Two examples are displayed here, one for a determiner and one for a substantive:
die ~
sign:{
syn => d_syntax:{
cat => det,
agr => ((nom;acc)&((fem&sg);pl)&weak),
fcomp => [sign:{
syn => n_syntax:{
cat => np},
sem => SEM} ],
ehf => no},
sem => d_semantic:{
class => def,
pred => def,
arg => fcomp},
string => [die|R], rest=>R }.
As in the LFG source grammar, the determiner is considered as a syntactical head (at least for the first step of this migration experiment, see below the concluding remarks). One can recognize this at the feature `fcomp', which has a subcategorization list. New in comparison with the source grammar is the `sign' organization, i.e. the use of a hierarchical type system. The type system, which has been build stepwise for the purpose of this experiment is displayed below. Also new is the treatment of agreement, having as value a boolean type (`&' = AND, `;' = OR, `' = NOT), that are defined within ALEP. The semantic features here are just collecting information which in the source grammar is not explicitly specified as such (there was not s-projection in the source LFG grammar).
In the case of substantives, the same kind of remarks is valid:
maerkte ~
sign:{
syn => n_syntax:{
cat => noun,
agr => (mas&pl&(~dat))},
sem => n_semantic:{
class => count,
pred => markt},
string => [maerkte|R], rest=>R }.
Once the migration into a type system has been done, there is no problem in migrating this kind of lexicon entries.