## 4. Constructions with the meaning of "comparison"

Constructions with the meaning of are constructions in which two or more events, states or entities are compared. They are primarily understood as comparison of two events.

There are three basic ways (forms) to express comparison:

Basic annotation rules for constructions in which two events are compared. In comparative constructions where two events (or states) are compared, the dependent clause expresses what the event in the governing clause is similar or identical to, or from what it differs. It is typical of constructions in which two events or states are compared that the underlying structure contains a feature, a degree of identity/similarity/difference, with respect to which the events or states are compared.

In constructions in which two events are compared, the following are distinguished:

• the governing clause.

The governing clause contains:

• the expression that refers to the degree of identity/similarity/difference.

• the dependent clause.

• the conjunction "než" or "jako".

Example:

• Pavel běhá rychleji, než běhá Honza. (=Pavel runs faster than Honza)

The governing clause: Pavel běhá rychleji.

The expression referring to the degree of identity/similarity/difference: rychleji.

The dependent clause: běhá Honza.

The conjunction: než.

The effective root node of the dependent clause represents the governing verb and has always the `CPR` functor (see Section 6.2, "CPR"). In regular cases, this node is dependent on the node representing the degree expression (i.e. the expression referring to the degree of identity/similarity/difference), which is part of the governing clause. If such an expression is missing from the surface form of the sentence (this is common in constructions with "jako"), a new node is added to the structure in the position of this expression, with the t-lemma `#Equal`. The reference to the conjunction is in the `a/aux.rf` attribute of the effective root node of the dependent clause.

The governing verb of the dependent clause is often omitted in the surface form of the sentence. The ellipsis is caused by the identity of the lexical content of the verbs in the governing and the dependent clauses (see Section 12.1.1.1, "Textual ellipsis of the governing verb"). Thus, if the governing verb of the dependent clause is not present in the surface form of the sentence, a new governing node with the `CPR` functor is inserted into the dependent clause in compliance with the rules in Section 12.1, "Ellipsis of the governing element" (usually, it is copied from the governing clause).

The reason why a new node is added to the dependent clause even in cases when this might sound unnatural is the fact that if the `CPR` functor were assigned directly to the locative, temporal or other adjuncts (when these modifications are compared), their locative, temporal or other meanings would be lost. Cf.:

• Polož to spíše do skříně než na postel. (=Put it rather into the wardrobe than on the bed)

= Polož to spíše do skříně, než to polož na postel. (=Put it rather into the wardrobe than put it on the bed)

If the `CPR` functor were assigned directly to the modification na postel, its directional meaning would be lost; however, if the sentence is understood as comparing two events, the `CPR` functor is assigned to the node for the governing verb and the directional meaning of na postel may be preserved.

The surface form of comparative constructions is often very abbreviated as sometimes more than one lexical unit (present in the underlying/tectogrammatical structure) is omitted. Tectogrammatical annotation of comparative constructions is therefore rather complex. Individual types of comparative constructions are described in more detail in the following sections.