Specific constructions
Impersonal verbs
The small class of mostly Greek origin impersonal verbs takes subject clauses, such as ⲉⲝⲉⲥⲧⲓ ‘it is appropriate’, which points from main verb to subordinate verb with csubj:
ⲟⲩⲕ ⲉⲝⲉⲥⲧⲓ/VERB ⲉ ⲁⲁ/VERB ϥ \n it is not appropriate to do it
csubj(ⲉⲝⲉⲥⲧⲓ, ⲁⲁ)
Non-coordinating Greek conjunctions and particles
Greek conjunctions and particles that are non-coordinating (i.e. not meaning ‘and/or’) are labeled as advmod to their associated predicate, as in the following example:
ⲙⲏ ⲁⲣⲁ ⲉ ⲓ ⲟⲩⲏϩ ⲟⲛ ϩⲓϫⲛ ⲧ ⲙⲏⲧⲉ ⲛ ϫⲱ ⲕ \n After all do I still sit upon the middle of your head?
advmod(ⲟⲩⲏϩ, ⲁⲣⲁ)
Inverted modifying construction - ⲛⲟϭ ⲛϭⲟⲙ
Inverted modifiers of the type ⲛⲟϭ ⲛϭⲟⲙ ‘great power’ (lit. a ‘great of a power’), are analyzed in purely syntactic terms, such that the semantic modifier (ⲛⲟϭ, ⲕⲟⲩⲓ etc.) is the head, as shown below. The initial article also attaches to the syntactic head. The reason for this is primarily to allow for better parser performance, since making the second noun the head would be a very unusual exception. To find this construction we can look for the set of lexemes appearing in this configuration, most often ⲛⲟϭ and ⲕⲟⲩⲓ.
ⲡⲓ ⲛⲟϭ ⲛ ⲃⲁⲣⲟⲥ \n this great burden
det(ⲛⲟϭ, ⲡⲓ)
nmod(ⲛⲟϭ, ⲃⲁⲣⲟⲥ)
case(ⲃⲁⲣⲟⲥ, ⲛ)
Independent possessive pronoun construction – ⲡⲁ/ⲧⲁ/ⲛⲁ + noun phrase
The independent possessive pronoun ‘that, which is of X, belongs to X’ is analyzed as the head of the phrase, and the possessor is attached as nmod to this:
ⲛⲁ ⲡⲉ ⲭⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ \n that which is Christ's
nmod(ⲛⲁ, ⲭⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ)
det(ⲭⲣⲓⲥⲧⲟⲥ, ⲡⲉ)
Rather than - the preposition ⲉϩⲟⲩⲉ
The word ⲉϩⲟⲩⲉ ‘rather than’ is treated as a preposition modifying the nominal it is contrasted with:
ⲁ ⲧⲉⲧⲛ ⲥⲱⲧⲡ ⲛⲏ ⲧⲛ ⲙ ⲡ ⲙⲟⲩ · ⲉϩⲟⲩⲉ/ADP ⲡ ⲱⲛϩ \n you have chosen for yourselves death, rather than life
nmod(ⲙⲟⲩ, ⲱⲛϩ)
case(ⲱⲛϩ,ⲉϩⲟⲩⲉ)
In cases having a double preposition, ⲉϩⲟⲩⲉ ⲉ, both are attached as case to the alternative:
ⲁ ⲧⲉⲧⲛ ⲙⲉⲣⲉ ⲡ ⲕⲁⲕⲉ/N ⲉϩⲟⲩⲉ/ADP ⲉ/ADP ⲡ ⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓⲛ/N \n you have loved darkness, rather than light
nmod(ⲕⲁⲕⲉ, ⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓⲛ)
case(ⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓⲛ,ⲉϩⲟⲩⲉ)
case(ⲟⲩⲟⲉⲓⲛ,ⲉ)
Multiple ACONJ chaining rule- ⲛ̄ⲧⲉ-, ⲛ̄=
In constructions with multiple auxiliary conjunctives (ACONJ), link the clauses together in a chain rather than linking each clause seperately from the root.
Example from Corinthians 1:10:
ϫⲱ ⲙ ⲡⲓ ϣⲁϫⲉ ... ⲛⲧⲉ/ACONJ ⲧⲙ ⲡⲱⲣϫ ϣⲱⲡⲉ ⲛϩⲏⲧ ⲧⲏⲩⲧⲛ. ⲛ/ACONJ ⲧⲉⲧⲛ ϣⲱⲡⲉ.. \n ...all speak the same thing and that there be no divisions among you
advcl(ϫⲱ, ϣⲱⲡⲉ)
aux(ϣⲱⲡⲉ,ⲛⲧⲉ)
advcl(ϣⲱⲡⲉ, ϣⲱⲡⲉ..)
aux(ϣⲱⲡⲉ..,ⲛ)
Clauses and fragments with ϩⲱⲥ
The Greek conjunction ϩⲱⲥ introduces adverbial clauses which can be analyzed like any advcl:
ϣϣⲉ ⲉⲣⲟ ⲛ ⲉ ⲙⲉⲉⲩⲉ ⲛ ⲧⲉⲓ ϩⲉ ϩⲱⲥ/SCONJ ⲉ ⲛ ⲛⲁ ϯⲗⲟⲅⲟⲥ/V ⲙ ⲡ ⲛⲟⲩⲧⲉ ⲙ ⲙⲏⲛⲉ \n it is fitting for us to think in this way, as if we will report to God daily
advcl(ⲙⲉⲉⲩⲉ,ϯⲗⲟⲅⲟⲥ)
mark(ϯⲗⲟⲅⲟⲥ,ϩⲱⲥ)
However, ϩⲱⲥ is also used sometimes to introduce an NP, similarly to native Coptic prepositions, despite the fact that it does not behave like a preposition in other respects (e.g. not tightly bound to the following noun). For consistency with the normal adverbial clause case, we annotate these as elliptical adverbial clauses, retaining the label advcl for the lexical item and mark for ϩⲱⲥ:
ⲛⲉⲕ/DET ⲙⲏⲙⲟⲟⲩ/N ⲉⲧ/SCONJ ϩⲛ/ADP ϩⲉⲛ/DET ϣⲟϣⲟⲩ/N ϩⲱⲥ/SCONJ ⲏⲣⲡ/N \n your urine, which is in jars as wine [is]
acl(ⲙⲏⲙⲟⲟⲩ,ϣⲟϣⲟⲩ)
advcl(ϣⲟϣⲟⲩ,ⲏⲣⲡ)
mark(ⲏⲣⲡ,ϩⲱⲥ)
ⲁϩⲣⲟ as the source of a clausal complement (ccomp)
The interrogative pronoun ⲁϩⲣⲟ ‘why’ can be the source of a clausal complement with ccomp pointing to the subordinate clause predicate
Example from Corinthians 4:7:
ⲁϩⲣⲟ/VBD ⲕ/PPERS ⲕ/PPERS ϣⲟⲩϣⲟⲩ/V ⲙⲙⲟ/PREP ⲕ/PPERO ϩⲱⲥ/CONJ ⲉ/CFOC ⲙⲡ/ANEGPST ⲕ/PPERS ϫⲓ/V \n why do you boast as if you had not received it?
ccomp(ⲁϩⲣⲟ, ϣⲟⲩϣⲟⲩ)
advcl(ϣⲟⲩϣⲟⲩ, ϫⲓ)
nsubj(ⲁϩⲣⲟ,ⲕ)
Constructions with ⲉⲓⲥ
The presentative particle ⲉⲓⲥ, sometimes translated ‘lo, behold!’ appears in multiple Coptic constructions. All of these are analyzed with ⲉⲓⲥ as an adverbial element, perhaps best translated etymologically as ‘already’ for the sake of these analyses, or as ‘here’ (though it is not a locative predicate). In line with the lexicocentric approach in UD, it is always analyzed as a dependent, rather than an existential head (unlike ⲟⲩⲛ/ⲙⲛ, which can be roots in existential constructions).
Presentative
With a plain noun, ⲉⲓⲥ ‘behold’ can also be thought of as a weak ‘already’, i.e. ‘it is (already) X’ or ‘an X there’. In this construction, the presented noun can be the local root:
ⲉⲓⲥ/PART ⲟⲩ/DET ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ/NOUN ⲉ/SCONJ ⲥ/PRON ⲛⲕⲟⲧⲕ/VERB ϩⲁⲣⲁⲧ/ADP ϥ/PRON \n Behold, a woman was sleeping beneath him
advmod(ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ,ⲉⲓⲥ)
acl(ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ,ⲛⲕⲟⲧⲕ)
This item is interchangeable with the two-token fixed expression ⲉⲓⲥ ϩⲏⲏⲧⲉ (advmod+fixed).
Auxiliary-like presentative
This construction is similar to presentatives but occurs with verbs, similarly to existential ⲟⲩⲛ, but is not limited to indefinite subjects and is still analyzable as adverbial and subordinate:
# A multitude was sitting around him, and they told him, 'Behold, your mother, your brothers, and your sisters are outside looking for you.' (or: "your mother, your brothers and your sisters are already outside/here they are outside, etc.")
1 ⲁⲩⲱ ⲁⲩⲱ CCONJ CONJ _ 4 cc _ _
2 ⲛⲉ ⲛⲉⲣⲉ AUX CPRET _ 4 aux _ _
3 ϥ ⲛⲧⲟϥ PRON PPERS Definite=Def|Gender=Masc|Number=Sing|Person=3|PronType=Prs 4 nsubj _ _
4 ϩⲙⲟⲟⲥ ϩⲙⲟⲟⲥ VERB V VerbForm=Fin 0 root _ _
5 ϩⲙ ϩⲛ ADP PREP _ 7 case _ _
6 ⲡⲉϥ ⲡⲉϥ DET PPOS Definite=Def|Gender=Masc|Gender[psor]=Masc|Number=Sing|Number[psor]=Sing|Person=3|Poss=Yes|PronType=Prs 7 det _ _
7 ⲕⲱⲧⲉ ⲕⲱⲧⲉ VERB V VerbForm=Fin 4 obl _ _
8 ⲛϭⲓ ⲛϭⲓ PART PTC _ 10 case _ _
9 ⲟⲩ ⲟⲩ DET ART Definite=Ind|Number=Sing|PronType=Art 10 det _ _
10 ⲙⲏⲏϣⲉ ⲙⲏⲏϣⲉ NOUN N _ 4 dislocated _ _
11 ⲡⲉϫⲁ ⲡⲉϫⲉ VERB VBD VerbForm=Fin 4 parataxis _ _
12 ⲩ ⲛⲧⲟⲟⲩ PRON PPERS Definite=Def|Number=Plur|Person=3|PronType=Prs 11 nsubj _ _
13 ⲇⲉ ⲇⲉ PART PTC _ 11 advmod _ _
14 ⲛⲁ ⲛⲁ ADP PREP _ 15 case _ _
15 ⲩ ⲛⲧⲟⲟⲩ PRON PPERO Definite=Def|Number=Plur|Person=3|PronType=Prs 11 obl _ _
16 ϫⲉ ϫⲉ CCONJ CONJ _ 24 mark _ _
17 ⲉⲓⲥ ⲉⲓⲥ PART PTC _ 24 advmod _ _
18 ⲧⲉⲕ ⲡⲉⲕ DET PPOS Definite=Def|Gender=Fem|Gender[psor]=Masc|Number=Sing|Number[psor]=Sing|Person=2|Poss=Yes|PronType=Prs 19 det _ _
19 ⲙⲁⲁⲩ ⲙⲁⲁⲩ NOUN N _ 24 dislocated _ _
20 ⲙⲛ ⲙⲛ ADP PREP _ 22 cc _ _
21 ⲛⲉⲕ ⲡⲉⲕ DET PPOS Definite=Def|Gender[psor]=Masc|Number=Plur|Number[psor]=Sing|Person=2|Poss=Yes|PronType=Prs 22 det _ _
22 ⲥⲛⲏⲩ ⲥⲟⲛ NOUN N _ 19 conj _ _
23 ⲥⲉ ⲛⲧⲟⲟⲩ PRON PPERS Definite=Def|Number=Plur|Person=3|PronType=Prs 24 nsubj _ _
24 ⲕⲱⲧⲉ ⲕⲱⲧⲉ VERB V VerbForm=Fin 11 ccomp _ _
25 ⲛⲥⲱ ⲛⲥⲁ ADP PREP _ 26 case _ _
26 ⲕ ⲛⲧⲟⲕ PRON PPERO Definite=Def|Gender=Masc|Number=Sing|Person=2|PronType=Prs 24 obl _ _
27 ϩⲓⲃⲟⲗ ϩⲓⲃⲟⲗ ADV ADV _ 24 advmod _ _
Temporal
This structure often appears with time expressions. Since ⲉⲓⲥ is not prepositional (incompatible with pronouns, appears with clauses), the temporal expression modified by ⲉⲓⲥ is considered an adverbial clause, and ⲉⲓⲥ is an adverb. It is similar to constructions in other languages expressing ‘it’s been (X time) that…’, and we take the time expression to be the head of the clause, which is subordindated to the main predicate for which a time span is given:
# Analysis: "And a woman that blood flowed from her, it's already been 12 years" (head: flow; modifier: it's already been 12 years)
1 ⲁⲩⲱ ⲁⲩⲱ CCONJ CONJ _ 3 cc _ _
2 ⲟⲩ ⲟⲩ DET ART Definite=Ind|Number=Sing|PronType=Art 3 det _ _
3 ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ ⲥϩⲓⲙⲉ NOUN N _ 0 root _ _
4 ⲉⲣⲉ ⲉⲣⲉ SCONJ CREL _ 7 mark _ _
5 ⲡⲉ ⲡ DET ART Definite=Def|Gender=Masc|Number=Sing|PronType=Art 6 det _ _
6 ⲥⲛⲟϥ ⲥⲛⲟϥ NOUN N _ 7 nsubj _ _
7 ϣⲟⲩⲟ ϣⲟⲩⲟ VERB V VerbForm=Fin 3 acl _ _
8 ⲙⲙⲟ ⲛ ADP PREP _ 9 case _ _
9 ⲥ ⲛⲧⲟⲥ PRON PPERO Definite=Def|Gender=Fem|Number=Sing|Person=3|PronType=Prs 7 obl _ _
10 ⲉⲓⲥ ⲉⲓⲥ PART PTC _ 13 advmod _ _
11 ⲙⲛⲧⲥⲛⲟⲟⲩⲥ ⲙⲛⲧⲥⲛⲟⲟⲩⲥ NUM NUM NumType=Card 13 nummod _ Morphs=ⲙⲛⲧ-ⲥⲛⲟⲟⲩⲥ
12 ⲛ ⲛ ADP PREP _ 13 case _ Orig=ⲣ
13 ⲣⲟⲙⲡⲉ ⲣⲟⲙⲡⲉ NOUN N _ 7 advcl _ _
14 . . PUNCT PUNCT _ 3 punct _ _
ⲙⲉϣⲉ ⲛⲓⲙ ‘someone, you don’t know who’
The rare irregular fossilized negative verb ⲙⲉϣⲉ can appear in a construction ⲙⲉϣⲉ ⲛⲓⲙ meaning ‘someone’, but literally composed of ‘(you) don’t know who’. The UD analysis of this construction treats the interrogative ⲛⲓⲙ as obj, meaning that the entire complex is treated as clausal. This can be a subject clause:
ⲙⲉϣⲉ/VERB ⲛⲓⲙ/PRON ⲛⲏⲩ/VERB ϣⲁⲣⲟ/ADP ⲕ/PRON \n someone is coming to you (lit. 'don't-know-who is coming to you')
csubj(ⲛⲏⲩ,ⲙⲉϣⲉ)
obj(ⲙⲉϣⲉ,ⲛⲓⲙ)
The reason for not treating this as a fixed expression is that the object can have dependents, as in the following example (if the construction is oblique it can only be analyzed as advcl):
ⲃⲱⲕ/VERB ϣⲁ/ADP ⲙⲉϣⲉ/VERB ⲛⲓⲙ/PRON ⲛ/ADP ⲁⲣⲭⲓⲙⲁⲛⲇⲣⲓⲧⲏⲥ/NOUN \n go to some archmandrite
advcl(ⲃⲱⲕ,ⲙⲉϣⲉ)
mark(ⲙⲉϣⲉ,ϣⲁ)
obj(ⲙⲉϣⲉ,ⲛⲓⲙ)
nmod(ⲛⲓⲙ,ⲁⲣⲭⲓⲙⲁⲛⲇⲣⲓⲧⲏⲥ)
case(ⲁⲣⲭⲓⲙⲁⲛⲇⲣⲓⲧⲏⲥ,ⲛ)