An L1 lexeme is, in principle, glossed by an L2 lexeme (Rule 4a). Sometimes more than one L2 word is necessary, for instance in Germ. fabulieren (invent.stories:INF). Such multiple words in one gloss are treated like configurations of features glossing one morph and are therefore separated by a dot (Rule 24).

However, profusion is to be avoided. Adjectives that do not require a copula in predicative function are sometimes glossed by adding a copula, e.g. West Greenlandic anurli ‘windy’ is glossed as ‘be.windy’ in Fortescue (1984:65). This would be possible (though still not necessary) if a word of this class requires an attributor in attributive function. Otherwise:

• The word ‘be’ in the gloss is apparently meant to imply that, contrary to what one might infer from the rest of the gloss, the L1 word is not an adjective, but a verb. However, a morphological gloss does not indicate the word or morpheme class.
• It wrongly implies that there is no difference between adjectives and verbs.
• It tends to obscure the fact that the language does not use a copula with adjectival predicates.

L1 cardinal numerals are glossed by Arabic numbers. A problem arises for proper names, which are often not glossed at all. However, there is no room here for an exception to the general rule: a proper name is rendered by its counterpart in L2. Some proper names have conventional counterparts that are specific to L2; Engl. John corresponds to Germ. Hans, and Engl. Munich corresponds to Germ. München. These then appear in the gloss. Whenever there is no such language-specific convention, the counterpart of an L1 name is usually the same word in L2.

Terms of animals and plants commonly have translation equivalents of two kinds: a lay expression which is in more or less common use, and the Linnaean name of the scientific nomenclature. For instance, Cabecar sirák is 'white-nosed coati (Nasua narica)'. The decision which of the two should be used as a gloss is clear if the text is accompanied by a glossary or lexicon: This will contain the Linnaean term, so the lay expression suffices for the gloss: 'coati' in the example case unless there happen to be other kinds of coatis in the context. This procedure also fits the layout rule that the gloss should not be longer than the L2 expression. If there is no such lexicon, the decision depends on the purpose the gloss is meant to serve. If the example is used in an analysis of verbal voice, observance of Linné is probably not the main concern.

If L2 is English, no problem arises for the form in which L2 lexemes are quoted in the gloss. In other languages, lexemes have a citation form in conformity with L2 conventions. If this is an inflected form, like the nominative for nouns or the infinitive for verbs, then it is excluded from a gloss by Rule 4b, and instead the bare stem is used. The reason is that such a gloss would seem to imply that there is a nominative, or an infinitive, in the L1 line where actually just a stem is being glossed.