search

UniversalDependencies / UD_English-EWT

English data
Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0 International
199 stars 42 forks source link

semi-auxiliaries/quasi-modals: "ought to/PART", "have to/PART", "go to/PART" #411

Closed nschneid closed 1 year ago

nschneid commented 1 year ago

Should the first word be AUX or VERB? Currently it is exclusively VERB for "go" (frequent) and exclusively AUX for "ought" (rare).

In general, we decided that "have" should be changed to AUX when it lacks an object (#403), but perhaps this construction (where it has an xcomp) is an exception.

"go to/PART" with xcomp is not exclusively the futurate, at least in the current data. E.g. there is a GUM sentence "went to live as a hermit" (should be advcl?)

There is also the idiom go on to do something.

Because "ought" is not a regular verb I'm fine with keeping it as AUX. But "go" and "have" clearly have verbal paradigms and do not act like auxes with respect to inversion, negation, etc., so maybe they should remain VERB even with an xcomp.

nschneid commented 1 year ago

(Plus this class may not be neatly closed: fixing to, aiming to, ...)

nschneid commented 1 year ago

(Related topic: "had better/best" UniversalDependencies/docs#803)

amir-zeldes commented 1 year ago

I would vote against, for the same reasons these things are not deprel aux. I think it's inconsistent to say we take bare infinitive as the criterion for deprel aux (so "should" is an auxiliary but "want" is not), and then split UPOS a different way.

nschneid commented 1 year ago

OK, let's keep VERB for "have to"