Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update 10-3.cgel #34

Open
wants to merge 15 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update 10-3.cgel #34

wants to merge 15 commits into from

Conversation

mebwells
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@bwaldon
Copy link
Collaborator

bwaldon commented Sep 3, 2024

  • Status of of-PPs in relational nouns (e.g., resident) may warrant more discussion. (As we discussed on 08/29). Two SIEG-inspired arguments for analyzing “of the district…” as :Comp not :Mod (see Section 5.4.1):
  1. “of the district…” corresponds to an argument of the verbal form reside (e.g., He resided in the district…).

  2. “of the district…” is ‘obligatory’ in the same way that an of-PP is ‘obligatory’ for the noun feasibility, as discussed in SIEG:

even when someone does say something like What’s the feasibility? we have to understand them as having asked about the feasibility of some particular planned action that was clear from the preceding context.

As discussed on 08/29, though, there’s a prima facie tension with analyzing this of-PP as :Comp when other, similarly ‘relational’ nouns (e.g., paragraph in [1]; schedule in [2]) supposedly can attach to :Mod of-PPs that correspond to one entity in the ‘relation’.

[1] https://github.com/nert-nlp/legal-cgel/blob/main/datasets/oneoff/9-2.cgel
[2] https://github.com/nert-nlp/cgel/blob/dec764379cf81f0915c8f81599d803ecc047ce89/datasets/ewt.cgel#L606C3-L606C38

@bwaldon
Copy link
Collaborator

bwaldon commented Sep 3, 2024

  • That said, of-PPs following service and notice should be:Comp not :Mod since they are nominalizations of verbs that would express these PPs as objects.
  • Does *for service of... * attach higher (i.e., at prescribed)? (TODO: discuss)
  • Multiple possible attachment sites for in an action in the same court? (TODO: discuss)

mebwells and others added 4 commits September 3, 2024 09:55
"by" PP Mod-> Comp
Changed instances of "of" to Comp, following discussion with Brandon. Reattached "for service of notice..." higher at "prescribed." 

In terms of "in an action in the same court," I'm having trouble understanding the actual meaning of this sentence in context, causing problems for accurate annotation. Can we discuss what this sentence is actually trying to say to better understand attachment/possible ambiguity?
@bwaldon
Copy link
Collaborator

bwaldon commented Sep 13, 2024

Does in an action in the same court have multiple attachment sites? Otherwise looks ready to merge in

@mebwells
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Upon review, I think there are potentially many attachment sites (one could argue that almost every preposition in that statement could have several different attachments...), but out of context I'm not sure which ones are valid interpretations in terms of what the law is trying to say

mebwells and others added 4 commits September 20, 2024 10:47
Added interpretation of ambiguity for "service of notice of motion in an action in the same court." It's very thorny though, so definitely needs review as we may disagree on how many/what meaningful readings exist/
"such" --> D
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants