You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The way that I annotate by default is to tag the orthography. Given that there are many items that in Mixtec don't explicitly mark certain features, the annotations are underspecific as to what is expressing the given feature, eg. in the example below the verb "sketa" is actually present tense and 1sg which don't show up in the orthography, but the entire form is just tagged for those features:
If however there is a phonetic transcription included, I tag both the orthographic forms (as above) as well as explicitly tagging the tone contours (encoded as <m> with @xml:id's), which specifically labels the linguistic feature.
However, I'm not sure what value of <span @type> to give it (currently labeling it "gram" the same as the general grammatical annotations, but I'm wondering if I should call it "tone" or something so that a retrieval script can just look for the presence of a <span @type> value rather that looking at whether the target is a <m> which is an ancestor of //seg[@notation='ipa']..
solution is to use <span type="gram" @subtype>, this requires a schema alteration and for <span> to be added to att.typed.
I am thinking that there should be at least two possible values of @subtype, the first "tone" (for the case discussed above in this issue) and the other possibly "morph" for when pointing to a morphological unit on an inflected, or maybe derived form.
Here is an example showing both uses of @subtype. to tag:
the presence of the future/potentive prefix "kun-" (which is realized phonetically as "ũː↗↘") in front of the verb, but which is only tagged in the phonetic transcription (annotated below as: <span type="gram" subtype="morph" target="#d1e157" ana="#FUT"/>): and
The presence of the tone inflection marking 1st person singular on the verb, which isn't marked in the orthography, annotated below as <span type="gram" subtype="tone" target="#d1e172" ana="#1PERS #SG"/>:
The way that I annotate by default is to tag the orthography. Given that there are many items that in Mixtec don't explicitly mark certain features, the annotations are underspecific as to what is expressing the given feature, eg. in the example below the verb "sketa" is actually present tense and 1sg which don't show up in the orthography, but the entire form is just tagged for those features:
If however there is a phonetic transcription included, I tag both the orthographic forms (as above) as well as explicitly tagging the tone contours (encoded as
<m>
with @xml:id's), which specifically labels the linguistic feature.However, I'm not sure what value of
<span @type>
to give it (currently labeling it "gram" the same as the general grammatical annotations, but I'm wondering if I should call it "tone" or something so that a retrieval script can just look for the presence of a<span @type>
value rather that looking at whether the target is a<m>
which is an ancestor of//seg[@notation='ipa']
..@laurent, what do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: