Another clarification point about adjunct rules and particles currently supported by the Matrix.
I noticed that, if I add both a focus particle and a negation particle, then, in at least some cases, I have both the adj-scop-phrase and the subtype of adj-int-phrase firing for focus particles. That might be because, in some cases at least, the negation library is adding just the general type of adj-scop-phrase, without any further constraints.
For example, for (1):
(1) Ivan chitaet zhe knigu Ivan.NOM reads FOC book.ACC "But Ivan IS reading the book!" [rus]
I get three trees:
The first one is I think the only one I want here, it is licensed by the rule added by the information structure library.
The second and third one are licensed by a scopal adjunct phrase, which I think I do not want? Is that right?
It looks like I could just add intersective-mod-lex to the information structure marking modifier in the information structure library, and it would solve the issue (the tests pass). Just double checking here that this makes sense?