| { |
| "paper_id": "C86-1027", |
| "header": { |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T13:15:17.827740Z" |
| }, |
| "title": "A Parametric NL Translator", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Randall", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Sharp", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": { |
| "laboratory": "", |
| "institution": "University of British Columbia Vancouver", |
| "location": { |
| "country": "Canada" |
| } |
| }, |
| "email": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": "", |
| "venue": null, |
| "identifiers": {}, |
| "abstract": "This report outlines a machine translation system whose linguistic component is based on principles of Government and Binding. A \"universal grammar\" is defined, together with pal-ameters of variation for specific languages. The system, written in Prolog, parses, generates, and translates between English and Spanish (both directions).", |
| "pdf_parse": { |
| "paper_id": "C86-1027", |
| "_pdf_hash": "", |
| "abstract": [ |
| { |
| "text": "This report outlines a machine translation system whose linguistic component is based on principles of Government and Binding. A \"universal grammar\" is defined, together with pal-ameters of variation for specific languages. The system, written in Prolog, parses, generates, and translates between English and Spanish (both directions).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Abstract", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "body_text": [ |
| { |
| "text": "The theory of Gov~t and Binding (GB) (Chc~sky 1981) proposes universal principles of grammar (UG) that underlie all natural grammars, with the principles being subject to parametrization, giving rise to language variation. One example is the socalled \"pro-drop\" parameter of languages like Spanish, Hungarian, C~ineae, etc., that, among other things, allow '%dssing\" subjects. To model such a theory, one needs merely (~) to define the UG along with an appropriate set of parameter values for each language, as opposed to defining totally independent language-specific grammars. The overall size of the system is thereby reduced, and adding the grammar for a new language ideally means simply adding its parameter settings. Hence the motivation for a GB approach to machine translation.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 37, |
| "end": 51, |
| "text": "(Chc~sky 1981)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To test the approach, a model of UG was constructed, parameters defined for Spanish and English, and language-specific rules added for morphology and, where necessary, idiosyncratic syntax. The result is the GB-Translator (GBT) (Sharp 1985) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 228, |
| "end": 240, |
| "text": "(Sharp 1985)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF3" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A general knowledge of GB is assumed in the following, as is a familiarity with Prolog, the language in which the GBT is implemented.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The overall strategy of the GBT is as follows:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(I)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "a. read in a sentence in the source language; b. perform a morphological and constituent analysis, building an S-structure representation; c. convert the S-structure to D-(\"deep\") structure via reverse-transformations; d. perfor~ lexical transfer frc~ the source Dstructure to target D-structure; e. transform the D-structure to one or more Sstructures; f. validate each S-structure for well-formedhess; g. \"flatten\" and display only the well-form~l target sentences.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Since GB is primarily a theory of syntax, no semantic processing has been introduced in the GBT. What is of interest here is the variety of syntactic forms available in diverse languages for expressing semantically equivalent propositions, with \"equi-valence,, being controlled by appropriate choices of lexical items in the two languages. Problems of semantic ambiguity and structural alteration have not been addressed, as this relates more to translation theory than to GB.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "An example of the system's behavior is shown below, where user responses are underlined: The GBT contains a UG conioonent and two languagespecific components, one for English, one for Spardsh. Exploiting the modular nature of GB (see Wehrli 1983) , the UG consists of a phrase structure cc~nent based on X-bar syntax (Jackendoff 1977), a transformational component that includes the rule Move Affix (=affix-hopping) and the general rule of Move Alpha (including the subjacency constraint), and a well-formedness component containing constraints on surface representations. The UG, then, is an expression of the theories of X-bar, Case, Theta, Government, Binding, and Bounding (Choms]oy 1981) (see Fig. i ).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 234, |
| "end": 246, |
| "text": "Wehrli 1983)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF6" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 698, |
| "end": 704, |
| "text": "Fig. i", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The l~ge-specific ccmi0onents consist of a lexicon and a grammar. The lexicon includes (i) the lexical entries, and (2) tables of inflections and contractions (e.g. Spanish del = de + el). The grammar contains the UG parameters and idiosyncratic transformations. Figure 2 lists the parameters and transformations currently implemented for each language.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 263, |
| "end": 271, |
| "text": "Figure 2", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "x-bar phrase structure rules (3) dict (Lang, Word, Cat, Features).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "where 'Lang w is the language~ 'Word' is the lexical unit, 'Cat ~ is the syntactic category, and 'Features' contains a list of morphological and syntactic features along with the transfer value. Sc~e s\u00a3~01e entries are shown below:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(4) di~c (e,put,v, [subcat([n,p] ) ,spanish(poner) ]).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 9, |
| "end": 32, |
| "text": "(e,put,v, [subcat([n,p]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "dict (e,believe,v, [~0cat (n) , sub cat (c), sdel (+),", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 5, |
| "end": 29, |
| "text": "(e,believe,v, [~0cat (n)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "~nish (o~r) ] )\u00b0 dict (e, seem,v, [subcat (c) ,sdel (+) ,theta(~), spanish (~) ] ). dict (s,poner,v, [subcat ( [n, p] ), english (put) ] ). dict (s, c~er,v, [subcat (n) ,subcat (c), english(believe) ] ) \u00b0 dict (s,pgxecer,v, [subcat (c), sdel (+) ,theta(=), english (~) ] ).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "~e verbs ~_t and poner s%Lbcategorize for an NP and pp. Believe subcategorizes for either an NP or a clause, as does its Spanish equivalent, creer. The former has the S-bar Deletion property, while the latter does ~ot, allowing for an infinitival comple= ment for believe but not for creer (see (2) above). Seem and parecer do not assign thematic roles to the subject, ir~Lcated by the feature \"theta(-)\", thus giving rise to sentences such as It seems John has left/Parece que Juan ha salido. Note that since seeal and parecer also have the \"sdel(+)\" feature, they beth exhibit subject=raising: John seems to have left/Juan_~ece haber ealido. The primary l~n~ase stru\u00a2:~ure rules are given in (5), using X-bar syntax and written in the gra~ar notation of Clocksin and Mellish (1981):", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(5)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "x2(L,C, [[C,F],Spec,XllPost] ) --> specifier (L, C, Spec), xl(L,C,Xl) , postadjunct (L, C, Post).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "xI ( For language L and category C, the x2 rule above constructs a imrse tree containing nodal information (category and what will become phrasal features) followed by the specifier, the X1 sub-structure, and any ~-adjuncts (e.g. PP modifiers). The xl rule parses a pre-adjunct, t/le head, and the complements of the head, the latter tak~ frcm the subcategorization features of tJ~e head. In this way, the parser is head-driven (Proudian and Pollard 1985) ; the head determines the course of f~irther parsing. The rule in (5) is used for all major phrasal categories, i.e. NP,VP,AP,PP, as well as the clausal phrases COMP (=S-bar) ar~ INFL (~) (Stowell 1981) .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 428, |
| "end": 455, |
| "text": "(Proudian and Pollard 1985)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 644, |
| "end": 658, |
| "text": "(Stowell 1981)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF4" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(It should be pointed out that (5) reflects headinitial gran~nars. A simple parameter could be inserted to aocommodate head-final grammars, such as for SOV languages like German, but this introduces parsing problems for Prolog. )", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "As an ex-~r~ole, the following structure is created :for the sente/%ce The man had seen many_~i[~LS_ from his window, where the symbol $e denotes an empty value, and \" \" denotes a place-holder for features:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(6) [[c,_] , Se, [ Se, Se, [[i,_] , [[n,_] ", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 4, |
| "end": 10, |
| "text": "[[c,_]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 17, |
| "end": 33, |
| "text": "[ Se, Se, [[i,_]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 36, |
| "end": 42, |
| "text": "[[n,_]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "i. Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Following the strategy :in (i), the GH9 reads in a sentence (assumed to be grammatically correct), analyzes the ~orphology of each word, and applies the phrase structure rule (5) recursively to build the S-str~Icture. Then, all movement transformations are undone and features percolated to the phrasal node, at whidi time f~iture agreement is ch~-~ed. %he result is a D-structure in which all (and only) thematic elements are in e-marked positions, thereby satisfying the Theta Criterion (Chomsky 1981) . This also simplifies lexical translation (as opposed to trmlslating ~tween LF representations).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 489, |
| "end": 503, |
| "text": "(Chomsky 1981)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The transformation stage presents the most interesting aspect of the system, since this is where the principles of UG are applied. (since the ir~t is assumed to be ~tical, it is not tested for well-formedness. ) The high~level Prolog program for this stage is given below: 7tra~gformation(L, Dstruchure, Sstrdcture) :transform (L,matrix (+), Dstructure, Sstructure), dbl_CC~P_filter (L, Sstructure), wh filter(L, Sstructure), case filter(L, Sstructure), b~ conditions (L, Sstructure), ecp(L, Sstructure).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The first action is to transform the D-structure to an S-structure. The \"transform,, predicate is called recursively on each cyclic node (~-bar), beginning with the most deeply embedded one. The transformations include those listed in Figure 2 above plus the general transformations of Move Affix and Move Alpha.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 235, |
| "end": 243, |
| "text": "Figure 2", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The next step involves checking the resulting Sstructure for well-formedness. (Note that the wellformedness conditions could execute in parallel, given appropriate machine architecture.) An Sstructure that fails to pass any of the conditions forces backtracking into the ,,transform,, predicate. For example, the clause in (8a), which involves no movement, will be generated, but since John cannot be assigned a grammatical Case, it fails the Case Filter. Backtracking to Move Alpha results in John moving to the non-8-marked subject of seem (8b), resulting in a well-formed structure: Another example that illustrates how parameters affect generation is given by the Empty Category Principle (ECP), which requires traces to be properly governed. Given the following parameter settings:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(9) proper_governor(english,v). proper_governor ( english, p ).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "proper_governor (spanish, v). proper_governor(spanish, i).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "where the last statement is interpreted as \"INFL is a proper governor if it contains the feature [+tns]\", the \"ecp\" statement in (7) will allow preposition-stranding in English but not in Spanish (i0), and allow \"that-trace\" in Spanish but not in Enqlish (11) :", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(i0) Which film did they leave after t? After which film did they leave _t ? Despu4s de cuil pelicula salieron ellos _t ? *Cu~l pelicula salieron ellos despu~s de t ?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(11) Who seems t to have left?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Who does it seem _t has left? *Who does it se~s that t has left?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Qui~n parece t haber salido? Qui~n parece que t ha salido?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A similar use of parameters controls subjacency within Move Alpha. To show that S-bar is a bounding node in Spanish, Torrego (1984) notes that Verb Preposing ~mlst occur in every clause that contains a wh-phrase or its trace in OCMP. In (12a), the trace of con ~ui~n causes inversion whereas (b) is derived without movement to (~MP, obviating inversion:", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 117, |
| "end": 131, |
| "text": "Torrego (1984)", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF5" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "a. Con qui~n sabia Juan _t que habia hablado Maria t ? b. Con qui~n sabia Juan que Maria habia hablado t ? ('With wh~ did John know that Mary had spoken?')", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The GBT system operates solely on the basis of syntax. In a more complete translation system, issues of semantics, pragmatics, and discourse must be dealt with, ideally by again assuming general principles subject to parametric variation. Never ~ theless, the current system illustrates the feasibility of a generalized syntactic ~nent in an overall language processing device.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System Operation", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| } |
| ], |
| "back_matter": [ |
| { |
| "text": "This paper is dedicated to the memory of Alfredo Hurtado.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Acknowledgements", |
| "sec_num": "7." |
| } |
| ], |
| "bib_entries": { |
| "BIBREF1": { |
| "ref_id": "b1", |
| "title": "B~lle CDn.cg. pts ~ Conseque/lces of the Theory of Gove~t and B'iDding", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "_", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1981, |
| "venue": "Clocksin and Mellish", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "_ _ (1982) .B~lle CDn.cg. pts ~ Conseque/lces of the Theory of Gove~t and B'iDding, MIT Press. Clocksin and Mellish (1981) ~ in Pro~, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF2": { |
| "ref_id": "b2", |
| "title": "XrBar Svntax: A Studv of Phrase Structure", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Jacke/Idoff", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1977, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Jacke/Idoff, R. (1977) XrBar Svntax: A Studv of Phrase Structure, MIT Press.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF3": { |
| "ref_id": "b3", |
| "title": "A Model of G~ Based on Principles of Government and Binding, M.Sc. Thesis, Ur~[v. of British Columbia, Canada. 81ocum", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "D", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Proudian", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "C", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Pollard", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Sharp", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1985, |
| "venue": "Current status, and Future Prospects", |
| "volume": "11", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "1--17", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Proudian, D. and Pollard, C. (1985) \"Parsing Head- Driven Phrase Structure G~\", 23rd Annual Meetinq of the ACL, 167-171. sharp, R. (1985) A Model of G~ Based on Principles of Government and Binding, M.Sc. Thesis, Ur~[v. of British Columbia, Canada. 81ocum, J. (1985) \"A Survey of Mac/line Translation: Its History., Current status, and Future Prospects,,, ~_ tational Linquistics, 11:1-17.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF4": { |
| "ref_id": "b4", |
| "title": "Origins of Phrase Structure", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "T", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Stowell", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1981, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Stowell, T. (1981) Origins of Phrase Structure, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF5": { |
| "ref_id": "b5", |
| "title": "On I/%version in Spallish and S(xt~ of its Effects", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "E", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Torrego", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1984, |
| "venue": "_~", |
| "volume": "15", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "103--129", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Torrego, E. (1984) \"On I/%version in Spallish and S(xt~ of its Effects\", _~ 15:103-129.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF6": { |
| "ref_id": "b6", |
| "title": "A Modular Parser for French", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "E", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Wehrli", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1983, |
| "venue": "Proc. of 8th IJCAI", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "686--689", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Wehrli, E. (1983) \"A Modular Parser for French\", Proc. of 8th IJCAI, 686-689.", |
| "links": null |
| } |
| }, |
| "ref_entries": {} |
| } |
| } |
