In the present subsection, two special cases are discussed, which are also analysed as cases of parenthesis:
-
constructions with the inversed syntactic relation between the clauses (see Section 7.3.1, "Inversed syntactic relation between clauses"),
-
the speaker's comments such as "aby bylo jasno (=let's get this clear)" (see Section 7.3.2, "The speaker's comments such as "aby bylo jasno"").
Cases of two parentheses, one being part of the other (parenthesis in parenthesis), are not treated in any special way.
Cases of inversed syntactic relation between clauses are such constructions in which the inserted clause (Soud, zdá se, nemyslí si o tom nic. (=The Court, it seems, does not take a stand on this)) or the clause introduced by the connective jak (Soud, jak se zdá, nemyslí si o tom nic. (=The Court, it seems, does not take a stand on this)) is in fact the governing clause. Usually, one argument is missing among the modifications of the verb in the original governing clause, which is expressed by the original content clause. Constructions with the connective jak and constructions without it are synonymous. The connective jak does not carry any meaning exactly because there is the inversed syntactic relation. Both types of construction are thus analyzed in the same way (the possible connective jak is not assigned a separate node at the tectogrammatical level).
The original governing clause is represented as a parenthesis. Its effective root node has the PAR functor and depends on the effective root node of the original content clause. The missing argument of the verb in the original governing clause is represented by a newly established node with the t-lemma substitute #PersPron and an appropriate functor. There is a textual coreference relation between the newly established node and the effective root node of the original content clause (see also Section 3, "Textual coreference"). All nodes of the subtree representing the original governing clause are assigned the value 1 in the is_parenthesis attribute.
Examples:
Soud, zdá se.PAR , nemyslí si o tom nic. (=The Court, it seems, does not take a stand on this)
Soud, <jak> se mi zdá.PAR , nemyslí si o tom nic. / Soud, zdá se.PAR mi, nemyslí si o tom nic. (=The Court, (as) it seems to me, does not take a stand on this) Fig. 6.120
<Jak> známo.PAR , odešel. (=As we all know, he left) Fig. 6.121
<Jak> řekl.PAR Karel, stalo se to již včera. (=As Karel said, it happened already yesterday) Fig. 6.122
In some cases, none of the arguments of the verb (in the original governing clause) has to be missing. The argument (which is in fact the original content clause) can also be expressed by the pronoun ten. For example:
Jak to řekl Karel, stalo se to již včera. (=As Karel put it, it happened already yesterday)
In such cases, no new node with the #PersPron t-lemma is inserted into the structure; there is a coreferential relation between the node for the pronoun and the effective root node of the original content clause.
Figure 6.120. Inversed syntactic relation between clauses
Soud, jak se mi zdá, nemyslí si o tom nic. (=lit. Court, as REFL to_me seems, not_thinks REFL about it nothing)
Clauses introduced by the conjunction aby in constructions like Aby bylo jasno, já jsem tu pánem. (=Let's get this clear: I am the boss here), which are a type of comment, are parenthetic in nature.
Such comments are very close to lexicalized parentheses; they get the PAR functor and all nodes of the relevant subtree are assigned the value 1 in the is_parenthesis attribute. The conjunction aby is not assigned a separate node.
Examples:
<Aby> bylo.PAR jasno, já jsem tu pánem. (=Let's get this clear: I am the boss here) Fig. 6.123
Voda se kupodivu, <abych> tak řekl.PAR , umoudřila. (=The water settled down, so to speak)
<Abych> řekl.PAR pravdu, mně se to ani trochu nelíbí. (=To tell you the truth, I don't like it here at all)
Já mu totiž, <abych> se přiznal.PAR , nevěřil. (=To be frank, I didn't believe him)
<Abyste> mi rozuměl.PAR , já jsem to tak nechtěl. (=Don't be mistaken, I didn't want it)
These comments should not be confused with false purpose clauses like Odešel, aby se už nevrátil. (=He left not to come again), which are analyzed as dependent clauses with the AIM functor assigned to their effective root nodes (see also Section 5.4.2, "False dependent conjunctional clauses").
