Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- user:zeman:interset:brainstorming [2007/10/03 18:00]
zeman нечии
+++ user:zeman:interset:brainstorming [2008/04/24 17:26]
zeman Quantos.
@@ Line 169: / Line 169: @@
 ==== reflex ====
   * Attribute of referencing (pronomial) nouns and adjectives. Means reflexive reference to itself. Does not apply to numerals and adverbs. Czech examples: sebe, se, sobě, si, sebou (personal), svůj (possessive), sám (demonstrative - as in "sám velký šéf", not in "zůstal tam sám").
@@ Line 175: / Line 176: @@
 ==== definiteness ====
-Bulgarian seems to be the reason why we need to separate the lexical definiteness (or demonstrativeness) from the morphological one. Most Bulgarian nouns, adjectives and pronouns allow for suffixes (-at, -ta, -to, -te) that change the default indefinite word forms to definite ones. Even indefinite pronouns (lexical definiteness = indefinite) can distinguish the two states. Thus, we have lexically indefinite morphologically indefinite word forms (нещо, едно), and lexically indefinite morphologically definite word forms (едната, едното, едните, нещата). We also cannot use the morphological indefiniteness to recognize indefinite pronouns. There are morphologically indefinite possessive pronouns (i.e., they can have the definite suffix but they do not have it in these particular cases) мое, твое, свое, негово, нейно, наше, ваше, тяхно... Hence the (morphological) definiteness feature does not remain unset and cannot be used to distinguish possessives from indefinite pronouns. If we take the opposite approach and query the poss feature first, we will not successfully encode the tag "P Pf def=i|ref=p|num=p" of нечии (něčí, someone's).
+Bulgarian seems to be the reason why we need to separate the lexical definiteness (or demonstrativeness) from the morphological one. Most Bulgarian nouns, adjectives and pronouns allow for suffixes (-at, -ta, -to, -te) that change the default indefinite word forms to definite ones. Even indefinite pronouns (lexical definiteness = indefinite) can distinguish the two states. Thus, we have lexically indefinite morphologically indefinite word forms (нещо, едно), and lexically indefinite morphologically definite word forms (едната, едното, едните, нещата). We also cannot use the morphological indefiniteness to recognize indefinite pronouns. There are morphologically indefinite possessive pronouns (i.e., they can have the definite suffix but they do not have it in these particular cases) мое, твое, свое, негово, нейно, наше, ваше, тяхно... Hence the (morphological) definiteness feature does not remain unset and cannot be used to distinguish possessives from indefinite pronouns. If we take the opposite approach and query the poss feature first, we will not successfully encode the tag "P Pf def=i|ref=p|num=p" of нечии (něčí, someone's). Similarly, indefinite numerals cannot be recognized by the value of definiteness because normal numerals can have this feature set. Example: any numeral expressed using ciphers ("1886", tag "M Mo gen=f|num=s|def=i").
 On the other hand, definiteness is not the same as demonstrativeness. Although I currently do not have an example of a demonstrative that is clearly morphologically indefinite, and although most demonstratives are semantically definite, there are demonstratives that describe the referee without necessarily having one particular (definite) in mind. Example: Czech demonstrative pronouns takový (such), týž, tentýž (same as).
@@ Line 230: / Line 231: @@
   * Není jisté, zda také hodnota //synpos// u číslovek vždy vyplývá ze //subpos//. Zatím u číslovek rozlišujeme obojí.
+===== Zájmena a příslovce míry, resp. neurčité aj. číslovky =====
+Portugalština:
+        # (Indefinite) quantifier pronoun or adverb.
+        # independent pronouns: algo, tudo, nada
+        # independent relative pronouns: todo_o_que
+        # determiners (pronouns): algum, alguma, alguns, algumas, uns, umas, vários, várias,
+        #    qualquer, pouco, poucos, muitos, mais,
+        #    todo, todo_o, todos, todas, ambos, ambas
+        # adverbs: pouco, menos, muito, mais, mais_de, quase, tanto, mesmo, demais, bastante, suficiente, bem
+        # demonstrative adverbs: t~ao
+        # This is not the class of indefinite pronouns. This class contains pronouns and adverbs of quantity.
+        # The pronouns and adverbs in this class can be indefinite (algo), total (todo), negative (nada), demonstrative (tanto, tao),
+        # interrogative (quanto), relative (todo_o_que). Many are indefinite, but not all.
+Tohle celé by mohlo být zachyceno v nějakém rysu numtype (analogie k prontype), kde by bylo card, ord, mult atd. Přijde mi ale trochu divné označovat neurčité číslovky za kardinální čísla. Další možnost je advtype (popř. reftype), kde by bylo vedle loc, tim a man taky qnt (quantity). Problém s pojmenováním rysu tkví v tom, že v češtině máme druhové číslovky kolikerý apod., které moc nepoužíváme, zatímco v portugalštině se číslovka kolik často používá jako determinátor, který se shoduje s počítaným podstatným jménem v rodě a čísle (quantos, quantas). Zatím tedy budu podobná slova odlišovat pomocí subpos = card, ale výhledově vymyslím něco lepšího.

[ Back to the navigation ] [ Back to the content ]

Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics Wiki

Differences