[02:20:02] <freeside> thanks!
[05:48:17] <freeside> trying to inherit only be_V from DictEng, I'm reading http://www.grammaticalframework.org/doc/gf-refman.html#inheritance and wondering if the line `    N = M1 {a,b,c}, M2-{d}
[05:48:29] <freeside> is correct, or if it should be using [a,b,c] instead of {a,b,c}
[05:51:14] <freeside> i'm using that syntax, but now i'm getting a conflict for a constant that i thought the explicit-inheritance [] syntax would have excluded: conflict StructuralEng.must_VV, DictEng.must_VV
[05:52:06] <freeside> oh, never mind, it's because somewhere in my deep past i did an i -retain
[05:52:09] <freeside> REBOOTING SOLVES EVERYTHING
[05:55:42] <freeside> oh, never mind my never mind, it's happening again
[05:55:49] <freeside>                 alethic.vv
[05:55:56] <freeside> concrete Ex4Eng of Ex4 = DictEng [be_V] ** open SyntaxEng, ParadigmsEng, IrregEng, ExtraEng in {
[05:56:36] <freeside> so that import of be_V from DictEng should omit all other constants defined in DictEng, right?
[05:57:23] <freeside> yet i'm getting
[05:57:25] <freeside> Ex4Eng.gf:50-70:
[05:57:25] <freeside>   Happened in the renaming of ClassHasAttrs
[05:57:25] <freeside>    Warning: atomic term have_V2
[05:57:25] <freeside>             conflict StructuralEng.have_V2, DictEng.have_V2
[05:57:28] <freeside>             given ExtraEng, IrregEng, ParadigmsEng, SyntaxEng, CommonX, CatEng,
[05:57:30] <freeside>                   DictEng, Ex4Eng
[05:58:46] <freeside>  i'll try a qualified open instead of a restricted inheritance
[06:00:01] *** Quits: drbean (~drbean@TC210-63-209-56.static.apol.com.tw) (Quit: ZNC 1.7.5 - https://znc.in)
[06:02:12] <freeside> hm, i don't think DictEng exports be_V lol
[08:52:34] *** Joins: drbean (~drbean@TC210-63-209-208.static.apol.com.tw)
[15:19:40] <inariksit> freeside: haha okay, that's a serious shortage
[16:19:43] <freeside> obviously it's there somewhere, i just need to find it
[16:19:46] <freeside> time to bust out the grep
[16:20:38] <freeside> is it be_V or some other kind of special copula?
[16:24:34] <inariksit> in the english rgl, there's auxBe
[16:24:39] <inariksit> and a VP function UseCopula
[16:26:42] <inariksit> there's only an oper Aux -> VP, not Aux -> V
[16:27:35] <inariksit> I think this surprising difficulty to get the most common verb, 'to be', is due to trying to be clever and abstract :-P
[16:28:19] <inariksit> like, not having a be_V in the RGL abstract, it makes possible to implement predication regardless of copula
[16:28:40] <inariksit> e.g. in russian, you'd just say "the cat black" whereas in english you need the copula
[16:33:18] <inariksit> do you need specifically the copula, or did you just want to try out something and thought it'd be a common and easy verb? :-P
[16:34:19] <inariksit> if you want, you can also get UseCopula from VerbEng (it's not exported in the API)
[16:34:23] <inariksit> Lang> p  -cat=Cl "John is" | l -treebank
[16:34:23] <inariksit> Lang: PredVP (UsePN john_PN) UseCopula
[16:34:23] <inariksit> LangEng: John is