Finally, we move on to the case of lexical rules with procedural annexes, as in the following (simplified) example of the HPSG: A definition is ambiguous if it lends itself to more than one unambiguous interpretation. A definition is figurative if it involves metaphors or tends to paint an image rather than expose the essential meaning of a term. Example: “camel” refers to a desert ship. This rule applies to any definition in which the context of the definitions is important to the meaning of the definition. Examples: “Strike” means (in baseball) a playing field on which a hitter swings and misses. “Hitting” means (in bowling) the act of knocking over all pins with the first ball of a frame. “Strike” means (in fishing) a pull on a line made by a fish when catching the bait. In Lesson 3, we discussed five types of definitions. Among these definitions, the lexical definition is the most important and common type of definition that we often use in our daily lives. In this lesson, we will learn the general rules of lexical definitions. The only types of lexical definitions that tend to be sensitive to any of these gaps are synonymous definitions and definitions by gender and difference. In the case of synonymous definitions, care must be taken to ensure that definitions are truly synonymous with definitions. When it comes to definitions by gender and difference, it is important to ensure that the specific difference reduces the just gender.

Here are the grammatically correct definitions of the above terms: For lexical rules without morphological effect, the production is: Lexical rules provide a mechanism for expressing redundancies in the lexicon, such as the types of inflectional morphology used for word classes, derived morphology as found with suffixes and prefixes, and null derivatives as found in detransitivization, nominalization of some varieties and so on. The format provided by ALE for specifying lexical rules is similar to that of PATR-II and HPSG. Lexical rules are modeled as characteristic structures of type lexical rule (rule l) that specify values for the INPUT and OUTPUT characteristics. There are three subtypes of lexical rules: the inflection rule (rule i), the derivation rule (rule d), and the post-bending rule (rule pi). The following list gives an overview of the features of these rules: Of the following two definitions, the first is affirmative, the second negative: “harmony” means harmony. “Concord” means the absence of discord. Once the input and output categories are calculated, the word of the lexical input input is passed through the morphological analyzer to produce the corresponding output word. Unlike the categorical component of lexical rules, a single output word is constructed based on the first input/output model that is paired.5.1The input word is paired with the models on the left side of morphological productions. If the entry word corresponds to the co-ownership, any conditions imposed by a when clause on production are evaluated. This order is arranged so that the Prolog target has instantiated all the variables in the input string. At this point, Prolog is called upon to evaluate the when clause.

In the narrowest case, as stated in the lexical rule above, Prolog is only used to provide abbreviations for classes. Thus, the definition of fricative/1 consists only of unitary sentences. For those unfamiliar with Prolog, this strategy can usually be used for simple morphological shortcuts. Evaluating these targets requires that the F in the input model matches one of the specified strings. The abbreviation of using atoms for lists of their characters only works in morphological sequences. In particular, the objectives of the prologue do not automatically inherit the ability of the lexical system to use atoms as abbreviations for lists, so they must be specified in lists. Replacing the fricative (sh) with the fricative ([s,h]) would not lead to the intended interpretation. Variables in sequences in morphological productions are always instantiated in lists, even if they are individual characters. Consider, for example, the lexical rule above, where each atom is written as an explicit list: a definition cannot be useful if it does not convey the essential meaning of the definition. Any definition that defines the word “human” as “bipedal without feathers‖ for example, may not be useful because it does not convey the essential meaning of “human” as the word is used in ordinary English.