- He has repeatedly stressed the need for a common defence and hence the militarisation of the EU.
- Han har gång på gång understrukit kravet på ett gemensamt försvar och därmed en militarisering av EU.
- You will no doubt have read yesterday that the American Minister of Defence is already putting obstacles in the way of common European defence.
- Ni har naturligtvis läst gårdagens förklaringar från den amerikanske försvarsministern som redan lägger på haspen när det gäller ett gemensamt europeiskt försvar.
- We need to forge alliances and foster cooperation that will generate a joint defence but certainly not a united common defence.
- Det behövs allianser och samarbete som gör det möjligt att ”försvara oss gemensamt” men helt säkert inte ett enat ”gemensamt försvar”.
- The implementation of a common foreign and security policy will require an EU capable of acting, with a common foreign minister, common defence and a common attitude to third countries.
- Ett genomförande av en gemensam utrikes- och säkerhetspolitik kommer att kräva ett handlingskraftigt EU med en gemensam utrikesminister, ett gemensamt försvar och en gemensam ståndpunkt gentemot tredje land.
- And many have also made it clear that the Treaty of Amsterdam as it stands means that the question of a common defence has now been put aside for some time to come.
- Det finns ju många som har klarlagt att Amsterdamfördraget innebär att frågan om ett gemensamt försvar för ganska lång tid har skjutits åt sidan med nuvarande beskrivningar.
- Even leaving aside the question of Member States with a tradition of neutrality, it states that common defence must be brought about through the integration of the WEU into the European Union and, at the same time, that this has already been achieved within the framework of NATO.
- Även om man undantar de stater som är bundna till sin neutralitet, indikerar det att ett gemensamt försvar bör eftersökas genom en integration av VEU i Europeiska unionen, och samtidigt att detta redan har gjorts inom ramen för Nato.
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 = 63438 AND
t12.lemma_id = 42586 AND
t21.lemma_id = 45212 AND
t22.lemma_id = 41367),
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;
;