Difference between revisions of "IP-IMP"
From Icelandic Parsed Historical Corpus (IcePaHC)
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
2p.plur. Verið (þið) góð vs. Þið eruð góð | 2p.plur. Verið (þið) góð vs. Þið eruð góð | ||
| + | </pre> | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | Expressions like "komdu sæl" are treated as IP-IMPs with secondary predicates (see [[ADJP]] and [[ADJP-SPR]]), as in the following example: | ||
| + | |||
| + | <pre> | ||
| + | ( (IP-IMP-SPE (INTJP (INTJ Já-já)) | ||
| + | (, ,-,) | ||
| + | (VBPI komið-koma) | ||
| + | (NP-SBJ (PRO-N þér-þú)) | ||
| + | (NP-TMP (Q-A alla-allur) (NS-A tíma-tími)) | ||
| + | (ADJP-SPR (ADJ-N sælir-sæll) (CONJ og-og) (ADJ-N blessaðir-blessaður)) | ||
| + | (. !-!))) | ||
| + | |||
</pre> | </pre> | ||
Revision as of 09:54, 26 September 2010
Imperative clauses are parsed IP-IMP. A verb in imperative is always tagged VBI/BEI/DOI, that is tense is not tagged. This is not to be confused with I(ndicative) in e.g. VBPI (verb, present, indicative).
Only overt subject of imperative clauses are parsed, cf. PPCME2,PPCEME documentation.
( (IP-IMP-SPE (CONJ og-og) (VBI kom$-koma) (NP-SBJ (PRO-N $du-þú)) (ADVP-TMP (ADV nú-nú)))) ( (IP-IMP-SPE (CONJ og-og) (VBI kom$-koma) (ADVP-TMP (ADV nú-nú))))
Verbs in 1p.plur., 2p.sing. and 2p.plur. are found in the imperative. Note that usually there is no morphological difference between imperative and indicative, but there is for VERA 'be' in 1p.plur., 2p.sing. and 2p.plur:
1p.plur. Verum (*við) góð vs. Við erum góð 2p.sing. Ver (þú) góður vs. Þú ert góður 2p.plur. Verið (þið) góð vs. Þið eruð góð
Expressions like "komdu sæl" are treated as IP-IMPs with secondary predicates (see ADJP and ADJP-SPR), as in the following example:
( (IP-IMP-SPE (INTJP (INTJ Já-já)) (, ,-,) (VBPI komið-koma) (NP-SBJ (PRO-N þér-þú)) (NP-TMP (Q-A alla-allur) (NS-A tíma-tími)) (ADJP-SPR (ADJ-N sælir-sæll) (CONJ og-og) (ADJ-N blessaðir-blessaður)) (. !-!)))
