-------------------------------------------------------
Comments

 <BASIC ORDER>: [*] VSO

 Although other orders are acceptable, this appears to be the most
 frequent and general in meaning.

I think, though, that it will be easier to get the agreement-dependent
VSO/SVO alternation by making SVO basic.

 Also, the coordination 'word' is somewhat of a clitic and can combine
 with negation markers to form a particle /wala:/, but until I get
 further I think these are morphemes that can be regularized and
 treated as different 'words'

That sounds reasonable.

 Using the choices given above, I started the LKB and was able to parse
 'adribu bint rajul' (the girl hit the man) and 'la insarafa bint' (the
 girl did not leave). Only the latter overgenerated at this point;
 unsure whether the 'la' was modifying the rest as a whole S or as just
 a VP. Otherwise, the structures were as expected.

[Please give the sentences in a form that your grammar expects, so
that I can drop them in and test them when you have questions like this.
For example, you have la: rather than la in the lexicon.]

I think this is because "VP" modifier isn't a well-defined category
in VSO languages.  There *is* no VP.  I think that making it an S
modifier would be a better choice.  Actually, perhaps even V.  Where
does it go in SVO sentences?

 This indeed is parsed by the LKB interface, but when I Process All in
 tsdb, the Parses count is still shown to be zero. Below, I've shown
 the words that I added in an attempt to increase coverage.

I think you forgot to make a new test suite instance after you updated
your skeleton.  The sentenc you mentioned ("yins.arifu    rrajulu") isn't
in either of the tsdb profiles you turned in.  When I created a new profile
on the basis of your lab4 skeleton and parsed it using the grammar you
submitted, three sentences indeed parsed.

 Something else I hadn't considered, both in the implementation, and
 the test suite itself, is my use of adjectives. Since adjectives in
 MSA show agreement with the nouns they modify, I thought I would get a
 good deal of mileage by using numerous sentences that not only show
 noun/verb agreement, but show noun-adjective/verb agreement.

And this goes against the maxim suggesting simpler sentences for test suites.
It's fine to have examples showing noun-adjective agreement, but
you cetainly want some noun-verb agreement examples without adjectives
in them.

 Consequently, implementing adjectives would give me vastly more
 coverage, while at the same time, I plan on adding a great deal of
 very simple sentences that don't make use of adjectives so that
 verb-noun agreement can be tested on its own. (I tried adding just a
 few of these sentences for this assignment, but this didn't appear to
 work with tsdb).

Right.  See above on why it appeared not to work.