cyang33/LingGym huggingface dataset:
Question 9:
You are a linguist specializing in Yauyos Quechua. 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): ri-shaq yaku-ta-mi-ki ___
Gloss (with missing item): go-1.FUT water-ACC-EVD-IKI ___
The English translation of this sentence is:I’m going to go. I’m going to take care of the water now.
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: In those cases in which \phono{-mI} takes scope over universal-deontic-modal or future-tense verbs, \phono{-k} and \phono{-ki} do not generally indicate an increase in evidence strength; rather, they indicate increasingly strong obligations and increasingly immediate futures, respectively. So, for example, under the scope of \phono{-mI-\uo}, \phono{yanapa-na-y} [help-\lsc{nmlz}-1] receives a weak universal deontic interpretation, ‘I ought to help’. In contrast, under the scope of \phono{-m-ik} or \phono{-m-iki}, the same phrase receives increasingly strong universal interpretations, on the order of ‘I have to help’ and ‘I must help’, respectively. Under the scope of \phono{-mI-\uo}, the phrase is understood as something like a strong suggestion, while under \phono{-m-iki}, it is understood as a more urgent obligation. That is, here, \phono{-ik} and \phono{-iki} seem to do something like increase the degree of modal force, turning a weak universal modal into a strong one. This is the case, too, where \phono{-mI} takes scope over future-tense verbs. For example, explain consultants, in the case of the future-tense \phono{ri-shaq} [go-1.\lsc{fut}] ‘I will go’, a speaker might use\phono{-mI-\uo} if she were going to go at some unspecified, possibly very distant future time. In contrast, she might use \phono{-m-ik} if her going were imminent, and \phono{-m-iki} if she were already on her way. The speaker of~(\ref{GloB:yakuta}), for example, urgently needed to water her garden and had been on her way to do just that when she got caught up in the conversation. When she uttered~(\ref{GloB:yakuta}) she was, in fact, already in motion.\\
A: word: qawa-mu-shaq	 gloss: look-CISL-1.FUT
B: word: kuti-mu-shaq	 gloss: return-CISL-1.FUT
C: word: ri-shaq	 gloss: go-1.FUT
D: word: taka-paka-ra-mu-shaq	 gloss: beat-MUTBEN-CISL-1.FUT
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: A
Question 10:
You are a linguist specializing in Yauyos Quechua. 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): qala-pis ___ luku-ya-ri-shpa-qa
Gloss (with missing item): naked-ADD ___ crazy-INCH-INCEP-SUBIS-TOP
The English translation of this sentence is:We could also stand around naked, going crazy.
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Present-tense conditional verbs in \SYQ{} may receive at least existential ability, circumstantial, deontic, epistemic and teleological interpretations. Past-tense conditional verbs may, in addition to these, also receive universal deontic and epistemic interpretations. That is, present-tense conditionals are specified for modal force [existential], but not modal base, while past-tense conditionals are specified for neither force nor base. \phono{-trI} restricts the interpretation of conditionals, generally excluding all but epistemic readings. In the case of past-tense conditionals, it generally excludes all but universal readings, as well. For example, although the present-tense conditional of~(\ref{GloB:Qalapis}), \phono{saya-ru-chuwan} ‘we could stand around’, is normally five-ways ambiguous, under the scope of \phono{-trI}, only the existential epistemic reading available: ‘it could happen that we stand around’. Similarly, although the past-tense conditional of~(\ref{GloB:mikuramanman}), \phono{miku-ra-ma-n-man} \phono{ka-rqa-\uo} ‘could/would/should/might have eaten me’, is normally seven-ways ambiguous, under the scope of \phono{-trI}, only the universal epistemic reading is available: ‘the Devil would necessarily have eaten me’. The context for~(\ref{GloB:Qalapis}) --~a discussion of women and alcohol~-- supports the epistemic reading. The speaker, a woman who in her eighty-odd years had never taken alcohol, was speculating on what would happen if women were to drink. Her conclusion: it’s possible we would stand around naked, going crazy.\\
A: word: ka-ya-chuwan-tri	 gloss: be-PROG-1PL.COND-EVC
B: word: saya-ru-chuwan-tri	 gloss: stand-URGT-1PL.COND-EVC
C: word: ashna-ku-lla-shaq-tri-ki	 gloss: smell-REFL-RSTR-1.FUT-EVC-IKI
D: word: shinka-ru-chuwan	 gloss: get.drunk-URGT-1PL.COND
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: B
Question 11:
You are a linguist specializing in Yauyos Quechua. 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): qala-pis ___ luku-ya-ri-shpa-qa
Gloss (with missing item): naked-ADD ___ crazy-INCH-INCEP-SUBIS-TOP
The English translation of this sentence is:We could also stand around naked, going crazy.
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: Present-tense conditional verbs in \SYQ{} may receive at least existential ability, circumstantial, deontic, epistemic and teleological interpretations. Past-tense conditional verbs may, in addition to these, also receive universal deontic and epistemic interpretations. That is, present-tense conditionals are specified for modal force [existential], but not modal base, while past-tense conditionals are specified for neither force nor base. \phono{-trI} restricts the interpretation of conditionals, generally excluding all but epistemic readings. In the case of past-tense conditionals, it generally excludes all but universal readings, as well. For example, although the present-tense conditional of~(\ref{GloB:Qalapis}), \phono{saya-ru-chuwan} ‘we could stand around’, is normally five-ways ambiguous, under the scope of \phono{-trI}, only the existential epistemic reading available: ‘it could happen that we stand around’. Similarly, although the past-tense conditional of~(\ref{GloB:mikuramanman}), \phono{miku-ra-ma-n-man} \phono{ka-rqa-\uo} ‘could/would/should/might have eaten me’, is normally seven-ways ambiguous, under the scope of \phono{-trI}, only the universal epistemic reading is available: ‘the Devil would necessarily have eaten me’. The context for~(\ref{GloB:Qalapis}) --~a discussion of women and alcohol~-- supports the epistemic reading. The speaker, a woman who in her eighty-odd years had never taken alcohol, was speculating on what would happen if women were to drink. Her conclusion: it’s possible we would stand around naked, going crazy.\\
A: word: saya-ru-chuwan-tri	 gloss: stand-URGT-1PL.COND-EVC
B: word: ka-ya-n-man-tri	 gloss: be-PROG-3-COND-EVC
C: word: shinka-ru-chuwan	 gloss: get.drunk-URGT-1PL.COND
D: word: ka-ya-chuwan-tri	 gloss: be-PROG-1PL.COND-EVC
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: A
Question 12:
You are a linguist specializing in Yauyos Quechua. 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): kuka-cha-n-kuna-ta apa-ru-pti-y-qa ___
Gloss (with missing item): coca-DIM-3-PL-ACC bring-URGT-SUBDS-1-TOP ___
The English translation of this sentence is:When I bring them their coca, they will accompany me sitting.
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: If it is the case, as \citet{Copley09} argue,\index[aut]{Copley, Bridget} and \citet{Matthewson05}\index[aut]{Matthewson, Lisa}\index[aut]{Rullmann, Hotze}\index[aut]{Davis, Henry} that the future tense is a modal specified for both force, [universal], and base, [metaphysical] or [circumstantial], \phono{-trI} should have no effect on the interpretation of mode in the case of future-tense verbs. This is indeed the case. For example, both the \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}) and \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} of~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}) receive exactly the interpretations they would have were they not under the scope of \phono{-trI:} ‘they will accompany me sitting’ and ‘I’m going to stink’, respectively. This does not mean that \phono{-trI-\uo/ik/iki} has no effect on the interpretation of future-tense verbs, however. Although it leaves \lsc{tam} interpretation unaffected, \phono{-trI} continues to indicate that the proposition under its scope is a conjecture. And \phono{-ik} and \phono{-iki}, as they do in conjunction with \phono{-mI}, indicate increasingly immediate or certain futures. So, although the \lsc{tam} interpretations of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata})’s \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} ‘will accompany me sitting’ and~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq})’s \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} ‘I’m going to stink’ are unchanged under the scope of \phono{-trI}, the \phono{-ik} of the first and the \phono{-iki} of the second signal immediate and certain futures, respectively. In~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}), that future was about an hour away: it was 6 o’clock and the those who were to accompany the speaker were expected at 7:00 for a healing ceremony. The context for~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}), too, was a healing ceremony. The speaker was referring to the upcoming part of the ceremony in which she would have to wash with putrid urine --~certain to make anyone stink!\\
A: word: yaku-ta-mi-ki	 gloss: water-ACC-EVD-IKI
B: word: chay-yuq-tri-ki	 gloss: DEM.D-POSS-EVC-IKI
C: word: tiya-pa-ru-wa-nqa-tri-k	 gloss: sit-BEN-URGT-1.OBJ-3.FUT-EVC-IK
D: word: pasa-ru-wa-nqa	 gloss: pass-URGT-1.OBJ-3.FUT
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: C
Question 13:
You are a linguist specializing in Yauyos Quechua. 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): ___
Gloss (with missing item): ___
The English translation of this sentence is:I’m going to stink!
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: If it is the case, as \citet{Copley09} argue,\index[aut]{Copley, Bridget} and \citet{Matthewson05}\index[aut]{Matthewson, Lisa}\index[aut]{Rullmann, Hotze}\index[aut]{Davis, Henry} that the future tense is a modal specified for both force, [universal], and base, [metaphysical] or [circumstantial], \phono{-trI} should have no effect on the interpretation of mode in the case of future-tense verbs. This is indeed the case. For example, both the \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}) and \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} of~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}) receive exactly the interpretations they would have were they not under the scope of \phono{-trI:} ‘they will accompany me sitting’ and ‘I’m going to stink’, respectively. This does not mean that \phono{-trI-\uo/ik/iki} has no effect on the interpretation of future-tense verbs, however. Although it leaves \lsc{tam} interpretation unaffected, \phono{-trI} continues to indicate that the proposition under its scope is a conjecture. And \phono{-ik} and \phono{-iki}, as they do in conjunction with \phono{-mI}, indicate increasingly immediate or certain futures. So, although the \lsc{tam} interpretations of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata})’s \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} ‘will accompany me sitting’ and~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq})’s \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} ‘I’m going to stink’ are unchanged under the scope of \phono{-trI}, the \phono{-ik} of the first and the \phono{-iki} of the second signal immediate and certain futures, respectively. In~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}), that future was about an hour away: it was 6 o’clock and the those who were to accompany the speaker were expected at 7:00 for a healing ceremony. The context for~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}), too, was a healing ceremony. The speaker was referring to the upcoming part of the ceremony in which she would have to wash with putrid urine --~certain to make anyone stink!\\
A: word: saya-ru-chuwan-tri	 gloss: stand-URGT-1PL.COND-EVC
B: word: lava-shun-tri-ki	 gloss: wash-1PL.FUT-EVC-IKI
C: word: ashna-ku-lla-shaq-tri-ki	 gloss: smell-REFL-RSTR-1.FUT-EVC-IKI
D: word: pasaypaq-tri-ki	 gloss: completely-EVC-IKI
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: C
Question 14:
You are a linguist specializing in Yauyos Quechua. 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): kuka-cha-n-kuna-ta apa-ru-pti-y-qa ___
Gloss (with missing item): coca-DIM-3-PL-ACC bring-URGT-SUBDS-1-TOP ___
The English translation of this sentence is:When I bring them their coca, they will accompany me sitting.
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: If it is the case, as \citet{Copley09} argue,\index[aut]{Copley, Bridget} and \citet{Matthewson05}\index[aut]{Matthewson, Lisa}\index[aut]{Rullmann, Hotze}\index[aut]{Davis, Henry} that the future tense is a modal specified for both force, [universal], and base, [metaphysical] or [circumstantial], \phono{-trI} should have no effect on the interpretation of mode in the case of future-tense verbs. This is indeed the case. For example, both the \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}) and \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} of~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}) receive exactly the interpretations they would have were they not under the scope of \phono{-trI:} ‘they will accompany me sitting’ and ‘I’m going to stink’, respectively. This does not mean that \phono{-trI-\uo/ik/iki} has no effect on the interpretation of future-tense verbs, however. Although it leaves \lsc{tam} interpretation unaffected, \phono{-trI} continues to indicate that the proposition under its scope is a conjecture. And \phono{-ik} and \phono{-iki}, as they do in conjunction with \phono{-mI}, indicate increasingly immediate or certain futures. So, although the \lsc{tam} interpretations of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata})’s \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} ‘will accompany me sitting’ and~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq})’s \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} ‘I’m going to stink’ are unchanged under the scope of \phono{-trI}, the \phono{-ik} of the first and the \phono{-iki} of the second signal immediate and certain futures, respectively. In~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}), that future was about an hour away: it was 6 o’clock and the those who were to accompany the speaker were expected at 7:00 for a healing ceremony. The context for~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}), too, was a healing ceremony. The speaker was referring to the upcoming part of the ceremony in which she would have to wash with putrid urine --~certain to make anyone stink!\\
A: word: tiya-pa-ru-wa-nqa-tri-k	 gloss: sit-BEN-URGT-1.OBJ-3.FUT-EVC-IK
B: word: chay-yuq-tri-ki	 gloss: DEM.D-POSS-EVC-IKI
C: word: ri-shaq	 gloss: go-1.FUT
D: word: pasa-ru-wa-nqa	 gloss: pass-URGT-1.OBJ-3.FUT
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: A
Question 15:
You are a linguist specializing in Yauyos Quechua. 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): ___
Gloss (with missing item): ___
The English translation of this sentence is:I’m going to stink!
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: If it is the case, as \citet{Copley09} argue,\index[aut]{Copley, Bridget} and \citet{Matthewson05}\index[aut]{Matthewson, Lisa}\index[aut]{Rullmann, Hotze}\index[aut]{Davis, Henry} that the future tense is a modal specified for both force, [universal], and base, [metaphysical] or [circumstantial], \phono{-trI} should have no effect on the interpretation of mode in the case of future-tense verbs. This is indeed the case. For example, both the \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}) and \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} of~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}) receive exactly the interpretations they would have were they not under the scope of \phono{-trI:} ‘they will accompany me sitting’ and ‘I’m going to stink’, respectively. This does not mean that \phono{-trI-\uo/ik/iki} has no effect on the interpretation of future-tense verbs, however. Although it leaves \lsc{tam} interpretation unaffected, \phono{-trI} continues to indicate that the proposition under its scope is a conjecture. And \phono{-ik} and \phono{-iki}, as they do in conjunction with \phono{-mI}, indicate increasingly immediate or certain futures. So, although the \lsc{tam} interpretations of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata})’s \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} ‘will accompany me sitting’ and~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq})’s \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} ‘I’m going to stink’ are unchanged under the scope of \phono{-trI}, the \phono{-ik} of the first and the \phono{-iki} of the second signal immediate and certain futures, respectively. In~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}), that future was about an hour away: it was 6 o’clock and the those who were to accompany the speaker were expected at 7:00 for a healing ceremony. The context for~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}), too, was a healing ceremony. The speaker was referring to the upcoming part of the ceremony in which she would have to wash with putrid urine --~certain to make anyone stink!\\
A: word: lava-shun-tri-ki	 gloss: wash-1PL.FUT-EVC-IKI
B: word: ashna-ku-lla-shaq-tri-ki	 gloss: smell-REFL-RSTR-1.FUT-EVC-IKI
C: word: anu-ya-n-ña-tr-iki	 gloss: wean-PROG-3-DISC-EVD-IKI
D: word: pasaypaq-tri-ki	 gloss: completely-EVC-IKI
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: B
Question 16:
You are a linguist specializing in Yauyos Quechua. 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): kuka-cha-n-kuna-ta apa-ru-pti-y-qa ___
Gloss (with missing item): coca-DIM-3-PL-ACC bring-URGT-SUBDS-1-TOP ___
The English translation of this sentence is:When I bring them their coca, they will accompany me sitting.
Here is a relevant knowledge point for this example, with the related morphemes and glosses masked: If it is the case, as \citet{Copley09} argue,\index[aut]{Copley, Bridget} and \citet{Matthewson05}\index[aut]{Matthewson, Lisa}\index[aut]{Rullmann, Hotze}\index[aut]{Davis, Henry} that the future tense is a modal specified for both force, [universal], and base, [metaphysical] or [circumstantial], \phono{-trI} should have no effect on the interpretation of mode in the case of future-tense verbs. This is indeed the case. For example, both the \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}) and \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} of~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}) receive exactly the interpretations they would have were they not under the scope of \phono{-trI:} ‘they will accompany me sitting’ and ‘I’m going to stink’, respectively. This does not mean that \phono{-trI-\uo/ik/iki} has no effect on the interpretation of future-tense verbs, however. Although it leaves \lsc{tam} interpretation unaffected, \phono{-trI} continues to indicate that the proposition under its scope is a conjecture. And \phono{-ik} and \phono{-iki}, as they do in conjunction with \phono{-mI}, indicate increasingly immediate or certain futures. So, although the \lsc{tam} interpretations of~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata})’s \phono{tiya-pa-ru-wa-nga} ‘will accompany me sitting’ and~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq})’s \phono{ashna-ku-lla-shaq} ‘I’m going to stink’ are unchanged under the scope of \phono{-trI}, the \phono{-ik} of the first and the \phono{-iki} of the second signal immediate and certain futures, respectively. In~(\ref{GloB:Kukachankunata}), that future was about an hour away: it was 6 o’clock and the those who were to accompany the speaker were expected at 7:00 for a healing ceremony. The context for~(\ref{GloB:Ashnakullashaq}), too, was a healing ceremony. The speaker was referring to the upcoming part of the ceremony in which she would have to wash with putrid urine --~certain to make anyone stink!\\
A: word: chay-yuq-tri-ki	 gloss: DEM.D-POSS-EVC-IKI
B: word: tiya-pa-ru-wa-nqa-tri-k	 gloss: sit-BEN-URGT-1.OBJ-3.FUT-EVC-IK
C: word: pasa-ru-wa-nqa	 gloss: pass-URGT-1.OBJ-3.FUT
D: word: anu-ya-n-ña-tr-iki	 gloss: wean-PROG-3-DISC-EVD-IKI
Please only return the letter (A–D). Do not say anything else.
Correct Answer: B