cyang33/LingGym huggingface dataset:
Question 162:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): {baru} siapa Sarles ___ dong dua turung bli ni
Gloss (with missing item): and.then who Sarles ___ 3PL two descend buy D.PROX
The English translation of this sentence is:‘and then, who-is-it, Sarles and the two of them came down and bought this’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: As for the distinction of \isi{comitative} and inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, \citet[33]{Haspelmath.2007c} makes the following cross-linguistic observations. In a \isi{comitative} \isi{conjunction} construction, the \isi{conjunction} of “two set-denoting \textsc{np}s [{\ldots}] ‘\{A, B\} and \{C, D\}’ yields the set \{A, B, C, D\}” (\citeyear*[33]{Haspelmath.2007c}). In inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, by contrast, “some members of the second conjunct set are already included in the first conjunct set”; hence the result of the coordination is not the “union, but the \textitbf{unification} of the sets [such that] ‘\{A, B, C\} and \{B\}’ yields the set \{A, B, C\}” (\citeyear*[33]{Haspelmath.2007c}). This distinction also applies to Papuan Malay. While the constructions in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) receive an inclusory reading, the \isi{comitative} ‘N1 \textitbf{the morpheme ___} ‘its gloss ___’ \textsc{N2}’ \isi{conjunction} construction in (\ref{Example_6.32}) receives an additive reading. (Comitative \isi{conjunction} constructions its gloss ___ \textitbf{the morpheme ___} ‘its gloss ___’ are discussed in see §\ref{Para_14.2.1.1}.)
A: word: dengang	 gloss: with
B: word: jangang	 gloss: NEG.IMP
C: word: dang	 gloss: and
D: word: natalia	 gloss: Natalia
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: A
Question 163:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): {baru} siapa Sarles dengang ___ dua turung bli ni
Gloss (with missing item): and.then who Sarles with ___ two descend buy D.PROX
The English translation of this sentence is:‘and then, who-is-it, Sarles and the two of them came down and bought this’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: As for the distinction of \isi{comitative} and inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, \citet[33]{Haspelmath.2007c} makes the following cross-linguistic observations. In a \isi{comitative} \isi{conjunction} construction, the \isi{conjunction} of “two set-denoting \textsc{np}s [{\ldots}] ‘\{A, B\} and \{C, D\}’ yields the set \{A, B, C, D\}” (\citeyear*[33]{Haspelmath.2007c}). In inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, by contrast, “some members of the second conjunct set are already included in the first conjunct set”; hence the result of the coordination is not the “union, but the \textitbf{unification} of the sets [such that] ‘\{A, B, C\} and \{B\}’ yields the set \{A, B, C\}” (\citeyear*[33]{Haspelmath.2007c}). This distinction also applies to Papuan Malay. While the constructions in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) receive an inclusory reading, the \isi{comitative} ‘N1 \textitbf{dengang} ‘with’ \textsc{N2}’ \isi{conjunction} construction in (\ref{Example_6.32}) receives an additive reading. (Comitative \isi{conjunction} constructions with \textitbf{dengang} ‘with’ are discussed in see §\ref{Para_14.2.1.1}.)
A: word: tanta	 gloss: aunt
B: word: dong/dorang	 gloss: 3PL
C: word: dong	 gloss: 3PL
D: word: kam	 gloss: 2PL
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: C
Question 164:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): {baru} siapa Sarles dengang dong ___ turung bli ni
Gloss (with missing item): and.then who Sarles with 3PL ___ descend buy D.PROX
The English translation of this sentence is:‘and then, who-is-it, Sarles and the two of them came down and bought this’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: As for the distinction of \isi{comitative} and inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, \citet[33]{Haspelmath.2007c} makes the following cross-linguistic observations. In a \isi{comitative} \isi{conjunction} construction, the \isi{conjunction} of “its gloss ___ set-denoting \textsc{np}s [{\ldots}] ‘\{A, B\} and \{C, D\}’ yields the set \{A, B, C, D\}” (\citeyear*[33]{Haspelmath.2007c}). In inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, by contrast, “some members of the second conjunct set are already included in the first conjunct set”; hence the result of the coordination is not the “union, but the \textitbf{unification} of the sets [such that] ‘\{A, B, C\} and \{B\}’ yields the set \{A, B, C\}” (\citeyear*[33]{Haspelmath.2007c}). This distinction also applies to Papuan Malay. While the constructions in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) receive an inclusory reading, the \isi{comitative} ‘N1 \textitbf{dengang} ‘with’ \textsc{N2}’ \isi{conjunction} construction in (\ref{Example_6.32}) receives an additive reading. (Comitative \isi{conjunction} constructions with \textitbf{dengang} ‘with’ are discussed in see §\ref{Para_14.2.1.1}.)
A: word: dua	 gloss: two
B: word: siduasi	 gloss: Siduas
C: word: tiga	 gloss: one
D: word: kedua	 gloss: second
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: A
Question 165:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): ... ___ dua deng bapa tu sayang dia
Gloss (with missing item): ... ___ two with father D.DIST love 3SG
The English translation of this sentence is:‘[but this child] I and (my) husband (emph) love her’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Papuan Malay inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, that is, ``\textsc{pro-pl} \textitbf{(dua) dengang} \textsc{np}’ constructions, are also distinct from ``\textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl}'' \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading. The pragmatic differences between the constituent order found in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) as compared to that found in (\ref{Example_6.33}) are similar to the differences found in \ili{Toqabaqit}, another \ili{Austronesian} language, as observed by \citet[27]{Lichtenberk.2000}: the contrast concerns “the relative degrees of discourse salience of the two sets of participants, the overtly and the covertly encoded ones”. This contrast also applies to Papuan Malay. In (\ref{Example_6.28}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}), the covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual constructions are more salient and therefore mentioned first. The overtly encoded participants, by contrast, are less salient and therefore mentioned second. In the \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrase in (\ref{Example_6.33}), by contrast, the overtly encoded participant \textitbf{bapa} ‘father’ is more salient and therefore mentioned first. The covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual construction \textitbf{dorang dua} ‘they two’ are less salient and of subordinate status. (For details on \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading, see §\ref{Para_6.2.2.2}.)
A: word: kam	 gloss: 2PL
B: word: hurki	 gloss: Hurki
C: word: kitong	 gloss: 1PL
D: word: tong	 gloss: 1PL
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: D
Question 166:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): ... tong ___ deng bapa tu sayang dia
Gloss (with missing item): ... 1PL ___ with father D.DIST love 3SG
The English translation of this sentence is:‘[but this child] I and (my) husband (emph) love her’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Papuan Malay inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, that is, ``\textsc{pro-pl} \textitbf{(the morpheme ___) dengang} \textsc{np}’ constructions, are also distinct from ``\textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl}'' \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading. The pragmatic differences between the constituent order found in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) as compared to that found in (\ref{Example_6.33}) are similar to the differences found in \ili{Toqabaqit}, another \ili{Austronesian} language, as observed by \citet[27]{Lichtenberk.2000}: the contrast concerns “the relative degrees of discourse salience of the its gloss ___ sets of participants, the overtly and the covertly encoded ones”. This contrast also applies to Papuan Malay. In (\ref{Example_6.28}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}), the covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal the morpheme ___l constructions are more salient and therefore mentioned first. The overtly encoded participants, by contrast, are less salient and therefore mentioned second. In the \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrase in (\ref{Example_6.33}), by contrast, the overtly encoded participant \textitbf{bapa} ‘father’ is more salient and therefore mentioned first. The covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal the morpheme ___l construction \textitbf{dorang the morpheme ___} ‘they its gloss ___’ are less salient and of subordinate status. (For details on \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading, see §\ref{Para_6.2.2.2}.)
A: word: anging	 gloss: wind
B: word: dua	 gloss: two
C: word: siduasi	 gloss: Siduas
D: word: kedua	 gloss: second
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: B
Question 167:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): ... tong dua ___ bapa tu sayang dia
Gloss (with missing item): ... 1PL two ___ father D.DIST love 3SG
The English translation of this sentence is:‘[but this child] I and (my) husband (emph) love her’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Papuan Malay inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, that is, ``\textsc{pro-pl} \textitbf{(dua) the morpheme ___ang} \textsc{np}’ constructions, are also distinct from ``\textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl}'' \isi{noun} phrases its gloss ___ an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading. The pragmatic differences between the constituent order found in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) as compared to that found in (\ref{Example_6.33}) are similar to the differences found in \ili{Toqabaqit}, another \ili{Austronesian} language, as observed by \citet[27]{Lichtenberk.2000}: the contrast concerns “the relative degrees of discourse salience of the two sets of participants, the overtly and the covertly encoded ones”. This contrast also applies to Papuan Malay. In (\ref{Example_6.28}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}), the covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual constructions are more salient and therefore mentioned first. The overtly encoded participants, by contrast, are less salient and therefore mentioned second. In the \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrase in (\ref{Example_6.33}), by contrast, the overtly encoded participant \textitbf{bapa} ‘father’ is more salient and therefore mentioned first. The covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual construction \textitbf{dorang dua} ‘they two’ are less salient and of subordinate status. (For details on \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrases its gloss ___ an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading, see §\ref{Para_6.2.2.2}.)
A: word: kam	 gloss: 2PL
B: word: deng	 gloss: with
C: word: dang	 gloss: and
D: word: dengang	 gloss: with
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: B
Question 168:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): ... tong dua deng ___ tu sayang dia
Gloss (with missing item): ... 1PL two with ___ D.DIST love 3SG
The English translation of this sentence is:‘[but this child] I and (my) husband (emph) love her’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Papuan Malay inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, that is, ``\textsc{pro-pl} \textitbf{(dua) dengang} \textsc{np}’ constructions, are also distinct from ``\textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl}'' \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading. The pragmatic differences between the constituent order found in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) as compared to that found in (\ref{Example_6.33}) are similar to the differences found in \ili{Toqabaqit}, another \ili{Austronesian} language, as observed by \citet[27]{Lichtenberk.2000}: the contrast concerns “the relative degrees of discourse salience of the two sets of participants, the overtly and the covertly encoded ones”. This contrast also applies to Papuan Malay. In (\ref{Example_6.28}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}), the covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual constructions are more salient and therefore mentioned first. The overtly encoded participants, by contrast, are less salient and therefore mentioned second. In the \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrase in (\ref{Example_6.33}), by contrast, the overtly encoded participant \textitbf{the morpheme ___} ‘its gloss ___’ is more salient and therefore mentioned first. The covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual construction \textitbf{dorang dua} ‘they two’ are less salient and of subordinate status. (For details on \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading, see §\ref{Para_6.2.2.2}.)
A: word: bapa-ade	 gloss: uncle
B: word: tete	 gloss: grandfather
C: word: bapa	 gloss: father
D: word: desa	 gloss: village
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: C
Question 169:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): ... tong dua deng bapa ___ sayang dia
Gloss (with missing item): ... 1PL two with father ___ love 3SG
The English translation of this sentence is:‘[but this child] I and (my) husband (emph) love her’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Papuan Malay inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, that is, ``\textsc{pro-pl} \textitbf{(dua) dengang} \textsc{np}’ constructions, are also distinct from ``\textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl}'' \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading. The pragmatic differences between the constithe morpheme ___ent order found in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) as compared to that found in (\ref{Example_6.33}) are similar to the differences found in \ili{Toqabaqit}, another \ili{Austronesian} language, as observed by \citet[27]{Lichtenberk.2000}: the contrast concerns “the relative degrees of discourse salience of the two sets of participants, the overtly and the covertly encoded ones”. This contrast also applies to Papuan Malay. In (\ref{Example_6.28}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}), the covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual constructions are more salient and therefore mentioned first. The overtly encoded participants, by contrast, are less salient and therefore mentioned second. In the \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrase in (\ref{Example_6.33}), by contrast, the overtly encoded participant \textitbf{bapa} ‘father’ is more salient and therefore mentioned first. The covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual construction \textitbf{dorang dua} ‘they two’ are less salient and of subordinate stathe morpheme ___s. (For details on \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading, see §\ref{Para_6.2.2.2}.)
A: word: satu	 gloss: one
B: word: dua	 gloss: two
C: word: sana	 gloss: L.DIST
D: word: tu	 gloss: D.DIST
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: D
Question 170:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): ___ dua dengang Natanael pu maytua langsung pake spit
Gloss (with missing item): ___ two with Natanael POSS wife immediately use speedboat
The English translation of this sentence is:‘he/she and Natanael’s wife immediately took the speedboat’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Papuan Malay inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, that is, ``\textsc{pro-pl} \textitbf{(dua) dengang} \textsc{np}’ constructions, are also distinct from ``\textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl}'' \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading. The pragmatic differences between the constituent order found in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) as compared to that found in (\ref{Example_6.33}) are similar to the differences found in \ili{Toqabaqit}, another \ili{Austronesian} language, as observed by \citet[27]{Lichtenberk.2000}: the contrast concerns “the relative degrees of discourse salience of the two sets of participants, the overtly and the covertly encoded ones”. This contrast also applies to Papuan Malay. In (\ref{Example_6.28}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}), the covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual constructions are more salient and therefore mentioned first. The overtly encoded participants, by contrast, are less salient and therefore mentioned second. In the \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrase in (\ref{Example_6.33}), by contrast, the overtly encoded participant \textitbf{bapa} ‘father’ is more salient and therefore mentioned first. The covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal dual construction \textitbf{dorang dua} ‘they two’ are less salient and of subordinate status. (For details on \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading, see §\ref{Para_6.2.2.2}.)
A: word: cantik	 gloss: be.beautiful
B: word: dong	 gloss: 3PL
C: word: dong/dorang	 gloss: 3PL
D: word: kam	 gloss: 2PL
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: B
Question 171:
You are a linguist specializing in Papuan Malay. You are given a sentence along with its morpheme breakdown, gloss, and translation. Words are separated by spaces, and morphemes are separated by hyphens. However, a word and its gloss are missing and represented by an underscore. Based on your understanding, please choose the most appropriate option. 
Sentence (with missing item): {dong} ___ dengang Natanael pu maytua langsung pake spit
Gloss (with missing item): 3PL ___ with Natanael POSS wife immediately use speedboat
The English translation of this sentence is:‘he/she and Natanael’s wife immediately took the speedboat’
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Papuan Malay inclusory \isi{conjunction} constructions, that is, ``\textsc{pro-pl} \textitbf{(the morpheme ___) dengang} \textsc{np}’ constructions, are also distinct from ``\textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl}'' \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading. The pragmatic differences between the constituent order found in (\ref{Example_6.26}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}) as compared to that found in (\ref{Example_6.33}) are similar to the differences found in \ili{Toqabaqit}, another \ili{Austronesian} language, as observed by \citet[27]{Lichtenberk.2000}: the contrast concerns “the relative degrees of discourse salience of the its gloss ___ sets of participants, the overtly and the covertly encoded ones”. This contrast also applies to Papuan Malay. In (\ref{Example_6.28}) to (\ref{Example_6.29}), the covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal the morpheme ___l constructions are more salient and therefore mentioned first. The overtly encoded participants, by contrast, are less salient and therefore mentioned second. In the \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrase in (\ref{Example_6.33}), by contrast, the overtly encoded participant \textitbf{bapa} ‘father’ is more salient and therefore mentioned first. The covertly encoded participants subsumed under the adnominal the morpheme ___l construction \textitbf{dorang the morpheme ___} ‘they its gloss ___’ are less salient and of subordinate status. (For details on \textsc{n} \textsc{pro-pl} \isi{noun} phrases with an \isi{associative} inclusory plural reading, see §\ref{Para_6.2.2.2}.)
A: word: ise	 gloss: Ise
B: word: kedua	 gloss: second
C: word: dua	 gloss: two
D: word: siduasi	 gloss: Siduas
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: C