  This paper explores commonalities and differences between \dachs, a variant
of Dependency Grammar, and Lexical-Functional Grammar. \dachs\ is based on
traditional linguistic insights, but on modern mathematical tools, aiming to
integrate different knowledge systems (from syntax and semantics) via their
coupling to an abstract syntactic primitive, the dependency relation. These
knowledge systems correspond rather closely to projections in LFG. We will
investigate commonalities arising from the usage of the projection approach in
both theories, and point out differences due to the incompatible linguistic
premises. The main difference to LFG lies in the motivation and status of the
dimensions, and the information coded there. We will argue that LFG confounds
different information in one projection, preventing it to achieve a good
separation of alternatives and calling the motivation of the projection into
question.
