omriabnd
commented
6 years ago We would annotate it the "alternatives" you mentioned. I should say that chains of Cs are not always forbidden but only if a Center has exactly one Center child. (i.e., it can have more children, but none of the others should be C).
On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 5:34 AM Nathan Schneider notifications@github.com wrote:
We're confused about whether multiple layers of nested non-scene units are permissible with elaborators like possessives. With certain compound nominals it feels tempting to have a unit with one or more elaborators that is further elaborated in a parent unit, but perhaps this is a bad idea.
[image: image] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/985263/45195109-24287c80-b224-11e8-920e-1e3e41fefe86.png
Should chains of multiple C edges always be forbidden? I guess alternatives to the above are:
[my_S+A (engine)_A]_E [broken_S (engine)_A]_E car_E engine (all E relations are sisters)
[my_S+A (cone)_A]_E [ice cream]_E cone_C
— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/UniversalConceptualCognitiveAnnotation/docs/issues/6, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG86yp8NZidhUr2a-BKBjm09UyzkdNtks5uYdtRgaJpZM4WeFCK .
nschneid
We're confused about whether multiple layers of nested non-scene units are permissible with elaborators like possessives. With certain compound nominals it feels tempting to have a unit with one or more elaborators that is further elaborated in a parent unit, but perhaps this is a bad idea.
Should chains of multiple
Cedges always be forbidden? I guess alternatives to the above are:[my_S+A (engine)_A]_E [broken_S (engine)_A]_E car_E engine (all
Erelations are sisters)[my_S+A (cone)_A]_E [ice cream]_E cone_C