Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

The Constraint Language for Lambda Structures

  • Published:
Journal of Logic, Language and Information Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents the Constraint Language for Lambda Structures(CLLS), a first-order language for semantic underspecification thatconservatively extends dominance constraints. It is interpreted overlambda structures, tree-like structures that encode λ-terms. Based onCLLS, we present an underspecified, uniform analysis of scope,ellipsis, anaphora, and their interactions. CLLS solves a variablecapturing problem that is omnipresent in scope underspecification andcan be processed efficiently.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alshawi, H. and Crouch, R., 1992, “Monotonic semantic interpretation,”, pp. 32-39 in Proceedings of the 30th ACL, Newark: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodirsky, M., Erk, K., Koller, A., and Niehren, J., 2001a, “Beta reduction constraints,” pp. 31-46 in Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Rewriting Techniques and Applications, Utrecht, A. Middeldorp, ed., Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodirsky, M., Erk, K., Koller, A., and Niehren, J., 2001b, “Underspecified beta reduction,” pp. 74-81 in Proceedings of the 39th ACL, Toulouse, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bos, J., 1996, “Predicate logic unplugged,” pp. 133-143 in Proceedings of the 10th Amsterdam Colloquium, P. Dekker and M. Stokhof, eds., Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • CHORUS Project, 1999, “The CHORUS demo system,” http://www.coli.uni-sb.de/cl/ projects/chorus/demo.html

  • Crouch, R., 1995, “Ellipsis and quantification: A substitutional approach,” pp. 229-236 in Proceedings of the 7th EACL, Dublin, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple, M., Shieber, S., and Pereira, F., 1991, “Ellipsis and higher-order unification,” Linguistics & Philosophy 14, 399-452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duchier, D. and Niehren, J., 2000, “Dominance constraints with set operators,” pp. 326-341 in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Computational Logic (CL2000), J. Lloyd et al., eds., Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Egg, M., 2001, “Reinterpretation from a synchronic and diachronic point of view,” Linguistics, to appear.

  • Egg, M., Niehren, J., Ruhrberg, P., and Xu, F., 1998, “Constraints over lambda-structures in semantic underspecification,” pp. 353-359 in Proceedings COLING/ACL'98, Montreal, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erk, K. and Niehren, J., 2000, “Parallelism constraints,” pp. 110-126 in Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Rewriting Techniques and Applications, Norwich, U.K., L. Bachmair, ed., Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erk, K., Koller, A., and Niehren, J., 2001, “Processing underspecified semantic representations in the constraint language for lambda structures,” Journal of Language and Computation, to appear.

  • Fiengo, R. and May, R., 1994, Indices and Identity, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardent, C. and Webber, B., 1998, “Describing discourse semantics,” pp. 50-53 in Proceedings of the 4th TAG+ Workshop, A. Abeillé et al., eds., Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawron, M. and Peters, S., 1990, Anaphora and Quantification in Situation Semantics, CSLI Lecture Notes, No. 19, Stanford, CA/Chicago, IL: CSLI/University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschbühler, P., 1982, “VP deletion and across the board quantifier scope,” pp. 132-139 in NELS 12, J. Pustejovsky and P. Sells, eds., Cambridge: CLSA Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaspars, J. and Koller, A., 1999, “A calculus for direct deduction with dominance constraints,” pp. 145-150 in Proceedings of the Twelfth Amsterdam Colloquium, Amsterdam, P. Dekker, ed., Amsterdam: ILLC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kehler, A., 1993, “A discourse copying algorithm for ellipsis and anaphora resolution,” pp. 203-212 in Proceedings of EACL, ACL.

  • Kehler, A., 1995, “Interpreting cohesive forms in the context of discourse inference,” Ph.D. Thesis, Harvard University.

  • Koller, A. and Niehren, J., 2000, “On underspecified processing of dynamic semantics,” pp. 460-466 in Proceedings of the 18th COLING, Saarbrücken, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koller, A. and Niehren, J., 2001, “Constraint programming in computational linguistics,” in Logic Unleashed: Language, Diagrams, and Computation. Proceedings of the 8th CSLI Workshop on Logic, Language, and Computation, D. Barker-Plummer, D. Beaver, J. van Benthem, and P.S. di Luzio, eds., Stanford, CA: CSLI Press, to appear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koller, A., Mehlhorn, K., and Niehren, J., 2000a, “A polynomial-time fragment of dominance constraints,” pp. 368-375 in Proceedings of the 38th ACL, Hong Kong, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koller, A., Niehren, J., and Striegnitz, K., 2000b “Relaxing underspecified semantic representations for reinterpretation,” Grammars 3(2-3), 217-241.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koller, A., Niehren, J., and Treinen, R., 2001, “Dominance constraints: Algorithms and complexity,” in Proceedings of the Third Conference on Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics (LACL '98), M. Moortgat, ed., Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2014, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, to appear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muskens, R., 1995, “Order-independence and underspecification,” pp. 15-34 in Ellipsis, Underspecification, Events and More in Dynamic Semantics, J. Groenendijk, ed., DYANA Deliverable R.2.2.C.

  • Niehren, J. and Koller, A., 2001, “Dominance constraints in context unification,” in Proceedings of the Third Conference on Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics, Grenoble, M. Moortgat, ed., Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2014, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, to appear.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niehren, J., Pinkal, M., and Ruhrberg, P., 1997a, “On equality up-to constraints over finite trees, context unification, and one-step rewriting,” pp. 34-48 in Proceedings 14th CADE, W. McCune, ed., Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niehren, J., Pinkal, M., and Ruhrberg, P., 1997b, “A uniform approach to underspecification and parallelism,” pp. 410-417 in Proceedings ACL'97, Madrid, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinkal, M., 1996, “Radical underspecification,” pp. 587-606 in Proceedings of the 10th Amsterdam Colloquium, P. Dekker and M. Stokhof, eds., Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rambow, O., Vijay-Shanker, K., and Weir, D., 1995, “D-tree grammars,” pp. 151-158 in Proceedings of ACL'95, San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reyle, U., 1993, “Dealing with ambiguities by underspecification: Construction, representation, and deduction,” Journal of Semantics 10, 123-179.

    Google Scholar 

  • RTA, 1998, “Decidability of context unification,” The RTA list of open problems, No. 90, http://www.lri.fr/~rtaloop/

  • Sag, I.A., 1980, Deletion and Logical Form, New York: Garland Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt-Schauß, M. and Schulz, K., 1998, “On the exponent of periodicity of minimal solutions of context equations,” pp. 61-75 in Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Rewriting Techniques and Applications, T. Nipkow, ed., Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shieber, S., Pereira, F., and Dalrymple, M., 1996, “Interaction of scope and ellipsis,” Linguistics & Philosophy 19, 527-552.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Deemter, K. and Peters, S., 1996, Semantic Ambiguity and Underspecification, Stanford, CA: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vijay-Shanker, K., 1992, “Using descriptions of trees in a tree adjoining grammar,” Computational Linguistics 18, 481-518.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xu, F., 1998, “Semantic underspecification and ellipsis resolution,” Diplom Thesis, University of the Saarland, http://www.coli.uni-sb.de/cl/projects/chorus/papers/fei98a.html

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computational Linguistics, University of the Saarland, P.O. Box 15 11 50, 66041, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Markus Egg & Alexander Koller

  2. Programming Systems Lab, University of the Saarland, P.O. Box 15 11 50, 66041, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Joachim Niehren

Authors
  1. Markus Egg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alexander Koller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joachim Niehren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Egg, M., Koller, A. & Niehren, J. The Constraint Language for Lambda Structures. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10, 457–485 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017964622902

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1017964622902

Search

Navigation