Shortened, hard-coded case names used inconsistently

[emilymbender]

From a student:

Also, we also ran into the "nom" vs. "nominative" issue in our grammar, and the cause of this issue is that the "Cases" page allows the user to specify names for the arguments (with two example names being "nominative" and "accusative"), but the patterns list ("ch.patterns()") continues to use abbreviations like "nom" and "acc" due to"nom-acc" being hardcoded into the choices file, while fields like "valence" use the custom name, causing a discrepancy between type names. This looks like a bug on the customization website, since it essentially allows users to produce invalid choices files, which in turn produce invalid grammars. By naming our argument cases to be "nom" and "acc" as well (matching the hardcoded names), we were able to work around the bug. Unfortunately I was not able to find the source code that generates choices files themselves, so I can't pinpoint the code that needs to be fixed.

[Keren Ruditsky]

If the use of "nominative" is specific to the clausal verb lex types, it might be the same issue as #688 which should be fixed after the next update.