The only problem? (No, that explanation doesnt make sense to me either.) This is not in dispute. It'd be a far better thing if they had more company. Insidious as the underlying motives were, Harrington could be forgiven for this mistake.
the original statement was written incompletely.
( z0 write :ARG1 ( z1 thing :ARG1-of ( z2 state ) :mod ( z3 original ) ) :ARG1-of ( z4 complete :polarity - ) )
(z0 / write-01
    :ARG1 (z1 / thing
              :ARG1-of (z2 / state-01)
              :mod (z3 / original))
    :ARG1-of (z4 / complete-02
                 :polarity -))
the original statement was written incompletely .
z1 :mod z3
z1 :ARG1-of z2
z0 :ARG1 z1
z0 :ARG1-of z4
z4 :polarity 0