File size: 51,095 Bytes
6fa4bc9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 | {
"paper_id": "P87-1007",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T09:13:31.857548Z"
},
"title": "An Attribute-Grammar Implementation of Government-bindlng Theory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Nelson",
"middle": [],
"last": "Correa",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "Syracuse University 111 Link Hall Syracuse",
"location": {
"postCode": "13244",
"region": "NY"
}
},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "The syntactic analysis of languages with respect to Government-binding (GB) grammar is a problem that has received relatively little attention until recently. This paper describes an attribute grammar specification of the Government-binding theory. The paper focuses on the description of the attribution rules responsible for determining antecedent-trace relations in phrase-structure trees, and on some theoretical implications of those rules for the GB model. The specification relies on a transformation-lem variant of Government-binding theory, briefly discussed by Chomsky (1981), in which the rule move-a is replaced by an interpretive rule. Here the interpretive rule is specified by means of attribution rules. The attribute grammar is currently being used to write an English parser which embodies the principles of GB theory. The parsing strategy and attribute evaluation scheme are cursorily described at the end of the paper.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P87-1007",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "The syntactic analysis of languages with respect to Government-binding (GB) grammar is a problem that has received relatively little attention until recently. This paper describes an attribute grammar specification of the Government-binding theory. The paper focuses on the description of the attribution rules responsible for determining antecedent-trace relations in phrase-structure trees, and on some theoretical implications of those rules for the GB model. The specification relies on a transformation-lem variant of Government-binding theory, briefly discussed by Chomsky (1981), in which the rule move-a is replaced by an interpretive rule. Here the interpretive rule is specified by means of attribution rules. The attribute grammar is currently being used to write an English parser which embodies the principles of GB theory. The parsing strategy and attribute evaluation scheme are cursorily described at the end of the paper.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "In this paper we consider the use of attribute grammars (Knuth, 1968; Waite and Goos, 1984) to provide a computational definition of the Governmentbinding theory layed out by Chomsky (1981 Chomsky ( , 1982 . This research thus constitutes a move in the direction of seeking specific mechanisms and realizations of universal grammar. The attribute grammar provides a specification at a level intermediate between the abstract principles of GB theory and the particular automatons that may be used for parsing or generation of the language described by the theory. Almost by necessity and the nature of the goal set out, there will be several arbitrary decisions and details of realization that are not dictated by any particular linguistic or psychological facts, but perhaps only by matters of style and possible computational efficiency considerations in the final product. It is therefore safe to assume that the particular attribute grammar that will be arrived at admits of a large number of non-isomorphic variants, none of which is to be preferred over the others a priori. The specification given here is for English. Similar specifications of the parametrized grammars of typologically different languages may eventually lead to substantive generalizations about the computational mechanisms employed in natural languages.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 56,
"end": 69,
"text": "(Knuth, 1968;",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 70,
"end": 91,
"text": "Waite and Goos, 1984)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 175,
"end": 188,
"text": "Chomsky (1981",
"ref_id": "BIBREF4"
},
{
"start": 189,
"end": 205,
"text": "Chomsky ( , 1982",
"ref_id": "BIBREF5"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The purpose of this research is twofold: First, to provide a precise computational definition of Government-binding theory, as its core ideas are generally understood. We thus begin to provide an answer to criticisms that have recently been leveled against the theory regarding its lack of formal explicitness (Gazdar et aI., 1985; PuUum, 1985) . Unlike earlier computational models of GB theory, such as that of Berwick and Weinberg (1984) , which assumes Marcus' (1980) parsing automaton, the attribute grammar specification is more abstract and neutral regarding the choice of parsing'automata.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 310,
"end": 331,
"text": "(Gazdar et aI., 1985;",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 332,
"end": 344,
"text": "PuUum, 1985)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 413,
"end": 440,
"text": "Berwick and Weinberg (1984)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
},
{
"start": 457,
"end": 471,
"text": "Marcus' (1980)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Attribute grammar offers a language specification frsxnework whose formal properties are generally well-understood and explored. A second and more important purpose of the present research is to provide an alternate and mechanistic characterization of the principles of universal grammar. To the extent that the implementation is correct, the principles may be shown to follow from the system of attributes in the grammar and the attribution rules that define their values.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The current version of the attribute grammar is presently being used to implement an English parser written in Prolog. Although the parser is not yet complete, we expect that its breath of coverage of the language will be substantially larger than that of other Government-binding parsers recently reported in the literature (Kashket (1986) , Kuhns (1986) , Sharp (1985) , and Wehrli (1984)). Since the parser is firmly based on Government-binding theory, we expect its ability to handle natural language phenomena to be limited only by the accuracy and correctness of the underlying theory.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 325,
"end": 340,
"text": "(Kashket (1986)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
},
{
"start": 343,
"end": 355,
"text": "Kuhns (1986)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
},
{
"start": 358,
"end": 370,
"text": "Sharp (1985)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF18"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In the development below I will assume that the reader is familiar with the basic concepts and terminology of Government-binding theory, as well as with attribute grammars. The reader is referred to Sells (1985) for a good introduction to the relevant concepts of GB theory, and to Waite and Goos (1984) for a concise presentation on attribute grammars.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 199,
"end": 211,
"text": "Sells (1985)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF17"
},
{
"start": 282,
"end": 303,
"text": "Waite and Goos (1984)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "For the attribute grammar specification we assume a transformation-less variant of Governmentbinding theory, briefly discussed by Chomsky (1981, p.89-92) , in which rule move-a is eliminated in favor of a system Ma of interpretive rules which determines antecedent-trace relations. A more explicit propceal of a similar nature is also made by Koster (1978) . We assume a context-free base, satisfying the principles of X'-theory, which generates directly structure trees at a surface structure level of representation. S-structure may be derived from surface structure by application of Ma. The rest of the theory remains as in standard Governmentbinding (except for some obvious reformulation of principles that refer to Grammatical Functions at D-Structure).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 130,
"end": 153,
"text": "Chomsky (1981, p.89-92)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 343,
"end": 356,
"text": "Koster (1978)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Grammatical Model Asstuned",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The grammatical model that obtains is that of (1). The base generates surface structures, with phrases in their surface places along with empty categories where appropriate. Surface structure is identical to S-structure, except for the fact that the association between moved phrases and their traces is not present; chain indices that reveal history of movement in the transformational account are not present. The interpretive system Ma, here defined by attribution rules, then applies to construct the absent chains and thus establish the linking relations between arguments and positions in the argument structures of their predicates, yielding the Sstructure level. In this manner the operations formerly carried out by transformations reduce to attribute computations on phrase-structure trees.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Grammatical Model Asstuned",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(1) developed (relying on conditions of Government and Case-marking). In addition, two attributes A-Chain and A-Chain are defined for every syntactic category which may be found in the c-command domain of NP. In particular, A-Chain and A'-Chain are defined for C, COMP', S, INFL', VP, and V' (assuming Chomsky's (1986) two-level X'system). The meanings attached to these attributes are as follows. Node defines a preorder enumeration of tree nodes; Chain is an integer that represents the syntactic chain to which an NP belongs; A -Chain (A-Chain) determines whether an argument (non-argument) chain propagates across a given node of a tree, and gives the number of that chain, if any.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 302,
"end": 318,
"text": "Chomsky's (1986)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Grammatical Model Asstuned",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Somewhat arbitrarily, and for the sake of concreteness, we assume that a chain is identified by the node number of the phrase that heads the chain.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Grammatical Model Asstuned",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "For the root node, the attribution rules dictate A-Chain ~-X-Chain -~ O. The two attributes are then essentially percolated downwards. However, whenever a lexical NP or PRO is found in a 8-position, an argument chain is started, setting the value of A-Chain to the node number of the NP found, which is used to identify the new chain. Thus NP traces in the c-command domain of the NP are able to identify their antecedent. Similarly, when a Wh-phrase is found in COMP specifier position, the value of A-Chain is set to the chain number of that phrase, and lower Wh-traces may pick up their antecedent in a similar fashion.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Grammatical Model Asstuned",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "A-Chain and A-Chain explains in a simple way the observed c-command constraint between a trace and its antecedent.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Downwards propagation of the attributes",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The precise statement of the attribution rules that implement the interpretive rule described is given in Appendix A. In the formulation of the attribution rules, it is assumed that certain other components of Government-binding theory have already been implemented, in particular parts of Government and Case theories, which contribute to the functional determination of empty categories. The implementation of the relevant parts of these subtheories is described elsewhere (Correa, in preparation) . We assume that all empty categories are base-generated, as instances of the same EC [#p e ]. Their types are then determined structurally, in manner similar to the proposal made by Koster (1978) . The attributes empty, pronominal, and anaphoric used by the interpretive system achieve a full functional partitioning of NP types (van Riemsdijk and Williams (1986) , p.278); their values are defined by attribution rules in Appendix B, relying on the values of the attributes Governor and Caees. The values of these attributes are in turn determined by the Government and Case theories, respectively, and indicate the relevant governor of the NP and grammatical Case assigned to it.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 475,
"end": 499,
"text": "(Correa, in preparation)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 683,
"end": 696,
"text": "Koster (1978)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
},
{
"start": 835,
"end": 864,
"text": "Riemsdijk and Williams (1986)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF19"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Downwards propagation of the attributes",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The claim associated with the interpretive rule, as it is implemented in Appendix A, is that given a eur]'aee etr~eture in the sense defined above, it will derive the correct antecedent-trace relations after it applies. An illustrative sample of its operation is provided in (3), where the (simplified) structure tree of sentence (2) is shown. The annotations superscripted to the C, COMP', S, INFL', VP, and V' nodes are the A-Chain and A-Chain attributes, respectively. Thus, for the root node, the value of both attributes is zero. Similarly, the superscripts on the NP nodes represent the node and Chain attributes of the NP. The last NP in the tree, complement of 'love', thus bears node number 5 and belongs to Chain 1.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Downwards propagation of the attributes",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In Government-binding theory it is assumed that the set of bounding nodes that a language may select is not fixed across human languages, but is open to parametric variation. Rizzi (1978) observed that in Italian the Subjacency condition is systematically violated by double Wh-extraction constructions, as in (4.a), if one assumes for Italian the same set of bounding nodes as for English. The analogous construction (4.b) is also possible in Spanish. A solution, considered by Rizzi to explain the grammaticality of (4), is to assume that in Italian and Spanish, COMP specifier position may be \"doubly filled\" in the course of a transformational derivation, while requiring that it be not doubly filled (by non-empty phrases) at S-Structure. Thus both moved phrases 'a cui' and 'the storie' can move to the lowest COMP position in the first transformational cycle, while in the second cycle 'a cui' may move to the next higher COMP and 'che storie' stays in the first COMP.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 175,
"end": 187,
"text": "Rizzi (1978)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "( 2)Who~ did Johny seem [ e, [ ej to love e,]",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(3) c(e,o)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Np(m) COMP1 (o,1) Who, COMP S (~1) did Np(~=) INFL I (2,1) John2 INFL VP (2'1) I V ~ (2,1) V C (2'1) { seem Np(~n COMP~ (zn COMP S (zl) el l',,II:, ('-,2) INFL I i e2 (0,1) INFL VP (\u00b0'1) I I to V I (o,1) V NP (6'1) I I love el",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "A second solution, which is the one adopted by Rizzi and constitutes the currently accepted explanation of the (apparent) Subiacency violation, is to assume that Italian and Spanish select C and NP as bounding nodes, a set different from that of English. The first phrase 'che storie' may then move to the lowest COMP position in the first transformational cycle, while the second, 'a cui', moves in the next cycle in one step to the next higher position, crossing two S nodes but, crucially, only one C node. Thus Subjaceney is satisfied if C, not S, is taken as a bounding node. 4 The empirical data that arguably distinguishes between the two proposed solutions is (5.a). While the \"doubly filled\" COMP hypothesis allows indefinitely long Wh-chains with doubly filled COMPs, making it possible for a wh-chain element and its successor to skip more than one COMP position that already contains some wh-phrase, the \"bounding node\" hypothesis states that at most one filled COMP position may be skipped. Thus, the second hypothesis, but not the first, correctly predicts the ungrammaticality of (5.a). La Gorgona, to where I can't imagine how many people know whom they have sent, is a beautiful island.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "One mi~t observe, however, that (5.a), even if it satisfies subjacency, violates Peseteky's (1982) Path Containment Condition (PCC). Thus, on these grounds, (5.a) does not decide between the two hypotheses. The grammaticality of (5.b), on the other hand, which is structurally similar to (5.a) but satisfies the PCC, argues in favor of the \"doubly filled\" COMP hypothesis. The wh-phrase 'a donde' moves from its D-Structure position to the surface position, skipping two intermediate COMP positions. This is possible if we assume the doubly filled COMP hypothesis, and would violate Subjacency under the alternate hypothesis, even if C is taken as the bounding node. We expect a similar pattern (5.b) to be also valid in Italian.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 92,
"end": 98,
"text": "(1982)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Movement across doubly filled COMP nodes, satisfying Pesetsky's (1982) Path Containment Condition, may be explained computationally if we assume that the type of the A -Chain attribute on chain nodes is a last-in/first, out (lifo) stack of integers, into which the integers identifying ,~-chain heads are pushed as they are first encountered, and from which chain identifiers are dropped as the chains are terminated. If we further assume that the type of the attribute is universal, we may explain the typological difference between Italian and English, as it refers to the Subjacency condition, by assuming the presence of an A-Chain atack depth bound, which is parametrized by universal grammar, and has the values 1 for English, and 2 (or possibly more) for Italian and Spanish.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 53,
"end": 70,
"text": "Pesetsky's (1982)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To conclude this section, it is worth to review the manner in which the subjacency facts are explained by the present attribute grammar implementation. Notice first that there is no particular set of categories in the theory that have been declared as Bounding categories. There is no special procedure that checks that the Subjacency condition is actually satisfied by, say, traversing paths between adjacent chain elements in a tree and counting bounding nodes. Instead, the facts follow from the attribution rules that determine the values of the attributes A-Chain and X-Chain. This can be verified by inspection of the possible cases of movement.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Thus, NP-movement is from object or INFL specifier position to the nearest INFL specifier which c-commands the extraction site. Similarly, Whmovement is from object, INFL specifier, or COMP specifier position to the nearest c-commanding COMP specifier. If the bound on the depth of the A-Chain stack is 1, either S or COMP' (but not both) may be taken as bounding node, and Whisland phenomena are observable. If the bound is 2 or greater, then C is the closest approximation to a bounding node (although cf. (5.b)), and Wh-island violations which satisfy the PCC are possible. NP is a bounding node as a consequence of the strong condition that no chain spans across an NP node, which in turn is a consequence of the rules (ii.e) in Appendix A.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Some Theoretical Implications: Bounding Nodes and Subjaeency",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "A prototype of the English parser is currently being developed using the Prolog logic programming language. As mentioned in the introduction, the attribute grammar specification is neutral regarding the choice of parsing automaton. Thus, several suitable parser construction techniques (Aho and Ullman, 1972 ) may be used to derive a parser. The context-free base used by the attribute grammar is an X'-grammar, essentially as in Jackendoff (1977), although some modifications have been made. In particular, following Chomsky (1986) we assume that maximal projections have uniformly bar-level 2 and that S is a projection of INFL, not V, as Jackendoff assumes. The base, due to left-recursion in several productions, is not LR(k), for any k.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 286,
"end": 307,
"text": "(Aho and Ullman, 1972",
"ref_id": "BIBREF0"
},
{
"start": 518,
"end": 532,
"text": "Chomsky (1986)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Parser Implementation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We have developed a parser which is essentially LL(1), and incorporates a stack depth bound which is linearly related to the length of the input string. Prolog's backtracking mechanism provides the means for obtaining alternate parses of syntactically ambiguous sentences. The parser performs reasonably well with a good number of constructions and, due to the stack bound, avoids potentially infinite derivations which could arise due to the application of mutually recursive rules. Attributes are implemented by logical variables which are associated with tree nodes (cf. Arbab, 1986) . Most attributes can be evaluated in a preorder traversal of the parse tree, and thus attribute evaluation may be combined with LL(1) parser actions. Notable exceptions to this evaluation order are the attributes Governor, Cases, and Os associated with the NP in INFL specifier position. The value of these attributes cannot be determined until the main verb of the relevant clause is found.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 574,
"end": 586,
"text": "Arbab, 1986)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF2"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Parser Implementation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We have presented a computational specification of a fragment of Government-binding theory with potentially far-reaching theoretical and practical implications. From a theoretical point of view, the present attribute grammar specification offers a fairly concrete framework which may be used to study the development and stable state of human linguistic competence. From a more practical point of view, the attribute grammar serves as a Starting point for the development of high quality parsers for natural languages.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To the extent that the specification is explanatorily adequate, the language described by the grammar (recognized by the parser) may be changed by altering the values of the universal parameters in the grammar and changing the underlying lexicon.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "I would like to thank my dissertation advisor, Jaklin Kornfilt, for helpful and timely advise at all stages of this research.Also, I wish to thank an anonymous ACL reviewer who pointed out the similaxity of the grammatical model I assume to that proposed by Koster (1978) , Mary Laughren and Beth Levin for their discussion and commentary on related aspects of this research, Ed Barton, who kindly made available some of the early literature on GB parsing, Mike Kashket for some critical comments, and Ed Stabler for his continued support of this project. Support for this research has been provided in part by the CASE Center at Syracuse University.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 258,
"end": 271,
"text": "Koster (1978)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgements",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "attribution:attribution: ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "annex",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "The Theory of Parsing, Translation and Compiling",
"authors": [
{
"first": "A",
"middle": [
"V"
],
"last": "Aho",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J",
"middle": [
"D"
],
"last": "Ullman",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1972,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Aho, A.V., and J.D. Ullman. 1972. The Theory of Parsing, Translation and Compiling.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Compiling Circular Attribute Grammars into Prolog",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Bijan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Arbab",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "IBM Journal of Research and Development",
"volume": "30",
"issue": "3",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Arbab, Bijan. 1986. \"Compiling Circular Attribute Grammars into Prolog.\" IBM Journal of Research and Development, Vol. 30, No. 3, May 1986",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "The Grammatical Basis of Linguistic Performance",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [],
"last": "Berwick",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Amy",
"middle": [],
"last": "Weinberg",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1984,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Berwick, Robert and Amy Weinberg. 1984. The Grammatical Basis of Linguistic Perfor- mance. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "Lectures on Government and Binding",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Noam",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chomsky",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1981,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Foris Publications. Dordreeht",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF5": {
"ref_id": "b5",
"title": "Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Noam",
"middle": [],
"last": "Chomsky",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Chomsky, Noam. 1982. Some Concepts and Conse- quences of the Theory of Government and Binding. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "Syntactic Analysis of English with respect to Governmentbinding Grammar",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Nelson",
"middle": [],
"last": "Correa",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "Ph.D. Dissertation",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Correa, Nelson. In preparation. Syntactic Analysis of English with respect to Government- binding Grammar. Ph.D. Dissertation, Syra- cuse University",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Gerald",
"middle": [],
"last": "Gazdar",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ewin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Klein",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Geoffrey",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pullum",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Ivan",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sag",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Gazdar, Gerald, Ewin Klein, Geoffrey Pullum, and Ivan Sag. 1985. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Harvard University Press. Cam- bridge, MA",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "X Syntaz: A Study o/ Phrase Structure",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ray",
"middle": [],
"last": "Jaekendoff",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1977,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jaekendoff, Ray. 1977. X Syntaz: A Study o/ Phrase Structure. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "Parsing a Free-word Order Language: Walpiri",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kashket",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting o/ the Association /or Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "60--66",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kashket, Michael. 1986. \"Parsing a Free-word Order Language: Walpiri.\" Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting o/ the Association /or Computational Linguistics, p.60-66.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "Semantics of Context-free Languages",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Donald",
"middle": [
"E"
],
"last": "Knut:H",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1968,
"venue": "Mathematical Systems Theory",
"volume": "2",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Knut:h, Donald E. 1968. \"Semantics of Context-free Languages.\" In Mathematical Systems Theory, Vol. 2, No. 2, 1968",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Conditions, Empty Nodes, and Markedness",
"authors": [
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Koster",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1978,
"venue": "Linguistic Inquiry",
"volume": "9",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Koster, Jan. 1978. \"Conditions, Empty Nodes, and Markedness.\" Linguistic Inquiry, Vol. 9, No.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "A PROLOG Implementation of Government-binding Theory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kuhns",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "Proceedinge of the Annual Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "546--550",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kuhns, Robert. 1986. \"A PROLOG Implementation of Government-binding Theory.\" Proceedinge of the Annual Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, p.546-550.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "A Theory of Syntactic Recognition for Natural Language",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Mitchell",
"middle": [],
"last": "Marcus",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1980,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Marcus, Mitchell. 1980. A Theory of Syntactic Recognition for Natural Language. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Paths and Categories",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pesetsky",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Pesetsky, D. 1982. Paths and Categories. Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Violations of the Wh-lsland Constraint in Italian and the Subjacency Condition",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Geoffrey",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pullum",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1978,
"venue": "Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics",
"volume": "11",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Pullum, Geoffrey. 1985. \"Assuming Some Vemion of the X-bar Theory.\" Syntax Research Center, University of California, Santa Cruz Rizzi, Luigi. 1978. \"Violations of the Wh-lsland Constraint in Italian and the Subjacency Condition.\" Montreal Working Papers in Linguistics 11",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Lectures on Contemporary Syntactic Theories",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Peter",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sells",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sells, Peter. 1985. Lectures on Contemporary Syn- tactic Theories. Chicago University Press. Chicago, Illinois",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF18": {
"ref_id": "b18",
"title": "A Model of Grammar Baaed on Principles of Government and Binding",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Randall",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Sharp",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sharp, Randall M. 1985. A Model of Grammar Baaed on Principles of Government and Bind- ing. M.Sc Thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of British Columbia. October, 1985",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "An Introduction to the Theory of Grammar",
"authors": [
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Van Riemsdijk",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Edwin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Honk",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Williams",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Van Riemsdijk, Honk and Edwin Williams. 1986. An Introduction to the Theory of Grammar. The MIT Press. Cambridge, MA",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "A Government-binding Parser for French",
"authors": [
{
"first": "William",
"middle": [
"M"
],
"last": "Waite",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Gerhard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Coos",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1984,
"venue": "Institut pour les Etudes Semantiques et Cognitives",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Waite, William M. and Gerhard Coos. 1984. Com- piler Construction. Springer-Verlag. New York Wehrli, Erie. 1984. \"A Government-binding Parser for French.\" Institut pour les Etudes Seman- tiques et Cognitives, Universite de Geneve. Working Paper No. 48",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {}
}
} |