Re: Claudia Jardim's text: morphological analysis by André Carvalho -- English Morphology Online Seminars

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, [2] ]

Subject: Re: Claudia Jardim's text: morphological analysis by André Carvalho

Author:
Claudia Jardim

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 14:17:50 10/02/09 Fri
In reply to: André Carvalho 's message, "Claudia Jardim's text: morphological analysis by André Carvalho" on 13:35:48 10/02/09 Fri

Good evening, André!

I think your analysis is pretty good. Congrats!

I'd like to discusse with you about some parts of it:

Some "words", I'm not sure if they are free or not. For instance: [PUT], its a ver, ok?
[TO DISCUSS] and [TO TAKE] wouldn't be [-finite]?
[LIKELY] = [LIKE] [+?]
[WILL SUCCEED] [?] 'will' is a modal. It modifies the verb, right.
[IS] = woudn't be [BE] [3rd person] [-past] [-plura]?
[TO DISRUP] [DISMANTLE] and [DESTROY] wouldn't be [-finite] as well?
[THINK] = [THINK] [-past]?

I have the same doubt about "hight-level" and "counterinsurgency" and about numbers. I am in doubt about "would consider" too.

Hve a nice weekend!

Claudia

>TEXT ANALYSIS
>
>(WASHINGTON) — Sen. John McCain said Wednesday that
>President Barack Obama cannot give up the fight in
>Afghanistan, saying the region would be destabilized
>if the United States and its NATO allies pulled back.
>McCain, Obama's Republican opponent in last year's
>election, also argued for the president to approve a
>call for additional troops by Gen. Stanley McChrystal,
>the U.S. commander on the ground, and other military
>officers. If Obama fails to do so, McCain said in a
>morning news show interview, it would "put the United
>States in much greater danger, because failure in
>Afghanistan" would run the risk of the nation turning
>into a base for attacks on the U.S. and its allies.
>McCain appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America" on a
>day in which Obama was holding a high-level White
>House meeting to discuss his Afghan strategy. His vice
>president, Joe Biden, Secretary of State Hillary
>Rodham Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and
>other members of his national security team were
>expected to take part.
>McChrystal has written an assessment of Afghanistan
>saying that he thinks the war effort there likely will
>succeed only with the dispatch of significant numbers
>of additional troops, in addition to the more than
>68,000 there now.
>The Obama White House has said repeatedly that the
>president would consider McChrystal's recommendations,
>and those of other advisers, carefully and
>methodically before announcing his next move. Obama
>has said the goal of the U.S. presence in Afghanistan
>is to disrupt, dismantle and destroy the al-Qaeda
>terrorist network and its sympathizers. Time is not on
>our side," McCain said, "so we need a decision pretty
>quickly. I think history is pretty clear that when the
>Taliban took over, it became a base for attacks on the
>United States and our allies."
>McCain said much more effort is needed in the wartorn
>Asian nation. "There are still populated areas that
>need to be under control," he said. "You go in, you
>clear, you hold, you allow the political, economic and
>cultural life to continue. ...There are great problems
>there, a corrupt government."
>But the Arizonan also said he thinks the country is in
>no worse shape, even perhaps better off, than Iraq was
>at the time when then-President George W. Bush ordered
>the American military surge there late in his second
>term. "We're talking about the inkblot strategy," said
>McCain, "where you go into the populated areas, you
>clear out the bad guys. ... That's what we did in
>Iraq, and that's the classic counterinsurgency."
>
>FREE MORPHS: [short], [Wednesday], [that],
>[President], [give], [up], [the], [fight], [in],
>[region], [would], [be], [if], [and], [back],
>[opponent], [last], [year], [also], [for], [approve],
>[a], [call], [by], [on], [ground], [other],
>[military], [to], [do], [so], [morning], [news],
>[show], [interview]*, [it], [put], [much], [danger],
>[because], [run], [risk], [of], [nation], [into],
>[base], [good], [america], [day], [which],
>[high-level]*, [white], [house], [discuss],
>[strategy], [vice], [secretary], [state], [defense],
>[other], [team], [take], [part], [an], [assessment],
>[war], [effort], [there], [likely], [will], [succeed],
>[only], [with], [dispatch], [significant], [more],
>[than], [now], [consider], [before], [next], [move],
>[goal], [presence], [is], [disrupt], [dismantle],
>[destroy], [network], [time], [on], [side], [so],
>[need], [decision], [pretty], [think], [history],
>[clear], [when], [took], [over], [still], [under],
>[control], [go], [hold], [allow], [life], [continue],
>[great], [but], [country], [no], [shape], [even],
>[perhaps], [off], [then], [surge], [late], [second],
>[term], [about], [inkblot]*, [strategy], [where],
>[bad], [what], [classic], [counterinsurgency]*.
>
>The names of people (Barack Obama, John McCain, etc),
>countries/states (Afghanistan, Iraq, Washington, etc)
>and TV channels (ABC) are also free morphs. (I think…)
>
>* I am not sure if those words are free morphs or not.
>
>Allomorphs analyzed in each sentence:
>
>I CHOSE NOT TO WORK WITH REPEATED TERMS. I’M AWARE
>THAT IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE CONFUSING… MY APOLOGIES.
>
>(WASHINGTON) — Sen. John McCain said Wednesday that
>President Barack Obama cannot give up the fight in
>Afghanistan, saying the region would be destabilized
>if the United States and its NATO allies pulled back.
>
>said – [say, +past]
>cannot – [can, +neg.]
>saying – [say, +pres. cont.]
>destabilized – [destabilize, +past]
>its – [3rd p., -pl, +neutral,+possessive]
>allies – [allie, +pl]
>pulled – [pull, +past]
>
>McCain, Obama's Republican opponent in last year's
>election, also argued for the president to approve a
>call for additional troops by Gen. Stanley McChrystal,
>the U.S. commander on the ground, and other military
>officers.
>
>Republican – [republic, +agent]
>election – [elect, +noun]
>argued – [argue, +past]
>additional – [add, +relational]
>troops – [troop, +pl]
>commader – [command, +agent]
>officers – [office, +agent, +pl]
>
>If Obama fails to do so, McCain said in a morning news
>show interview, it would "put the United States in
>much greater danger, because failure in Afghanistan"
>would run the risk of the nation turning into a base
>for attacks on the U.S. and its allies.
>
>fails – [fail, +sim. pres.]
>morning – [morn, +ing]
>greater – [great, +superlative]
>failure – [fail, +noun]
>turning – [turn, +pres. cont.]
>attacks – [attack, +pl]
>
>McCain appeared on ABC's "Good Morning America" on a
>day in which Obama was holding a high-level White
>House meeting to discuss his Afghan strategy.
>
>appeared – [appear, +past]
>was – [be, -pl, +past]
>holding – [hold, +pres. cont.]
>meeting – [meet, +noun]
>his – [3rd p., -pl, +masc.]
>Afghan – [Afghanistan, +relational]
>
>His vice president, Joe Biden, Secretary of State
>Hillary Rodham Clinton, Defense Secretary Robert Gates
>and other members of his national security team were
>expected to take part.
>
>members – [member, +pl]
>national – [nation, +relational]
>were – [be, +pl, +past]
>expected – [expect, +past]
>
>McChrystal has written an assessment of Afghanistan
>saying that he thinks the war effort there likely will
>succeed only with the dispatch of significant numbers
>of additional troops, in addition to the more than
>68,000 there now.
>
>has – [have, 3rd p., -pl, -past]
>written – [write, +past]
>he – [3rd p., -pl, +masc.]
>thinks – [think, +simp. pres.]
>numbers – [number, +pl]
>addition – [add, +noun]
>68,000 – [???]
>
>The Obama White House has said repeatedly that the
>president would consider McChrystal's recommendations,
>and those of other advisers, carefully and
>methodically before announcing his next move.
>
>repeatedly – [repeat, +manner]
>recommendations – [recommend, +noun, +pl]
>those – [that, +pl]
>advisers – [advise, +noun, +pl]
>carefully – [careful, +manner]
>methodically – [methodical, +manner]
>announcing – [announce, +pres. cont.]
>
>Obama has said the goal of the U.S. presence in
>Afghanistan is to disrupt, dismantle and destroy the
>al-Qaeda terrorist network and its sympathizers.
>
>is – [be, -pl, -past]
>terrorist – [terror, +agent]
>sympathizers – [sympathize, +agent, +pl]
>
>Time is not on our side," McCain said, "so we need a
>decision pretty quickly. I think history is pretty
>clear that when the Taliban took over, it became a
>base for attacks on the United States and our allies."
>
>quickly – [quick, +manner]
>became – [become, +past]
>
>McCain said much more effort is needed in the wartorn
>Asian nation.
>
>needed – [need, +past]
>Asian – [Asia, +relational]
>
>"There are still populated areas that need to be under
>control," he said.
>
>are – [be, +pl, -past]
>populated – [populate, +relational]
>areas – [area, +pl]
>
>"You go in, you clear, you hold, you allow the
>political, economic and cultural life to continue.
>
>you – [2nd p.]
>political – [policy, +manner]
>economic – [economy, +manner]
>cultural – [culture, +manner]
>
>There are great problems there, a corrupt government."
>
>problems – [problem, +pl]
>
>But the Arizonan also said he thinks the country is in
>no worse shape, even perhaps better off, than Iraq was
>at the time when then-President George W. Bush ordered
>the American military surge there late in his second
>term.
>
>Arizonan – [Arizona, +relational]
>worse – [bad, +superlative]
>better – [good, +superlative]
>ordered – [order, +past]
>American – [America, +relational]
>
>"We're talking about the inkblot strategy," said
>McCain, "where you go into the populated areas, you
>clear out the bad guys. …That's what we did in Iraq,
>and that's the classic counterinsurgency."
>
>we – [1st p., +pl]
>talking – [talk, +pres. cont.]
>guys – [guy, +pl]
>did – [do, +past]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]