Related to this but may be separate.
I think I am maybe seeing one of those “unification surprises” where you don’t see an edge in the chart but aren’t getting any unification failures interactively.
Here’s what I expect (the verb):
The order of lexical rules is: no-aspect, non-3rd-pl, non-future, and finally interrogative-3sg-transitive.
I am no longer getting this with the updated customization system/grammar, and specifically what I am not getting is the non-future—interrogative-transitive part.
I am seeing the interrogative-IN-transitive rule in the chart but not the transitive rule. Yet when I am interactively unifying, everything seems fine.
Which item on the “surprise list” does this most sound like?
It is a const-lex-rule, and the difference between the working version and the broken version is that the broken version inherits additionally from something called add-icons-subj-foc-lex-rule, which is something new, being added by the information structure library. The intransitive version is not inheriting from it, and if I remove it and replace it with add-only-no-rels-hcons-rule, then I do get the parse.
; I get this in the chart: ITRG-3SG-INTRAN-lex-rule := ITRG3PER-lex-rule-super & add-only-no-rels-hcons-rule & itrg-lex-rule & [ DTR.ARG-ST #arg-st, ARG-ST #arg-st & < [ ] >, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.VAL.SUBJ.FIRST.LOCAL [ CONT.HOOK [ INDEX.PNG [ PER 3rd, NUM SG ], ICONS-KEY non-focus ], CAT.HEAD.CASE Nom ] ]. ; I do not get this in the chart: ITRG-3SG-TRAN-lex-rule := ITRG3PER-lex-rule-super & add-icons-subj-foc-lex-rule & itrg-lex-rule & [ DTR.ARG-ST #arg-st, ARG-ST #arg-st & < [ ], [ ] >, SYNSEM.LOCAL.CAT.VAL [ SUBJ.FIRST.LOCAL [ CAT.HEAD.CASE Nom, CONT.HOOK [ INDEX.PNG [ NUM SG, PER 3rd ], ICONS-KEY focus ] ], COMPS.FIRST.LOCAL [ CONT.HOOK.ICONS-KEY non-focus, CAT.HEAD.CASE NFO+Acc ] ] ].
The new information structure rule which seems to be breaking things looks like this:
add-icons-subj-foc-lex-rule := add-only-no-rels-hcons-rule & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL [ CAT.VAL.SUBJ < [ LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.INDEX #target ] >, CONT [ HOOK.INDEX #clause, ICONS.LIST < focus & [ IARG1 #clause, IARG2 #target ] > ] ] ].
The interrogative supertype looks like this:
itrg-lex-rule := add-only-no-ccont-rule & [ SYNSEM.LOCAL.CONT.HOOK.INDEX.SF ques ].
Why would the combination of all that result in the transitive rule not showing up in the chart?