Closed chiarcos closed 2 months ago
my favorite would be alternative 2, with the following modifications:
For fusional languages, alternatives 1 - 3 have no difference, as they all "drop" InflectionType. (See examples added at the minutes to be discussed next time: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ckwhltPxJKxFpEOwTanOHHHIM0HvYm_Q38B191e1dpY/edit#heading=h.28k0zvfnaaec).
Note that for the current model, we have added grammatical meaning (be it a single feature or a set of features) as a property on inflection rule (this is not depicted in the diagram, see issue https://github.com/ontolex/morph/issues/11).
The current model is less economical compared to the other alternatives; so, alternative 2 sounds ok, but let's see also how this can be used for agglutinative languages.
Regarding renaming "GrammaticalMeaning" to "FeatureBundle", +1.
current diagram implements alternative 1
inflectionType
to inflectionSlot
and of paradigm
to inflectionClass
.
current definitions:
this definition does not work for the current diagram, if one inflection type represents the position for all cases, we cannot associate the form for, say, dative with the rule for dative via inflection type (thanks to Matteo for pointing that out).
Comparing alternatives
current model
Form -inflectionType-> InflectionType
Paradigm <-paradigm- InflectionType
InflectionType -inflectionRule-> InflectionRule
InflectionType -next-> InflectionType
alternative 0: keep current model, one inflection type per paradigm and rule
alternative 1: detach InflectionType
note: paradigms should be allomorphy-free, then (this is at odds with traditional usage of “paradigm”. in inflection tables, it normally includes allopmporphic variants.
alternative 2: replace InflectionType by GrammaticalMeaning
alternative 3: merge InflectionType with InflectionRule