I have a pseudogrammar with a lexical rule associated with an affix -SUBJ which is supposed to mark the verb for an abstract nonfinite form:
FRM-lex-rule-super := add-only-no-ccont-rule & infl-lex-rule &
[ DTR verb-lex ].
nonfin-lex-rule := FRM-lex-rule-super &
[ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.HEAD.FORM subjunctive ].
%suffix (* -SUBJ)
When I try to parse a pseudosentence that includes verb-SUBJ, I don’t get a parse and, to begin with, I do not see the verb going though the lexical rule, so in the parse chart, there is only one mention of verb-SUBJ, and it is the leaf level. No lexical rule.
The feature structure for tverb-SUBJ somehow has [ FORM finite ] on it, presumably because that’s what is on supertype of the verb. So I see why tverb-SUBJ won’t go through the rule, the values of FORM clash, but I don’t understand how tverb-SUBJ got to be analyzed without going thrugh the rule?
Something about the Morphology system that I don’t understand here.