Multitasking Clause Samples
The Multitasking clause defines the conditions under which a party may perform multiple tasks or projects simultaneously under the agreement. Typically, this clause clarifies whether the party is permitted to work on other assignments for different clients or projects while fulfilling their obligations under the current contract, and may set boundaries to prevent conflicts of interest or ensure priority is given to the primary engagement. Its core practical function is to establish clear expectations regarding workload management and exclusivity, thereby preventing misunderstandings about the party’s ability to take on additional work during the contract term.
Multitasking. You may use the Multitasking services only for their intended purposes as described in the Documentation.
Multitasking. At every step in a derivation, if a probe can trigger two operations A and B, and the fea- tures checked by A are a superset of those checked by B, the grammar prefers A. (Van Urk and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ 2015: 132) These principles encode slightly different perspectives on the basic insight sketched above, but in practice they yield essentially the same results. To illustrate, it’s helpful to consider a toy exam- ple. Suppose head H has, in present terms, features [A:_], [B:_], and [C:_] that trigger agreement with a phrase bearing these features. Suppose further that there is a phrase XP bearing features [A], [B], [C], a phrase YP bearing features [B], [C], and that XP and YP are both licit targets for agreement at H.8 Then both (18) and (19) dictate that a derivation where agreement at H tar- gets XP for all three features is preferable to one where agreement targets XP for some features and YP for the remaining features. This result is trivial for (19). For (18), it arises because there is a preference for agreement to be maximally general: if H agrees with XP for feature [A], this relationship must extend to all features shared in common. Both principles converge, at least in cases like this, to the basic preference to minimize the number of items operated on by Agree. Both the Free Rider constraint and Multitasking were originally proposed in Uninterpretable- Features-based frameworks that posit a ▇▇▇▇▇ distinction between Agree and Merge. Agreement operations are regulated by the distribution of interpretable and uninterpretable features, and are triggered specifically to satisfy output filters, while Merge operations operate more or less freely, assembling the syntactic structure. The framework developed in the previous two sec- tions, however, posits much less distinction between agreement and merge. Both are lexically associated with certain heads and apply at the root of the structure in accordance with the core ObOp logic. Given this lack of distinction, my proposal is that the basic notion of economy ex- pressed in (18) and (19) should apply equally to Agree and Merge. I therefore propose that the following economy constraint is active in the derivation.
Multitasking