GRAMMAR CLEANUPS

General harmonization:
pronoun predicates
neg_rel
exist_rel
quickly quick

ENGLISH SENTENCES

1. 
Sentence:       Dogs sleep.
Realizations:   1 :)

2. 
Sentence:       Dogs chase cars. 
Realizations:   2
Comments:       Ambiguity is due to topicalized word order (x2).

3.
Sentence:       I chase you.
Realizations:   4
Comments:       Ambiguity is due to topicalized word order (x2) and multiple 
                forms of second person pronoun (x2).
                
4. 
Sentence:       These dogs sleep.
Realizations:   1 :)
Comments:       We previously did not have any proximal demonstratives 
                implemented. This was because Yiddish's primary method of
                indicating a proximal demonstrative is through the use of 
                stress on the determiner. We looked further and found that there
                is also a -o suffix on determiners for emphasizing proximal
                demonstratives, and implemented this as a new set of 
                demonstratives with proximal+dem_a_rel as the ALTKEYREL PRED.

5. 
Sentence:       Dogs eat.
Realizations:   1 :)

6. 
Sentence:       I can eat glass.
Realizations:   16 :(
Comments:       Initially we were getting past-participle forms of the
                matrix verb. This turned out to be because the
                past-participle form was incorrectly inheriting from
                finite.

                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! 

7. 
Sentence:       It doesnt hurt me.
Realizations:   6 
Comments:       Ambiguity is due to multiple forms of the third person 
                pronoun (x3) and topicalization word order (x2). 
                

8. 
Sentence:       The dogs chase cars.
Realizations:   2
Comments:       Ambiguity is due to topicalized word order (x2).

                In order to get the definite determiner appearing in
                the translation we had to modify the bare-np-phrase
                rule have its COG-ST to be type-id. We then had to
                create an alternate rule for pronouns. This is shown
                below. We needed a quick fix for this, and we are
                aware that it is better to avoid types in the
                daughters of phrasal rules.

                bare-np-phrase := basic-bare-np-phrase &
                  [ C-CONT.RELS <! [ PRED "exist_q_rel" ] !>,
                    SYNSEM.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.INDEX.COG-ST type-id ].

                bare-np-pro-phrase := basic-bare-np-phrase &
                  [ C-CONT.RELS <! [ PRED "exist_q_rel" ] !>,
                    HEAD-DTR pers-pro-lex ].


9.
Sentence:       I think that you know that dogs chase cars.
Realizations:   4
Comments:       Ambiguity is due to multiple forms of 2nd person pronoun (x2),
                and topicalization word order (x2).

                When we began, we were getting many realizations for
                this sentence --possibly around 30. One bug we
                discovered was that the first argument of complement
                clause taking verbs was not being restricted to
                nominative as we had forgotten to do this when
                implementing these new subcat frames. We fixed this by
                creating a new type nom-verb-lex illustrated below,
                which we could then apply to verb-comp-lex and
                copula-verb lex, which was also deficient in this way.

                nom-verb-lex := verb-lex &
                  [ ARG-ST.FIRST.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD noun &
                                                [ CASE nom ] ].


10. 
Sentence:       I ask whether you know that dogs chase cars.
Realizations:   
Comments:       

11. 
Sentence:       
Realizations:   Cats and dogs chase cars.
Comments:       

12. 
Sentence:       
Realizations:   Dogs chase cars and cats chase dogs.
Comments:       

13. 
Sentence:       
Realizations:   Cats chase dogs and sleep.
Comments:       

14. 
Sentence:       
Realizations:   Do cats chase dogs?
Comments:       

15. 
Sentence:       
Realizations:   Hungry dogs eat.
Comments:       

16. 
Sentence:       
Realizations:   Dogs eat quickly.
Comments:       

17. 
Sentence:       The dogs are hungry.
Realizations:   
Comments:       

18. 
Sentence:       The dogs are in the park.
Realizations:   
Comments:       

19. 
Sentence:       The dogs are the cats.
Realizations:   
Comments:       

