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

 I figured out very late that Hausa uses a case-marking adposition 'wÃ'
 for common nouns acting as indirect objects.  I tried to add it, but I
 ran out of time.  I don't think it should be too hard, but it did
 complain when I added a CASE feature in two places (to type noun and
 type adp).  Would making a supertype, and adding it as a parent of
 these two solve that problem?

Yes, but you don't need to make the supertype, it already exists:
+np, defined in head-types.tdl.

 The other place where I was trying to get pronouns to display case was
 with ditransitive verbs.  I wanted to create a ditransitve verb type,
 but I couldn't figure out how to get constraints on the third element
 of a verb's ARG-ST list.  I could constrain the second element to be
 indirect object case, but I couldn't find a way to specify that the
 second complement should be independent case (only for ditransitive
 verbs - transitive verbs take one complement in direct object case).

You should be able to define a type ditransitive-verb-lex which inherits
from verb-lex and ditransitive-lex-item.  It will have three things on
its ARG-ST, and you can constain the CASE value on each of them.

 While I got case to work in pronoun objects, the grammar as it stands
 now doesn't constrain the case of pronouns inside coordinated phrases.
 Is there a way to get at the CASE information inside the daughters of
 a coordination rule?  Or to say something like the CASE of the
 coordinated phrase is the unification of the CASE of its daughter
 phrases?  I had three sentences with a coordinated pronoun as the
 subject, and all three parsed.  However, two of them had the wrong
 case (indirect object and direct object), so they shouldn't have
 parsed.

Yes, you'll need to add to all of the noun coordination rules (or NP, if
that's what you have) that the CASE value of the mother and all of the
daughters is the same.

The grammar that you submitted wouldn't load into the LKB because for
some reason (looks like an editing error), you had taken a chunk out
of matrix.tdl.  I replaced matrix.tdl with the backup file created by
emacs when you did that (matrix.tdl~) and it worked.

It seems you specified N coordination to the customization script.  This
means that your parse for "boy and I" has the bare-np rule applying only
once at the top.  This seems odd to me, but it's a little hard to imagine
what Hausa data might decide the issue.  Perhaps some modification facts:
Can "little boy and I" have a reading where "little" is predicated of the "I"
as well?  Can you get "boy and I little", or just "boy little and I"?

(All of this stuff about coordination is just icing, in some sense, not
directly required, but I think it's cool to get it right if we can.
If you decide to do NP coordination instead of N coordination, probably
the best thing is to upload your choices file to the customization script,
change that, and see what comes out.  You can incorporate the new rules 
into your grammar.  It's possible that Hausa has both NP and N coordination,
but that the pronouns aren't allowed in N coordination.)

karàncee := dobj-transitive-verb-lex &
  [ STEM < "kar~àncee" >,
    SYNSEM.LKEYS.KEYREL.PRED "_readall_v_rel" ] .

What does the PRED value above mean?  Remember, for the MT to
work, we want to keep the preds the same across languages.