p. 52/52:
remarks on the syntactic position of "gezielt" in Jacob's analysis:
Does it really make sense to assume that syntactic position maps 1-1
on semantic scope? In the HPSG environment of the present book that
is far from obvious.
Yes, I think so. According to the Jacobs analysis it is [ Adv [ .... ]], according to my analysis it
is [ Adv _v ] [ .... _v ]. That is it is one verb that may be deeper embedded, not necessarily the topmost verb.
Yes, I think so. According to the Jacobs analysis it is [ Adv [ .... ]], according to my analysis it is [ Adv _v ] [ .... _v ]. That is it is one verb that may be deeper embedded, not necessarily the topmost verb.
To do: make clearer?