9

I'm trying to (more or less) replicate this phonological rewrite rule:

enter image description here

I'm using the package phonrule, and what I manage to accomplish is this:

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{phonrule} \begin{document} \phonc {\phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ +hi}} {[$\alpha$grv]} {\oneof{% \phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$grv}\phold\\ \phold\phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$vce}% }} \end{document}

enter image description here

My main problem here is what appears after the "when" slash:

(1) The package only provides a left curly bracket - how can I add a right one as well?

(2) The two options within the curly brackets are not well aligned. I think comparing the two pictures themselves says it better than what I could do with words.

Improve this question
1
  • 1
    in redard to (2): According phonrule.sty \oneof internally uses a simple tabular environment. If you insert an ampersand (eg. like this: \phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$grv} & \phold) and add a second newline `\\ \` the result looks not perfect but a little bit better ... Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 12:24

3 Answers 3

Reset to default
4

You can look at the reimplementation of phonrule I did for Alignment in \oneof from the phonrule package

We can now define a variant of \oneof where the closing brace is added and the space between columns is removed.

\documentclass{article} % BEGIN reimplementation of phonrule \providecommand*{\textrightarrow}{\ensuremath{\rightarrow}} \providecommand*{\textplus}{\ensuremath{+}} \providecommand*{\textminus}{\ensuremath{-}} \newcommand*{\phold}{\rule[-1.5pt]{1.5ex}{.5pt}} \newcommand*{\phon}[2]{#1 \textrightarrow{} #2} \newcommand*{\phonc}[3]{\phon{#1}{#2}~/~#3} \newcommand*{\phonr}[3]{\phon{#1}{#2}~/~\phold#3} \newcommand*{\phonl}[3]{\phon{#1}{#2}~/~#3\phold} \newcommand*{\phonb}[4]{\phonl{#1}{#2}{#3}#4} \makeatletter \newcommand*{\env}{\@ifstar{\@env{&}}{\@env{~}}} \newcommand*{\@env}[3]{#2~/#1#3} \newcommand*{\envr}{\@ifstar{\@envr{&}}{\@envr{~}}} \newcommand*{\@envr}[3]{\@env{#1}{#2}{\phold#3}} \newcommand*{\envl}{\@ifstar{\@envl{&}}{\@envl{~}}} \newcommand*{\@envl}[3]{\@env{#1}{#2}{#3\phold}} \newcommand*{\envb}{\@ifstar{\@envb{&}}{\@envb{~}}} \newcommand*{\@envb}[4]{\@env{#1}{#2}{#3\phold#4}} % set environment for feature matrix with square brackets \newcommand*{\phonfeat}[1]{% \ensuremath{% \left[\begin{tabular}{c}#1\end{tabular}\right]% }% } \newcommand*{\oneof}[2][c]{% \ensuremath{% \left\{ \begin{tabular}{#1#1}#2\end{tabular} \right. }% } \makeatother % END \newcommand{\oneofvar}[2][c]{% \ensuremath{% \left\{ \begin{tabular}{#1@{}#1}#2\end{tabular} \right\} }% } \begin{document} \phonc {\phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ +hi}} {[$\alpha$grv]} {\oneofvar{% \phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$grv} & \hrulefill \\ \hrulefill & \phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$vce}% }} \end{document}

enter image description here

Improve this answer
4
  • How can I add the @{}c@{} bit (from Alan's answer) to the tabular definition of \oneof and \oneofvar to get the braces closer? Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 15:02
  • @Sverre If you remove the @{} from the \oneofvar definition it is the same as mine. (And personally I wouldn't use \hrulefill here, since the environment line is way too long and high.) Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 15:19
  • @AlanMunn Yes, but I was wondering how I can put the @{}c@{} bit into the definition of \oneofvar/\twoof (I renamed it \phonbraces), so that I don't need to repeat it every time I write a rule. Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 15:22
  • 1
    @Sverre Just replace the [c] in the macro definition with @{}c@{}. Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 15:25
6

Here's a version that looks ok. I added a \twoof command for the second brace and made a longer \phold command \Phold. Since the underlying commands are tabular you can pass any tabular specification to it so I removed the intercolumn space to make the alignment look a bit nicer.

\documentclass{article} \usepackage{phonrule} \usepackage{amsmath} \newcommand*{\twoof}[2][c]{% \ensuremath{% \left\{ \begin{tabular}{#1#1}#2\end{tabular} \right\} }% } \newcommand*{\Phold}{\rule[-4pt]{2.5em}{.5pt}} \begin{document} \phonc {\phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ +hi}} {[$\alpha$grv]} {\twoof[@{}c@{}]{% \phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$grv} & \Phold\\ \Phold & \phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$vce}% }} \end{document}

output of code

Improve this answer
3
  • I was hoping you would come to the rescue, Alan :) Now as a follow-up: could you please make a package for phonological rewrite rules? Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 12:41
  • 1
    I'll add this to the list of "packages I've been asked to write in TeX.se comments". :) Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 12:49
  • 1
    @Sverre And see, egreg has already rewritten the package! Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 13:01
1

Using egreg's answer as the basis, and incorporating something from Alan's answer as well as adding a few bits of my own, I've decided on this (stripping away lines I don't need for this MWE):

\documentclass{article} \providecommand*{\textrightarrow}{\ensuremath{\rightarrow}} \makeatletter \newcommand*{\phoncrossbar}{\leavevmode\leaders\hrule height .5pt\hfill\kern\z@} \newcommand*{\phon}[2]{#1 \textrightarrow{} #2} \newcommand*{\phonc}[3]{\phon{#1}{#2}~/~#3} \newcommand*{\phonfeat}[1]{% \ensuremath{% \left[\begin{tabular}{@{}l@{}}#1\end{tabular}\right]% }% } \newcommand*{\phonbraces}[2][@{}c@{}]{% for curly braces on both sides \ensuremath{% \left\{ \begin{tabular}{#1#1}#2\end{tabular} \right\}% }} \makeatother \begin{document} \phonc {\phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ +hi}} {[$\alpha$grv]} {\phonbraces{% \phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$grv} & \phoncrossbar\\ \\ \phoncrossbar & \phonfeat{$-$cnt\\ $\alpha$vce}% }} \end{document}

enter image description here

What I've changed from egreg's answer is this:

(1) Created a version of \hrulefill called \phoncrossbar that has the same thickness (0.5pt) as rules used elsewhere here.

(2) Added @{}c@{} to the definition of \phonfeat and \phonbraces to remove extra white space in matrices and around braces (this is also how it normally looks in the literature).

(3) Left aligned the features in the feature matrix (which is the norm).

Improve this answer
3
  • This is an aesthetic choice, of course, but to my eye the bar is still too long and too high. Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 16:01
  • @AlanMunn I had the same doubts, but I compared with SPE, and that's how they do it, actually. Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 16:03
  • 2
    Well it wouldn't be the only thing about SPE that's ugly. :) Commented Apr 17, 2017 at 16:05

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.