|
English |
It is getting better |
UNL |
obj ( get..@entry.@progress, it ) |
The difference between gol and plt
There are two possibilities of relations for "(We) go to Brussels". One is using "gol" as in
gol(go, brussels),
and the other one is using "plt" as in
plt(go, brussels).
Both are correct, the difference is, from "gol(go, brussels)" it is also implied that "Brussels" is the final place of the object (obj, it is overlapping with agent "agt"), for UW "go". "plt(go, brussels)" only means that the event, in this case "go to Brussels", will finish at "Brussels".
These also can be said for "src" and "plf".
Example 1
English |
We will go to Brussels |
UNL |
agt ( go.@entry.@future, we ) |
Example 2
English |
We will travel till Brussels |
UNL |
agt ( travel.@entry.@future, we ) |
Example 3
English |
to leave for India |
UNL |
plt ( leave.@entry, india ) |
Comments on Example1 & 2 & 3
For these sentences, it is also possible to use "gol" instead of "plt". This is because the agents (agt) of UW's "go", "travel" and "leave" are also the objects (obj) of them at the same time. This can be said to all UWs which have the same characteristic as "go", "travel" and "leave".
Example4
English |
Is this train bound for Edinburgh? |
UNL |
aoj ( bound.@entry, train ) |
Comments on Example4
Since "bound" is an UW which come from an adjective, according to the specifications of UNL, its target should use the relation "plt". This may be compared with relation "to", if UW "bound" does not appear in UNL, there will be a link between UW "train" and "Edinburgh", and the relation should by "to". (Please refer example on the following paragraph).
Example
English |
Is this train (bound) for Edinburgh? |
UNL |
to ( train, edinburgh.@entry ) |
Comments on Example
The UNL expression of this sentence is shown in "plt" session (Example 4) when UW "bound" is used.
Last updated : 2000/09/21