Interpolation of supplements

[BrettRey]

John writes, "If you indicate Supplements by standard branches, won’t you, in the case of interpolations, end up with trees with crossing branches? In your (69), for example, isn’t the correct anchor the top Clause rather than the VP? See CGEL page 1355."

It's not clear to me that the anchor here is the clause rather than the VP, but perhaps it's clearer to others. It may also be the case that we can identify clear examples.

[nschneid]

Maybe since the interpolation "and I still believe it" contains both a subject and an object, it is expected to parallel the full clause, not just the VP?

Anyway, I can live with an overly simplistic treatment of supplements since the cases like this should be very rare. Unless you would rather treat it as a gap.