Difference between revisions of "Annotating Tumbuka"
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
In the next sentence: | In the next sentence: | ||
<Phrase>2777</Phrase> | <Phrase>2777</Phrase> | ||
| − | is ''idwa'' really the passive marker? The sentence does not seem to have a passive reading | + | is ''idwa'' really the passive marker? The sentence does not seem to have a passive reading. |
| + | |||
| + | The following phrase poses a problem: | ||
| + | <Phrase>2805</Phrase> | ||
Revision as of 09:04, 27 May 2008
We have annotated the following sentence;
Here little stuff: it seems that the meaning of 'ka' in akamayezais still not reflected in the annotation; perhaps that could be added; also the POS tag for the possessive is still missing.
Here a questions potentially more important; I am wondering about the the annotation of noun classes If noun classes are not indicated we cannot identify in the glosses which elements the nouns actually agree with.I guess we need class information both on the nouns and the verbs that they agree with. carefully it also seems that the imported nouns: mavayilasi, maparasayiti etc. carry a class marker. It probably would be a good idea to annotate those.
In the next sentence:
is idwa really the passive marker? The sentence does not seem to have a passive reading.
The following phrase poses a problem: