Print

Print


Referring to the definition for tei:w at 
http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-w.html

The definitions of @lemma and @lemmaRef seem to imply:
(a) that @lemma and @lemmaRef differ by something other than the 
location of the lemma; one is uninflected form, one is a root.
(b) that words can only have a single uninflected form or root. The best 
European counter-examples I can think of are long German compound nouns 
and Welsh placenames, both of which use concatenation to form 
multi-rooted words. Māori appears similar to Welsh in this regard.

Surely those are both mistakes?

I'll admit that I may have the wrong end of the stick, because my 
linguistics aren't what they might be and @lemmaRef isn't mentioned in 
the body of the standard and only has a single example in the definition.

cheers
stuart
-- 
Stuart Yeates
http://www.nzetc.org/       New Zealand Electronic Text Centre
http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/     Institutional Repository