Open nschneid opened 3 years ago
Additionally, many verb particles as in "crack down" are incorrectly tagged as ADV
/advmod
: http://match.grew.fr/?corpus=UD_English-EWT@dev&custom=604a52a8b72b8&clustering=N.upos
Actually the guidelines are inconsistent: UniversalDependencies/docs#771
Down is ADV
, that seems correct to me, and the page about ADP
does not mention down as one of the "particles" that are ADP
.
Why? Is there supposed to be a lexical distinction between up, down on the one hand (ADV
as particles) and in, to on the other (ADP
as particles)? All of these can be ordinary prepositions in PPs.
OK, you guys English speakers go ahead and sort it out among yourselves :-)
I'm probably biased because my translation of down can be only adverb in my language, so it did not occur to me that actually it could also act as a preposition. But I seem to remember that when we were formulating that guideline you found in ADP
, someone (from Stanford?) came and said wait, some of them are actually adverbs. And I think down was one of the examples.
I think they should all be ADV, see reasons here
Words like "down" and "out" in a verb particle construction should be
ADP
, as mentioned here (which was surprising to me because I thought UD tried to follow traditional grammar categories but I understand the logic of an intransitive adposition).compound:prt
: http://match.grew.fr/?corpus=UD_English-EWT@dev&custom=604a515213fac&clustering=N.uposShould an exception be made for words like "together", "apart", and "away" which are never transitive prepositions? I.e. should these be
ADV
?