-------------------------------------------
Comments

                Aside from the problematic word orders (some of which
                are clearly ungrammatical, and some we do not have the
                data to tell -- discussed further in the Italian
                version of this sentence), the other issue we are
                having with this sentence is that the indefinite
                article is being inserted incorrectly. We think this
                is caused by the fact that indefinite articles have
                COG-ST type-id which is underspecified (and then
                interacting with the change we made to make articles
                appear if they their relevant cognitive status marking
                were present in the input sentence.) An analysis of mass
                nouns might have helped here too! 

EB> [COG-ST type-id] is not underspecified.  Not sure what
you mean there.

                We are currently not generating the realization that has
                the interrogative complementizer appearing in the
                embedded clause, we still need to implement this.

EB> Because of trigger rules, or something else?

Comments:       Well. This is a bit sad. We are getting past participle forms
                popping up everywhere. It looks like this might be that the
                finite form of the verb in second conjunct might be somehow
                permitting the past-participle form. We unfortunately 
                ran out of time to finish debugging this. The other fix
                that could help here is insisting that sentential conjuncts
                both be MC +, but it's not clear if this will be sweeping things
                under the rug. 

EB> I suspect that you need to make the constraints on the daughters
of S-coordination look a lot like the constraints on the root symbol.

Comments:       We think the problem is to do with the trigger rule, however
                when we change the above trigger rule to fire on PRED "~.*_ap_",
                the stack overflow goes away and we end up with no realizations.
                Perhaps the [] regexp notation within the string being matches
                is not working. According to the DELPH-IN wiki, regular expressions
                are supported in the PRED feature, but maybe not this specific
                syntax?

EB> I'd guess that you need two separate trigger rules.  

