Clausal predicate with a copula — nsubj:outer — proposal

Proposal: accept the analysis of the 2.10 amendment and EWT. Do not take the old analysis from _en/specific-syntax.md:46–51, where the copula is the head and the clause is ccomp (Clausal predicate with a copula: ccomp in the text, nsubj:outer in the data).

What exactly in mova. The problem is that these sentences are difficult: the head is difficult, is is cop, problem is nsubj:outer, sentences is nsubj. For a clausal subject of the outer clause — csubj:outer.

Why.

• Matches the standard and the data: EWT 2.18 has 257 nsubj:outer/csubj:outer and not a single instance of the old analysis. The 7 cases of be with ccomp are quotative be like and there are hints … that.
• More consistent. The copula stays cop in all sentences, with no "transitive copula" exception.
• Lossless: export is identity. The old analysis, if it is ever needed for UD v1 or SD conversions, is derived deterministically from nsubj:outer + cop.

Check. en.verbal.outer-subject-needs-cop (Outer subject with a predicate clause), en.verbal.cop-verb-head-outer (In a copular clause the head is the predicative); counters ud218.outer-subject, ud218.be-ccomp-head.

Origin. Clausal predicate with a copula: ccomp in the text, nsubj:outer in the data; 2.18:docs/changes.md#multiple-subjects.

Mova decides.

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/dialects/mova/seeds/clausal-predicate/