- As for Amendment No 5, we feel that it places an excessive burden on the central authorities in the context of a directive-based system in which these central authorities have only a subsidiary function.
- När det gäller ändringsförslag 5, tycker vi att det lägger alltför stor börda på de centrala myndigheterna inom ramen för ett system i direktivet där dessa centrala myndigheter bara har en kompletterande roll.
- As for Amendment No 5, we feel that it places an excessive burden on the central authorities in the context of a directive-based system in which these central authorities have only a subsidiary function.
- När det gäller ändringsförslag 5, tycker vi att det lägger alltför stor börda på de centrala myndigheterna inom ramen för ett system i direktivet där dessa centrala myndigheter bara har en kompletterande roll.
- If I am not mistaken, Amendment No 3 brings nothing new to the measure in question, in that the Member States which will designate a single authority and then a central authority are precisely the ones whose legislation does not allow for the direct transmission of judgements.
- Ändringsförslag 3 tillför inte - om ingen har en bättre åsikt - någonting nytt till den bestämmelse vi diskuterar, då medlemsstaterna som skall utse en gemensam myndighet, alltså en central myndighet, är just de som i sin rätt inte tillåter en direkt överföring av domar.
- Wine is not a foodstuff, but a luxury item which should be subjected to the laws of the marketplace without any further intervention from central authorities - apart from any steps that might be justified for reasons of alcohol policy, but these would need to be effected at Member State level, not EU level.
- Vin utgör inget livsmedel, utan det är en lyxvara som bör vara underställd marknadens lagar utan ytterligare interventioner från centrala myndigheter än sådana som kan vara motiverade av alkoholpolitiska skäl, men de måste i så fall ske på medlemsstatsnivå, inte på EU-nivå.
show query
SET search_path TO f9miniensv;
WITH
list AS (SELECT
t11.token_id AS t11,
t12.token_id AS t12,
t21.token_id AS t21,
t22.token_id AS t22,
r1.dep_id AS dep1,
r2.dep_id AS dep2
FROM
deprel r1
JOIN depstr s1 ON s1.dep_id = r1.dep_id
JOIN word_align a1 ON a1.wsource = r1.head AND a1.wsource < a1.wtarget
JOIN word_align a2 ON a2.wsource = r1.dependent
JOIN deprel r2 ON r2.head = a1.wtarget AND r2.dependent = a2.wtarget
JOIN depstr s2 ON s2.dep_id = r2.dep_id
JOIN token t11 ON t11.token_id = r1.head
JOIN token t21 ON t21.token_id = r2.head
JOIN token t12 ON t12.token_id = r1.dependent
JOIN token t22 ON t22.token_id = r2.dependent
WHERE
s1.val = 'amod' AND
s2.val = 'AT' AND
t11.ctag = 'NOUN' AND
t21.ctag = 'NOUN' AND
t12.ctag = 'ADJ' AND
t22.ctag = 'ADJ' AND
t11.lemma_id = 35048 AND
t12.lemma_id = 11059 AND
t21.lemma_id = 54674 AND
t22.lemma_id = 11059),
stats AS (SELECT
sentence_id,
count(DISTINCT token_id) AS c,
count(*) AS c_aligned,
count(DISTINCT wtarget) AS c_target
FROM
token
LEFT JOIN word_align ON wsource = token_id
WHERE
sentence_id IN (
SELECT sentence_id
FROM
list
JOIN token ON token_id IN(t11, t21)
)
GROUP BY sentence_id),
numbered AS (SELECT row_number() OVER () AS i, *
FROM
list),
sentences AS (SELECT *, .2 * (1 / (1 + exp(max(c) OVER (PARTITION BY i) - min(c) OVER (PARTITION BY i)))) +
.8 * (1 / log(avg(c) OVER (PARTITION BY i))) AS w
FROM
(
SELECT i, 1 AS n, sentence_id, ARRAY[t11,t12] AS tokens
FROM
numbered
JOIN token ON token_id = t11
UNION SELECT i, 2 AS n, sentence_id, ARRAY[t21,t22] AS tokens
FROM
numbered
JOIN token ON token_id = t21
) x
JOIN stats USING (sentence_id)
ORDER BY i, n)
SELECT
i,
n,
w,
c,
c_aligned,
c_target,
sentence_id,
string_agg(CASE WHEN lpad THEN ' ' ELSE '' END || '<span class="token' ||
CASE WHEN ARRAY[token_id] <@ tokens THEN ' hl' ELSE '' END || '">' || val || '</span>',
'' ORDER BY token_id ASC) AS s
FROM
sentences
JOIN token USING (sentence_id)
JOIN typestr USING (type_id)
GROUP BY i, n, w, c, c_aligned, c_target, sentence_id
ORDER BY w DESC, i, n;
;