120419
Notes from an ad-hoc discussion 19.4.2012
Merging Actio, Der/n and Der/eapmi
Reason for discussion
- Der/n and Der/eapmi are in complementary distribution, and express the same 
 = they are the same = Der/Actio - Actio and Der/Actio are the same thing as well, just used in different syntactic contexts 
 - in some cases there are two forms, one long and one short, parallel to what 
 we find in other parts of the grammar = the existence of parallel short and long forms is not an argument for having two categories - in eastern dialects the long forms are used in cases where western dialects 
 use the short form, further underlining the fact that the short and long forms are really variants of the same 
Change it like this?
- Der/n, Der/eapmi and Actio in the present tagset is changed to Der/Actio 
 - the new Der/Actio gets a full noun paradigm, with both Sg and Pl, and all 
 cases (the fact that Plural and some cases are not used in a verbal context (=the old Actio) is a reflection of the syntactic context, and not an indication of a defective paradigm) 
Discussion
Nickel/Sammallahti har tre grupper: 
Dagens norm-fst: borran borran borrat+V+TV+Actio+Gen borran borrat+V+TV+Actio+Nom borran borrat+V+TV+Actio+Acc <==== denne fjernes borran borrat+V+TV+PrfPrc borran borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Gen <==== Der/n => Der/NomAct + Allegro borran borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Nom borrama borrama borrat+V+TV+Actio+Gen <==== denne fjernes borrama borrat+V+TV+Actio+Acc <==== denne fjernes borrama borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Gen <=== Der/NomAct borrama borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Acc <=== Der/NomAct borramiin <==== legge til Actio+Com borramiin borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Pl+Loc <=== Der/NomAct borramiin borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Com <=== Der/NomAct borramis borramis borrat+V+TV+Actio+Loc borramis borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Nom+PxSg3 borramis borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Acc+PxSg3 borramis borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Gen+PxSg3 borramis borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Sg+Loc <=== Der/NomAct borrame borrame borrat+V+TV+Actio+Ess <==== Short? Argument mot: bruken er dialektavhengig, og da bør taggene være de samme for begge dialektene. borrame borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Ess <==== denne fjernes borramin borramin borrat+V+TV+Actio+Ess borramin borrat+V+TV+Der/n+N+Ess <=== Der/NomAct lágidan lágidan lágidit+V+TV+Der/eapmi+N+Sg+Gen <==== denne vil opptre kun i sammensetninger. Vi kan evt innføre lágidit+V+TV+Der/N+Cmp ? lágidan lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Nom lágidan lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Gen lágidan lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Acc <==== denne fjernes lágideami lágideami lágidit+V+TV+Der/eapmi+N+Sg+Acc lágideami lágidit+V+TV+Der/eapmi+N+Sg+Gen lágideami lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Gen <==== denne fjernes lágideami lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Acc <==== denne fjernes lágideame lágideame lágidit+V+TV+Der/eapmi+N+Sg+Gen+Allegro <=== Der/NomAct lágideame lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Ess lágideame lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Gen <==== denne fjernes lágideame lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Acc <==== denne fjernes lágideamen lágideamen lágidit+V+TV+Actio+Ess
Fra korpus:
"<Son>"
        "son" Pron Pers Sg3 Nom @SUBJ>
"<lei>"
        "leat" V IV Ind Prt Sg3 @+FAUXV
"<merkestemiinis>"
        "merket" V* TV Der/st Der/eapmi N Pl Loc PxSg3 @ADVL>  <======= Px
"<hui>"
        "hui" Adv @>ADVL
"<vuollegaččat>"
        "vuollegaččat" Adv @ADVL>
"<govvidan>"
        "govvidit" V TV PrfPrc @-FMAINV
"<dán>"
        "dát" Pron Dem Sg Acc @>N
"<ártegis>"
        "ártet" A Sg Gen PxSg3 @>N
"<olmmošgaskavuođa>"
        "olmmoš#gaskavuohta" N Sg Acc @<OBJ
"<,>"
Nickel/Sammallahti:
1) Innafor verbalet: 
2) Utafor verbalet: 
>>>>>>>>>>> čállit+V+TV+Actio+Acc  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<  dette er den problematiske
(čállin girji) skal samskrives slik: - čállingirji - skrivebok +Der/NomAct+N
296: 
3) Avleiing 
Actions
- hiva ut actio acc och ill, och in alla andra (og fjern alle Err/Sub)
 - bare korformen skal ha Actio Gen (borrama og lágideame og lágideami skal bort)
 - hiva in alla px: ar igen, ja ved derivasjonane 
 - lágidan Der/NomAct ska bara gå till R 
 - follow-up on the CG to check that the removed tag doesn't create changed 
 output 

