Common Contracts

3 similar Verb Agreement contracts

Icelandic finite verb agreement
Verb Agreement • July 19th, 2006

Nonagreement with nominative subjects would yield the underspecification in (36a).8 Conversely, agreement (of a verb or a predicate) with quirky subjects would result in the overspecification in (36b). Taraldsen (1994) suggests that featural overspecification of this sort is ruled out by the principle of econonmy of representation: instead of favoring smaller trees over bigger ones in the same candidate set, he suggests, "the relevant evluation metric actually counts specified features rather than nodes" (p. 49).

AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Icelandic finite verb agreement
Verb Agreement • July 19th, 2006

Nonagreement with nominative subjects would yield the underspecification in (36a).8 Conversely, agreement (of a verb or a predicate) with quirky subjects would result in the overspecification in (36b). Taraldsen (1994) suggests that featural overspecification of this sort is ruled out by the principle of econonmy of representation: instead of favoring smaller trees over bigger ones in the same candidate set, he suggests, "the relevant evluation metric actually counts specified features rather than nodes" (p. 49).

Icelandic finite verb agreement
Verb Agreement • July 19th, 2006

Nonagreement with nominative subjects would yield the underspecification in (36a).8 Conversely, agreement (of a verb or a predicate) with quirky subjects would result in the overspecification in (36b). Taraldsen (1994) suggests that featural overspecification of this sort is ruled out by the principle of econonmy of representation: instead of favoring smaller trees over bigger ones in the same candidate set, he suggests, "the relevant evluation metric actually counts specified features rather than nodes" (p. 49).

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!