.
\subsubsection{Prepositions} \index{prepositional phrases!with past
participles}
A preposition or subordinator that dominates a past participial clause is
bracketed as SBAR. The rule about prepositions (as described in section
\ref{list:gp:s-nom/s:s-nom:PPobj:def-of-PP} on page
\pageref{list:gp:s-nom/s:s-nom:PPobj:def-of-PP}) applies only to {\it
-ing}\/ clause complements, not to
other sentential complements (i.e., {\it until}\/ is always a PP with
gerund complements because it {\bf could}\/ take an NP complement: {\it
until yesterday/last year}\//etc. However, since past participles are
always Ss, {\it until}\/ with a past participle complement is an SBAR).
%B.
\subsubsection{Function tags}
If not under a subordinator, the participle receives the appropriate
function tag.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ-1 *-2)
(VP Given
(NP *-1)
(NP the chance)))
,
(NP-SBJ-2 I)
(VP 'd
(VP do
(NP it)
(ADVP-TMP again))))
\end{verbatim}
If under a subordinator (here, {\it until}\/), it is the subordinator that
bears the adverbial function tag.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 I)
(VP will
(VP wait
(ADVP-LOC here)
(SBAR-TMP until
(S (NP-SBJ-2 *-1)
(VP asked
(NP-3 *-2)
(S (NP-SBJ *-3)
(VP to
(VP leave)))))))))
\end{verbatim}
%C.
\subsubsection{Coindexation and tracing}
Coindexation and tracing proceed as usual with past participles. This
means that there is generally a passive trace coindexed with a null subject
in participial clauses. The null subject is coindexed with another NP in
the sentence if appropriate, according to interpretation.
\index{participles!past|)}
%V.
\subsection{Coordination} \index{coordination!of gerunds/participles}
\label{list:gp:coordination}
Coordination rules laid out in \RefCoord\ apply to NP, S-NOM, S, S-ADV with
no change. See \RefShared\ for more details on the annotation of
coordinate structures and shared elements.
There are only two special cases in the coordination of gerunds and
participles --- the coordination of S-NOM with NP, and S becoming
S-NOM in order to coordinate with NP.
\begin{enumerate}
%A.
\item Level of coordination is labeled NP.
The coordination of S-NOM and NP is labeled NP.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ we)
(VP must
(VP choose
(PP-CLR between
(NP (NP peace)
and
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
(VP keeping
(NP the Communists)
(PP-LOC-CLR out
(PP of
(NP Berlin)
)))))))))
\end{verbatim}
%B.
\item S becomes S-NOM.
Although the {\it -ing}\/ clause object in VP is normally labeled S, it is
labeled S-NOM when it is coordinated with another NP object so that it can
be coordinated under an NP label. Coindexation of the null * subject is
less likely than usual.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP like
(NP (NP cookies)
,
(NP mako sharks)
,
and
(S-NOM (NP-SBJ *)
(VP swimming
(PP-LOC in
(NP the lake))
(PP-TMP on
(NP Tuesdays)))))))
\end{verbatim}
%coindex? -m.
%I prob'ly wouldn't. -k....instead of saying ``coindexation...is as usual''
%how about saying something like ``coindexation varies with the
%annotator''? Or leaving out the statement about coindexing. (here and the
%other before place). -k.
% changed wording a bit-R.
\end{enumerate}
If it is necessary to coordinate any S other than a gerund with an NP, the
coordination must be labeled UCP (Unlike Coordinated Phrase).
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-5 she)
(VP gets
(UCP (NP the best comic bits)
and
(S (NP-SBJ *-5)
(VP to
(VP wear
(NP glamorous dresses)))))))
\end{verbatim}
%VI.
\subsection{Reduced relatives and floating participles} \index{relative
clauses!reduced relatives!vs. ``floating'' participles}
\index{participles!floating@``floating''!vs. reduced relatives}
\label{list:gp:rrc-fp}
%what do you call your aunt after you chop her arm off? Reduced relative!
There are two kinds of NP-modifying participle --- the ``reduced relative''
and the ``floating participle''. Reduced relatives are those that are
closely related to the NP, and don't easily appear in any position other
than just after the modified NP. This type tends to roughly correspond to
{\bf restrictive}\/ relatives (but note that even this rough distinction is
{\bf not}\/ made for non-reduced relatives). Floating participles are
those that move easily around the sentence (beginning and end of sentence,
as well as just after the noun).
%A.
\subsubsection{Reduced Relative Clause} \index{relative clauses!reduced
relatives|(}
The reduced relative clause resembles a restrictive relative clause in
which the complementizer and auxiliary verb are absent. It postmodifies a
noun and consists of either a past participle, a present participle, or an
ADJP, NP, or PP with sentential modifiers.
%1.
\paragraph{VP.} If the reduced relative is a past or present participle, the
participle is labeled VP and adjoined to the NP.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-2 (NP An orangutan)
(VP foaming
(PP-CLR at
(NP the mouth))))
(VP should
not
(VP be
(VP provoked
(NP *-2)))))
\end{verbatim}
In the case of passives, the passive trace is indicated by (NP *).
However, note that this null element does not bear an index, as ordinarily
it would be coindexed with the subject of the relative clause, which in
this case is not present in the annotation.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ He)
(VP bought
(NP (NP two watches)
(VP designed
(NP *)
(PP by
(NP-LGS Paloma Picasso))))))
\end{verbatim}
Notice that the passive trace (NP *) may sometimes function as the subject
of a subordinate clause:
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP an elephant)
(VP called
(S (NP-SBJ *)
(NP-PRD Dumbo))
(SBAR-PRD because
(S (NP-SBJ his ears)
(VP were
(ADJP-PRD so large))))))
\end{verbatim}
%2.
\paragraph{Non-VP: RRC and other likely common alternates.} The label RRC
is used only if the ``reduced relative'' is not a VP, but rather some other
postmodifier such as NP, PP, ADJP, or ADVP that itself has ``sentential''
modifiers. The RRC bracketing provides an additional level under which to
attach these modifiers. (Note that use of RRC is rare.) \index{RRC}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP 110 titles)
(RRC not
(ADVP-TMP presently)
(PP-LOC in
(NP the collection))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP the negative ad)
,
(RRC (PP-TMP for
(NP years))
(NP (NP a secondary presence)
(PP-LOC in
(NP most political campaigns))))
,)
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP this kind)
(PP of
(NP mudslinging))
,
(RRC (ADVP-TMP long)
(ADJP empty
(PP of
(NP significant issues))))
,)
\end{verbatim}
However, note that despite this policy and despite the fact that reduced
relatives of this type are fairly widespread in the corpus, the RRC label
is in general {\bf not}\/ used by the annotators. Instead, one of several
alternate annotations may be found, illustrated here. \index{RRC}
\begin{enumerate}
%(b),
\item where modifiers are bracketed as children of the modifying phrase.
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP 110 titles)
(PP-LOC not
(ADVP-TMP presently)
in
(NP the collection)))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP the negative ad)
,
(NP (NP (ADVP-TMP always)
a secondary presence)
(PP-LOC in
(NP most political campaigns)))
,)
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP this kind)
(PP of
(NP mudslinging))
,
(ADJP (ADVP-TMP long)
empty
(PP of
(NP significant issues)))
,)
\end{verbatim}
%(c),
\item where modifiers are adjoined to the modifying phrase.
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP the negative ad)
,
(NP (PP-TMP for
(NP years))
(NP a secondary presence)
(PP-LOC in
(NP most political campaigns)))
,)
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP this kind)
(PP of
(NP mudslinging))
,
(ADJP (ADVP-TMP long)
(ADJP empty
(PP of
(NP significant issues))))
,)
\end{verbatim}
%(d),
\item where modifiers are adjoined separately to the NP (as though they were
modifiers of the NP rather than modifiers of the modifying phrase itself).
(This option, which in fact misrepresents the semantic structure, is rare.)
%Gotta wonder about that, actually. I'll betcha it's as common as a,b,&c
%above... -R.
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP the books)
(PP-LOC on
(NP the shelf))
(NP-TMP yesterday))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP the negative ad)
,
(PP-TMP for
(NP years))
(NP (NP a secondary presence)
(PP-LOC in
(NP most political campaigns)))
,)
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP this kind)
(PP of
(NP mudslinging))
,
(ADVP-TMP long)
(ADJP empty
(PP of
(NP significant issues)))
,)
\end{verbatim}
%(e),
\item which represents the {\bf coordination}\/ of reduced relatives, with
modifiers placed at the level of coordination. \index{relative
clauses!coordination of reduced relatives}
\begin{verbatim}
(NP (NP this kind)
(PP of
(NP mudslinging))
,
(ADJP (ADVP-TMP long)
(ADJP empty
(PP of
(NP significant issues)))
,
but
(ADVP-TMP still)
(ADJP common)))
\end{verbatim}
\end{enumerate}
\index{relative clauses!reduced relatives|)}
%B.
\subsubsection{Floating participles}
\index{participles!floating@``floating''|(}
\label{list:gp:rrc-fp:fp}
``Floating participle'' is a blanket term used by the Treebank to refer to
a modifying predicate attached at S or VP level. They include past
participles, present participles/gerunds, adjectives, and the occasional NP
or PP. They are bracketed as VPs or -PRDs dominated by an S-ADV.
Floating participles are placed at S-level if they occur before the verb
and at VP-level if they occur after the verb. They are labeled S-ADV,
often with a null subject that is coindexed with the appropriate NP
(usually the subject of the matrix clause).
\begin{enumerate}
%1.
\item Before the subject.
When the floating participle appears before the subject, it is never
analyzed as a reduced relative and is bracketed as follows:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(ADJP-PRD heady
(PP with
(NP success))))
,
(NP-SBJ-1 I)
(VP rushed
(NP it)
(PRT in))))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
( (S-3 (S-ADV (NP-SBJ-2 *-1)
(VP Considered
(NP *-2)
(PP-CLR as
(NP a whole))))
(PRN ,
(S (NP-SBJ Mr. Lane)
(VP said
(SBAR 0
(S *T*-3))))
,)
(NP-SBJ-1 the filings)
``
(VP will
(VP be
(ADJP-PRD effective)))
. ''))
\end{verbatim}
\begin{verbatim}
( (S (S-ADV (NP-SBJ-2 *-1)
(VP Clad
(NP *-2)
(PP-CLR in
(NP his trademark black velvet suit))))
,
(NP-SBJ-1 the soft-spoken clarinetist)
(VP announced
(SBAR that
(S (NP-SBJ-9 (NP his new album)
, ``
(NP-TTL Inner Voices)
, '')
(VP had
(ADVP-TMP just)
(VP been
(VP released
(NP *-9)))))))
.))
\end{verbatim}
%2.
\item After the subject; nonadjacent to the subject.
When the floating participle appears after the subject and nonadjacent to
the subject, it is never analyzed as a reduced relative:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 I)
(VP rushed
(NP it)
(PRT in)
,
(S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(ADJP-PRD heady
(PP with
(NP success))))))
\end{verbatim}
%3.
\item After the subject; adjacent to the subject.
If the participle appears after the subject but adjacent to it or its
modifiers, it can be bracketed either as a reduced relative or as a
floating participle. Annotators use the following tests to decide whether
a given modifier is a reduced relative or a floating participle. (Of
course, which test(s) the annotator decides to use will influence the
eventual annotation. In most cases, the outcome is the same, but there is
some variation in the results.) The tests are listed in the order that
they are most likely to be used by the annotators.
Distinguishing floating participle from reduced relative:
\index{participles!floating@``floating''!vs. reduced relatives}
\begin{enumerate}
%a.
\item Mobility.
Is its semantic relation to the sentence maintained if it is moved around
the sentence?
Yes $\rightarrow$ floating participle\\
No $\rightarrow$ reduced relative
``??Reported by the advisory committee, the progress is real''\\
This participial clause cannot move; therefore, reduced relative.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ (NP The progress)
(VP reported
(NP *)
(PP by
(NP-LGS the advisory committee))))
(VP is
(ADJP-PRD real)))
\end{verbatim}
%b.
\item Commas. \index{participles!floating@``floating''!and commas}
Does it have comma intonation (insofar as that can be ascertained)? There
is a strong tendency for the choice to be influenced by the presence of
commas in the text, which signal comma intonation in the case of floating
participles.
Yes $\rightarrow$ floating participle\\
No $\rightarrow$ reduced relative
``And now, the woman, tired and trembling, came here...''\\
This participial clause requires comma intonation; therefore, floating
participle.
\begin{verbatim}
(S And
(ADVP-TMP now)
,
(NP-SBJ-1 the woman)
,
(S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(UCP-PRD (ADJP-PRD tired)
and
(VP trembling)))
,
(VP came
(ADVP-DIR here)
(PP-DIR to
(NP the DeKalb County cannery))))
\end{verbatim}
% Although it's a bit inconsistent with the way we do NP modifiers, it
% appears that we did show internal structure along the lines of what is
% shown in the UCP above. The general tendency is to show more structure
% for predicates. Also, the VP would ordinarily be labelled as a lone
% present participle, so it seems weird to leave it unlabelled.-R (tgrep)
%c.
\item Paraphrase with {\it while}\/ or {\it being}\/.
Is its semantic relation to the sentence maintained if {\it while}\/ or {\it
being}\/ is inserted?
Yes $\rightarrow$ floating participle\\
No $\rightarrow$ reduced relative
``The Rusk belief, while replacing...''\\
This is OK; therefore, floating participle.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ-1 (NP The Rusk belief)
(PP in
(NP balanced defense)))
,
(S-ADV (NP-SBJ *-1)
(VP replacing
(NP (NP the Dulles theory)
(PP of
(NP massive retaliation)))))
,
(VP removes
(NP a grave danger)))
\end{verbatim}
``The progress, while reported...''
This is not OK; therefore, reduced relative.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ (NP The progress)
(VP reported
(NP *)
(PP by
(NP-LGS the advisory committee))))
(VP is
(ADJP-PRD real)))
\end{verbatim}
%d.
\item Paraphrase with {\it which/that is/are}\/.
Is its semantic relation to the sentence maintained if {\it which/that
is/are}\/ is inserted?
Yes $\rightarrow$ reduced relative\\
No $\rightarrow$ floating participle
``The progress that is reported...''\\
This is good; therefore, reduced relative.
\begin{verbatim}
(S (NP-SBJ (NP The progress)
(VP reported
(NP *)
(PP by
(NP-LGS the advisory committee))))
(VP is
(ADJP-PRD real)))
\end{verbatim}
\index{participles!floating@``floating''|)}
\end{enumerate}
%4.
\item Non-participial S-ADVs. \index{S-ADV!non-participial}
Note that although the vast majority of S-ADVs are in fact ``floating
participles'', any adverbial modifier that contains a predicate merits S +
the relevant adverbial tag(s), for example infinitival clauses and things
such as {\it I hope not too late}\/:
\begin{verbatim}
(S (S (NP-SBJ She)
(VP asked
(SBAR if
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP had
(NP other advice))))))
and
,
(S (NP-SBJ I)
(VP rushed
(NP it)
(PRT in)
,
(S-ADV (NP-SBJ I)
(VP hope
(SBAR 0
(S (NP-SBJ *)
(ADJP-PRD not too late))))))))
\end{verbatim}
\end{enumerate}
%\printindex
%\end{document}
diff --git a/layout.md b/layout.md
index 21c0055..e69de29 100644
--- a/layout.md
+++ b/layout.md
...
Id_ger_par_tex_v_1__.tex
