Université de Montréal - Thèse sous forme numérique

2276. Ambiguity between the past participle of the verb and the derivative noun, e.g.O conflito terá resultado numa guerra / O resultado do jogo (Eng. The conflictmay have resulted in a war / The result of the match). The noun is very frequent,whereas the verb form is not. This is the case of the candidate term resultar.7. Ambiguity between the past participle of the verb and the derivative adjective,e.g. Ele tinha anotado a morada / O código anotado (Eng. He had written downthe address / The annotated code). The adjective is very frequent, whereas theverb form is not. This is the case of the candidate terms aludir, anotar,contravertir, locar and ocorrer.8. Ambiguity between the infinitive form of the verb and the noun e.g. ...para ojornal titular o artigo. / O titular do prédio (Eng. ...so as to give a title to thearticle / The owner of the building). The noun is very frequent, whereas the verbform is not. This is the case of the candidate term titular.Secondly, some candidate terms were not selected because they did not meet any ofthe criteria set out in section 2.3.2 as well as in section 4.2.2. Thus, 62% of the eliminatedcandidate terms (the remaining 24 verbs of the 39 listed in Appendix 12) and 21% of thefirst 114 candidate terms do not have a meaning that relates to the subject field of law, ingeneral, and to what the macro-scenario of a judgment involves, in particular. What ismore, neither their actants nor their morphological derivatives are terms of the subject fieldof law, in general, or of the judgments, in particular. Finally, they do not establishparadigmatic relations to other valid terms.For instance, dever (must) and pagar (to pay) have a high specificity score (53 and42, respectively) as well as an extremely high frequency (5130 and 2000, respectively) butthey do not meet the validation criteria. Although the former conveys the idea of obligationwhich is a relevant concept in the subject field of law, it is an auxiliary modal verb that