<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C94-1039">
  <Title>Adjuncts and the Processing of Lexical Rules</Title>
  <Section position="7" start_page="257" end_page="257" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
4 Final remarks
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> We illustrated that recursive lexic~d constraints might be useful from a linguistic perspectiw~. If lexlc~d rules are formalized as cotni)lex cot/strahlts ol) \]exica\] categories then methods from logic l)rogl:amtning can be used to imtflement such constraints.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> Note that complex CG,lstraints and delayed eva.huttion techniques are also useful in other areas of linguistic desciptlon. For example.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> we used the same methods to deline and pro- null cess IIPSG's FOOT FEATURE PRINCIPLE. The method may also be applied to implement IIPSG's binding theory.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> As a testcase we improved upon the IIPSG analysis of (Germanic) verb clusters and adjuncts by treating adjuncts as categories that are on the subcat list by virtue of a complex constraint. The fragment that has been implemented with the methods described is much larger than the discussion in the previous sections suggest, but includes treatments of extraposition, ipp, modal inversion, participium inversion, the third construction, partial-vp topicalisation, particle verbs, verb-second, subject raising, subject control, raising-to-object, object control and clitic climbing in Dutch.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>