The changes are now live. I've finally not included the apostrophe form in
the paradigms; instead, it's a form of the 's lemma that is removed via CG
when the previous lemma is not a noun or proper noun ending in "s". I'm
currently training the apertium-eng tagger, so I'll add some forbids
related to genitives in the TSX files to rely less on CG.
In order to add support for genitives in any pair using apertium-eng,
simply add the following entry (change LR to RL if English is on the right
side of the bidix):
<e r="LR"><p><l><s n="gen"/></l><r></r></p></e>
To generate the genitive form of any noun or proper noun, add "+'s<gen>"
after the noun. The correct form of the genitive will be generated
automatically. Example:
house<n><sg>+'s<gen> = house's
house<n><pl>+'s<gen> = houses'
Thank you!
2017-07-19 0:35 GMT+02:00 Marc Riera Irigoyen <marc.riera.irigo...@gmail.com
>:
> Fran, I agree with your suggestion, I'll do it this way.
>
> Flammie, the only change you need to do in the bidix is to add an entry
> like this:
>
> <e r="LR"><p><l>'s<s n="gen"/></l><r></r></p></e>
>
> This will allow your pair to get a <gen> lemma after the word in genitive
> that can be used in transfer rules when translating from English. The other
> way round is simpler, just make the rules add an extra <gen> tag to a lemma
> to get its genitive form (e.g. house<n><sg><gen> will show up as "house's").
>
> I will wait until the end of the week (in case someone else has any
> suggestion) and notify you all when I commit the changes. Thanks!
>
> 2017-07-18 20:34 GMT+02:00 Flammie Pirinen <flam...@iki.fi>:
>
>> 2017-07-18, Francis Tyers sanoi:
>>
>> > El 2017-07-18 14:44, Marc Riera Irigoyen escribió:
>> > > Hello! I'm working on apertium-eng-cat and I've been having some
>> > > issues with genitives. Currently, many noun paradigms in
>> > > apertium-eng (mostly irregular nouns) have a <gen> form with the
>> > > genitive. Not all nouns have it, so apertium-eng also includes a
>> > > specific lemma for the regular genitive ('s) to add the <gen> tag
>> > > in the analysis.
>> > >
>> > > However, when using apertium-eng for generation, it is impossible to
>> > > know in advance whether or not a lemma has the genitive form, so
>> > > generation for lemmas without the <gen> form is broken.
>> > >
>> > > I'm considering adding a <gen> form to all the affected paradigms to
>> > > fix this issue. Any objections?
>> >
>> > Are there other pairs relying on apertium-eng ? Would this break
>> > them ?
>>
>>
>> I’ve genitives and apertium-eng set up for e.g. fin-eng, but I’m ok with
>> whichever solution, if you can post a bidix formula for that once
>> you’ve updated the eng.
>>
>> --
>> Flammie, computer scientist bachelor + linguist master = computational
>> linguist doctor, free software Finnish localiser,
>> and more! <http://www.iki.fi/flammie/>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> ------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Apertium-stuff mailing list
>> Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Marc Riera Irigoyen*
> Freelance Translator EN/JA>CA/ES
>
> (+34) 652 492 008 <+34%20652%2049%2020%2008>
>
--
*Marc Riera Irigoyen*
Freelance Translator EN/JA>CA/ES
(+34) 652 492 008
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Apertium-stuff mailing list
Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
