Bug reports, errors
This file is now abandoned, as our bugs are reported and solved in our Bugzilla bug report system. This file is kept here for nostalgic reasons.
Morphophonological (twol) errors
it accepts girkudáidda but not girkodáidda. The vow shortening in compounds thus does not quite work. Other examples:
oskkoldat oskkoldat oskkoldat+N+Sg+Nom diehtaga diehtaga died1a+N+Sg+Gen diehtaga died1a+N+Sg+Acc oskkoldatdiehtaga oskkoldatdiehtaga oskkoldatdiehtaga +? oahpaheaddjeoahpus oahpaheaddjeoahpus oahpaheaddjeoahpus +?
Answer: because Nom + Nom is not accepted for this type of words.
Moprpholoical errors (Errors in the rule file)
dárkil works but dárkileappot does not.
no paradigm for actio of DOHPPE
dohppema dohppema dohppema +? beastima beastima beastit+V+n+N+Actio+Sg+Gen beastima beastit+V+n+N+Actio+Sg+Acc
besten, dohppen, beastin are ok, but not bestema, dohppema, contrary to beastima. This is a problem for the DOHPPE lexicon.
goappas1 (wesrt) goappas1iid goappas1iid goappas1iidda goappas1iin goappas1iiguin goappas1in guktot (east) guktuid guktuid guktuide guktuin guktuiguin gukton (?)
HAVE A LOOK.
e in front of -las in deverbal adjectives
The parser gives bealkálas from bealkit, which is correct, but it overgenerates to joavdálas for joavdit, where the correct form should be jovdelas. Look into this.
Illative of foreign names in -e
There are two documented patterns:
Lene -> Lenii
Manasse -> Manassei
The question is: Can there be made some generalisations?
Qestions, open issues
otnás1 otnás1 otnás1+Sg+Gen otnás1 otnás1+Sg+Acc otnás1 otnás1+Sg+Nom otnás1 otnás1+N+Sg+Gen otnás1 otnás1+N+Sg+Acc otnás1 otnás1+N+Sg+Nom
Missing POS in derivatives
mánnálas1 mánnálas1 mánná+N+las1+Sg+Nom mánnálas1 mánnálas1+N+Sg+Nom mánnálas1 mánnálas1+A+Sg+Nom mánnálas1 mánnálas1+A+Attr
The first entry does not say "+A".
Diacritical marks in the lexicon forms
The forest of comparatives
apply down> issoras+A+Comp+Sg+Nom issorasat issorat issorabbu issoreabbo issoreabbu issoret issorit issorut apply down> fargat+A+Sg+Gen fargat fargada suovat suovada
Missing declension forms (?)
deaivat > deives1 (missing)
jeagadit > jeagolas1 (missing)
Gradation error for certain nouns
Weak grade not rec. for máhli, duihmi, c1áihmi, -hl-, -hm-, -hn- also in weak grade.
Errors in the lexicon files (missing words)
has defect Acc, Gen, and 'apply down' does not work
is not found in the lexicon list at all. TODO: Write a lexicon for LASIS
All CG cases of series II E are checked. The ihx ones do not work (cf. above), but the other ones do.
The multiple genitive forms
At one stage , Acc/Gen forms were accompanied by several strange additional forms (Gen#vuoign1an/vuoignám). These are now commented out of the noun lexicon, by a ! mark.
TODO: Check with the original lexicon, to ensure that nothing crucial has been lost in the conversion process.
Comitative plural and Px
Correct: apply down> giella+N+Pl+Com+PxSg3 gielaidisguin apply down> giella+N+Pl+Com+PxPl3 gielaideasetguin Errouneous: apply down> beana+N+Pl+Com+PxPl3 beatnagiiddiset apply down> beana+N+Pl+Com+PxSg3 beatnagiiddis
Also the contracted words luomi and gahpir behaved the same way as beana. It thus seems this is an error for all contracted nouns.
TODO: Go through the Px paradigm, and see if beana shows errors in other parts of the paradigm, and if there are other words that have problems in the Comitative Plural paradigm.
apply down> jearaldat+N+Pl+Ill jearaldahkaide
Also for servodat
apply up> buorre buorri1+A+Sg+Nom <== what is buorri1 ? buorre+A+Sg+Nom
duogás1 duogás1+Sg+Gen duogás1 duogás1+Sg+Acc duogás1 duogás1+Sg+Nom
Have a look at this:
apply up> goappa goabbá+Pron+Interr+Sg+Acc goabbá+Pron+Interr+Sg+Gen apply up> goappá goabbá+Pron+Interr+Sg+Acc goabbá+Pron+Interr+Sg+Gen
It seems the first one is errouneous.
bienasta bitnii must be included in a list of multiword expressions in the preproscessor.
The vislcg preprocessor lookup2cg
This preprocessor is located in gt/script/. It has two main problems:
- The quotation marks are not always in place
- The grammatical tags are kept on non-final elements in compounds.
The quotation marks are not always in place
The grammatical tags are kept on non-final elements in compounds.
Cf. this example:
"<girkoás1s1it>" "girku" N Sg Nom # ás1s1i N Pl Nom "girku" N Sg Gen # ás1s1i N Pl Nom "<gulle>" S:1314, 1573, 1573, 1530 "gullat" V Ind Prs Du1 "gullet" V VGen "gullet" V Ind Prs Sg3
Here, the correct reading "gullet V Ind Prt Pl3" is removed due to rule 1314, saying
REMOVE Pl3 IF (0 Sg3) (-1 (N Sg Nom)); ## Dokumeanta c1ilge, mo mii eallit.
But the Sg Nom in the preceeding word is the first part of the compound, not the second, and it should be disregarded during the context evaluation of the 1314 rule.
- Remove all grammatical information before the # symbol
- This is a clean solution. One marginal problem is that the initial tag, the "word" itself is kept, and this may act as a tag in its own right.
- Change the grammatical tags before the # symbol into something else, e.g. by wrapping < > parentheses around them.
- The output becomes cumbersome to read, but it may still be the best solution.
- One possibility may be to include the # symbol in the set definitions, so that for each tag, the set of corresponding tags including a succeeding # is disregarded, e.g. SET NSGNOM = (N Sg Nom) - (N Sg Nom #);
- This looks cumbersome, though, as all tag combinations must be decleared as sets.
Todo: Evaluate this.