Predicate Clauses amendment (multiple subjects due to copular clauses)#868
Conversation
|
Still have to work on the pages for individual relations but welcoming comments on what's written so far. |
|
Do we want to list |
|
@amir-zeldes @dan-zeman if no objections I'll merge this tonight |
Remove the ugly exception! @dan-zeman please check the Czech copula examples
| ~~~ | ||
|
|
||
| Prepositions may also project a cop dependent. | ||
| Prepositions may also project a `cop` dependent. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this is a preposition, more likely an adverb or a predicative adjective (paradigmatic with "the light is bright", not "* the light is for")
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would a better example be "the city I'm in"? (cop dependent in relative clause)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, that truly is a preposition, though in this case the reason it governs a cop is promotion. I can't think of a legitimate case where a true preposition governs a cop, not due to promotion, and not due to metalinguistic usage. If it has an object (in constituent/SUD terms), then that object would govern the cop in UD, and if it doesn't have an object, then it's not really a preposition, just maybe a homophone of one.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can go ahead and edit the page, either change it to the relative clause or remove it entirely
No description provided.