MEASURE not measuring

[lfoppiano]

@kermitt2 To be 100% sure. The chunk: one of the is measuring nothing, therefore shall be annotated as O. Does it make sense?

he	O
was	O
one	O
of	O
the	O
founders	B-TITLE
of	O	
the	O	
Revisionist	B-ORGANISATION
movement	ORGANISATION
in	O
Bulgaria	B-LOCATION

[kermitt2]

yes it's rather a frozen expression than any expression of quantity, agree!

[lfoppiano]

What about the terms first, second, third, etc...

Personally I would not consider them measures, as they are not measuring anything, but, on the other hand, they are indicating some cardinal positioning ...

[kermitt2]

These are ordinal in linguistics, they can be view as MEASURE I think without too much doubt as they indicate a numerical order in a scale or measure of something that can be quantified (size, date, etc.).

However, I think we should not consider referring expressions e.g. of the two courses on linguistics, the first is the less boring, here I would not annotate first.

[everzeni]

I feel that this one:

there occurred a boycott of Jewish businesses, which was the first national antisemitic campaign

is not to be annotated either, since it seems more like an equivalent of "for the first time" / "the beginning of" and not really an order in a scale or something quantified (different from "the first commandment", for example).

Is that correct?

[lfoppiano]

@everzeni I think it's correct not to annotate it.

[everzeni]

While reviewing each other files, we found it's difficult to reach a consensus on ordinals, particularly first. It seems we need more precise criteria to work on, so I propose to annotate all the ordinals (even my above example first national antisemitic campaign as MEASURE, except:

• things like among the first to be sent to concentration camps or one of the first where there is no notion of scale but rather of "beginning"

• plural things like the first jews to be deported

What do you think?

[kermitt2]

I agree. Maybe the criteria here is: can we quantify (enumerate) what is "first"?

[everzeni]

1. Elias proposed another criteria, in addition with "can we quantify what is first?": can we replace "first" by "second". It seems to work and eliminate things like one of the thirst, among the first, the first X to.

What do you think?

2. Also, it's not totally clear for me what you meant by "enumerate", could you expand a little? thanks!

[everzeni]

Ok so we keep this criteria (replacement by "second") until further notice.