| { |
| "paper_id": "C88-1039", |
| "header": { |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T12:14:46.397609Z" |
| }, |
| "title": "Semantic Interpretation of Pragmatic Clues: Connectives, Modal Verbs, and Indirect Speech Acts", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Michael", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Gerlach", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Michael", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Sprenger", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": "", |
| "venue": null, |
| "identifiers": {}, |
| "abstract": "Much work in current research in the field of semanticpragmatic analysis has been concerned with the interpretation of natural language utterances in the context of dialogs. In this paper, however, we will present methods for a primary pragmatic analysis of single utterances. Our investigations involve problems which are not currently well understood, for example how to infer the speaker's intentions by using interpretation of connectives and modal verbs.", |
| "pdf_parse": { |
| "paper_id": "C88-1039", |
| "_pdf_hash": "", |
| "abstract": [ |
| { |
| "text": "Much work in current research in the field of semanticpragmatic analysis has been concerned with the interpretation of natural language utterances in the context of dialogs. In this paper, however, we will present methods for a primary pragmatic analysis of single utterances. Our investigations involve problems which are not currently well understood, for example how to infer the speaker's intentions by using interpretation of connectives and modal verbs.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Abstract", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "body_text": [ |
| { |
| "text": "Much work in current research in the field of semanticpragmatic analysis has been concerned with the interpretation of ~Latural language utterances in the context of dialogs, e.g., determining the speaker's goals [Allen 83] , deriving beliefs of one agent about another [Wilks/Bien 83] , and planning speech acts [Appelt 85] . In this paper, however, we will present methods for a primary pragmatic analysis of ,~Jingle utterances to construct user model entries which are the starting point for the higher level inference processes just mentioned. Our investigations involve problems which are not currently well understood, for example, how to infer the speaker's intentions by using interpretation of connectives and modal verbs.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 213, |
| "end": 223, |
| "text": "[Allen 83]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 270, |
| "end": 285, |
| "text": "[Wilks/Bien 83]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 313, |
| "end": 324, |
| "text": "[Appelt 85]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Our work is a part of the natural language consultation system WISllER [Bergmann/Gerlach 87] . Consultation dialogs require a much wider class of utterances to be understood than other applications (e.g., for data base interface). In advisory dialogs wants and beliefs play a central role. Although a consultation system must be capable of handling the linguistic means which are used for expressing those attitudes, problems of how to treat modal verbs have received little attention in artificial intelligence and computational linguistics.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 71, |
| "end": 92, |
| "text": "[Bergmann/Gerlach 87]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The interpretation processes described in this paper work with our aemantic representation !anguage IRS and generate entries for the user model Representations of utterances in IRS still contain uninter preted linguistic features such as modal verbs, modal hedges, connectives, and tense information. We are pre senting methods for deriving the meaning of these features as they occur in utterances: transforming idiomaticallyused indirect speech acts, interpreting connectives in compound sentences, and resolving ambiguities in the meaning of modal verbs by using, i.a., temporal restrictions. The last chapter sketches the technical means used by these processes, i.e., the semantic representation language, the way rules are encoded, and the asscrtional knowledge base containing the user model. Fig. 1 shows the different stages of the interpretation process. First, if a connective is found, the analysis process breaks up the sentence into separate propositions, in the next step idomatically-used indirect speech acts are transformed into a direct question. The propositions are then interpreted independently during the modal verb analysis which creates one or more propositional attitudes for each proposition. These interpretations arc then related, depending on the natural language connective. Finally, after inferring the appropriate time intervals from verb tense, the sentence type is used to derive the propositional attitudes which are entered into the user model.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 800, |
| "end": 806, |
| "text": "Fig. 1", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Speakers often use indirect speech acts because they want to express politeness or uncertainty. Examples are : \"Could you please tell me which bonds have the highest interest rate?\", \"i'd like to know which...\", \"I do not know which....\" We believe that for appropriately handling such an idiomatic use of indirect speech acts in a consultation system it is admissible to transform such utterances into a simplified form -the corresponding direct quest;~n. Therefore the first step in our semantic-pragmatic interpretation is mapping the different ways of asking questions onto one standard form which is the formal representation of the equivalent direct question. Fig. 2 shows the ru~e which applies to the idiom \"I do not know whether X.\" and transforms it into the represen tation of the direct speech act \"X ?\" The rule formalism will be described in detail later. Durin$\" that transformation process we do not loose any information which might be relevant to the dialog control component of the system (not described in this paper). Before answering any question -direct or indirect -the system has to check whether it is able to answer that question. If this is not the ease the user must be informed about the limitations of the system's competence, anyway. This argumentation is similar to that of [Ellman 83] , who argues that it is not relevant whether an utterance is a request or an inform as long as the hearer can detect the speaker's superordinate goals. The transformation of indirect speech acts works on the semantic level by applying rules which specify formal transformations of semantic representations of sentences. In this our approach differs from that taken in UC [Wilensky et. al. 84 and ZernikfDyer 85] where a phrasal lexicon is used and the semantic interpretation of idioms is done during the parsing process.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 1307, |
| "end": 1318, |
| "text": "[Ellman 83]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 1690, |
| "end": 1730, |
| "text": "[Wilensky et. al. 84 and ZernikfDyer 85]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 666, |
| "end": 672, |
| "text": "Fig. 2", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Transformation of Idiomatically-Used Indirect Speech Acts", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "An adequate treatment of modal verbs is necessary for determining the attitudes of the speaker concerning the state of affairs expressed by the proposition he is asserting. 1) The main problem in interpreting modal verbs is their typical ambiguity, e.g., 1Mein Sohn sod viel Geld haben.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Interpretation of Modal Verbs", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In English the two readings are:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Interpretation of Modal Verbs", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "'My son is supposed to have a lot of money.' VS.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Interpretation of Modal Verbs", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "'I want my son to have a lot of money.'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Interpretation of Modal Verbs", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Our rules for disambiguating the different readings are based on information which is stored in the semantic representation of the utterance: information about semantic categories of the subject of the modal verb (e.g., ANIMATE, GENERIC, DEFINIT]O, the relation between the time expressed by the modal verb and the time of the proposition and whether the proposition denotes a state or an event.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Interpretation of Modal Verbs", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2) Ich habe 10000 Mark geerbt und m6chte das Geld ir~ Wertpapieren anlegem Sic sollen eine Laufzeit yon vier Jahren haben. 'I have inherited 10000 Marks and would like to invest the money in securities.'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Interpretation of Modal Verbs", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Two readings of the second sentence:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Interpretation of Modal Verbs", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\"they are supposed to have a term of fbur yea,'s.'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Interpretation of Modal Verbs", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Whey should have a term of four years.'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In the first reading of the second sentence the entry for the user model must contain the proposition embedded in a belief context, while the second reading must lead to an entry under speaker's wants. In order to resolve this ambiguity, the rules compare the time of the proposition with the tense of the modal verb. For example, if the tense of the modal verb is present and the time of the proposition is sometime in the future, the system decides that the \"want\" reading is appropriate. The problem in our example is to determine the time of the proposition: We have only the information of tense haben (to have) which is a present infinitive and might also denote a future state. Hence the system tries to final out whether the object of the proposition appears in a Want context of the speaker. This is the case as is clear from the previous utterance ... and I wan$ to invest the money in securities and therefore the ~y~tem decides to put the propesition of the ~c~nd sent~t~e into the user's want ~ontext as well. (Even if the second utterance is taken to be a belief of the ~peaker, the fact that it is cited in this context is sufficient to infer that it is also a want, why else should the speaker cite this fact in connection with his decision to invest in securities?) Usually the user's questions are interpreted as user wants to knowp (or more formally: (WANT USER (KNOW USER P))),", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "where ~ th;notes the propositional content of the question. For example,", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3) K0nnen Pfandbriefe mehr als 7% Rendite haben?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "'C~n bonds have an interest rate of more then 7%?' is interpreted as: the user wants to know whether the proposition is true, which means in our example, taking into account the modal verbk6nnen, whether it is possible for bonds to have an interest rate ofmore then 7 %.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "One problem arises when the modal verb sollen occurs in a question. Normally it is interpreted as indicating a want, e.g.,", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Soil ich das Fenster schliegen?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "'l]hould I close the window?'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Here the speaker wants to know, whether there is some other pers~m (probably the hearer), who wants the proposition to be true. But this interpretation doesn't make any sense in a consulting dialog. Ina consultation the speaker is not interested in the wants of the advisor, e.g.,", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Soll ich Pfandbriefe mit 5% Rendite kaufen?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "'l~hould I buy bonds which have an interest rate of 5 %?'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Rather than inquiring about someone else's wants, as in (4), the speaker is interested in a recommendation:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(WANT USER (KNOW USER (I~,ECOMMI,IND SYSTEM P~)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The interpretation of modal verbs is further infiuet~ood by eonnectiw~;; which may occur in complements. Consider the following sentence:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(6) Meine Sehwester mug viel Geld habcn. 'My sister nmst have a lot of money.'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In this case one can only infer that the speaker bo!ieves that the proposition is true, namely that his sister has a lot of money. The interpretation completely changes when we have:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Meine Schwester mug viel Geld haben, um th~ Haus zu bauen. ':My sister needs to have a lot of money in order to bnild her house.'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "It is possible that the speaker believes as in (6) that his sister has s lot of money, but this cannot be inferred from the statement. Here we can only infer that the speaker believes that the second proposition (his sister's building her house) implies the first one (his sister's having a lot of money). The system interprets underlying beliefs and wants and enters them into the user nmdel in accordance with the different classes of connectives.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "As an example, take the class of connectives which express inferences of the speaker, e.g.,", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Ich will eine Anlage mit kurzer Laufzeit, damit ich schnell an mein Geld herankommen kann.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "'i want a short term investment so that I can get my money back quickly.'", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Because of the connective damit the system concludes that the proposition of the second part of the sentence is the superordinate goal rather than the first proposition although this is the want which is expressed directly. The user supposes that the first proposition is a necessary condition for the second, which expresses his goal. When further processing this logical structure, the system can recognize the underlying misconception, namely that it is not the term of an investment which is important for getting the money back quickly, but the liquidity. In (9) the modal verb sollen inside the question indicates that the user wants a recommendation. It indicates further that the connective um-zu has to be interpreted as a user's want. The correct interpretation is that the user wants to know whether the system would recommend that the user attempts to attain a certain goal (paying off his mortgage) by selling his securities.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Such a want is not inferrable from (10). It may be that the user wants to desotve his savings account at somc time in the future, but the modal verb mtissen (must) inside the question does not indicate a current want. Therefore only the relation between the two propositions is the focus of attention. Hence we can paraphrase the user's want as 'Do I have to pay a fee if I want to desolve my savings account?', or, again more formally,", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(WANT USER (KNOW USER (IMPLIES P2 PLY)),", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "where P2 denotes the desolving event and P1 the fee paying.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "VS.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The processes described in this paper work on a formal representation of utterances which reflects their semantic structure but also contains lexical and syntactic information (hedges, connectives, modal verbs, tense, and mood) which has not yet been interpreted. Our formal representation language is called IRS (Interne Reprtisenta-tionsSprache, [Bergmann et. al. 87] ). It contains all the standard operators of predicate calculus, formalisms for expressing propositional attitudes, modalities, and speech acts, natural language connectives (and. or, however, therefore, etc.) , a rich collection of natura/!anguage quantifiers (e.g., articles, wh-particles), and modal operators (maybe, necessarily). This example contains some important features of IRS: Only one-and two-place predicates are allowed. They correspond to the concepts and roles defined in our terminological knowledge base QUIRK [Bergmann/ Gerlach 86] except for SOLLEN and HAS-TENSE which still need to be semantically interpreted. Quantifications are always restricted to a range which may be described by an arbitrary formula. The operator PROP allows for associating a variable to a formula. In subsequent terms the variable may be used as a denotation of the proposition expressed by that formula.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 348, |
| "end": 369, |
| "text": "[Bergmann et. al. 87]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 544, |
| "end": 579, |
| "text": "(and. or, however, therefore, etc.)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 899, |
| "end": 921, |
| "text": "[Bergmann/ Gerlach 86]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Computational Model", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In the formula given in Fig. 3 the variable A1 denotes the assertion as an action with agent USER and propositional content P1. $1 reflects the occurrence of the modal verb sollen which is represented like a predicate, but has not yet been semantically interpreted. The \"propositional content\" of S1 is P2 which denotes the proposition the securities have a term offouryears.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 24, |
| "end": 30, |
| "text": "Fig. 3", |
| "ref_id": "FIGREF3" |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Computational Model", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For characterizing sets of structures to which one specific interpretation may apply, we use IRS patterns [Gerlach 87 ], i.e., highly parameterized semantic structures which specify an arbitrary combination of features relevant to the interpretation process: The surface speech act, tense information, modal hedges, and restrictions on the propositional content.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 106, |
| "end": 117, |
| "text": "[Gerlach 87", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Computational Model", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A quite simple example for an IRS pattern is given in Fig. 4 . Its elements are variables (symbols starting with '?'), constants (all other symbols), a concept pattern (matching any one-place predication), role patterns (matching two-place predications). This pattern is used for matching the top level of the representation of an utterance of the user, directed to the system. When matching the variable ?OBJECT is bound to the whole propositional content of the utterance and is used by the subsequent steps of analysis.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 54, |
| "end": 60, |
| "text": "Fig. 4", |
| "ref_id": "FIGREF4" |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "194,", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "As described above, we do not only infer new user model information directly, but also perform transformations on IRS structures, e.g., to reduce idioms to more primitive speech acts. This kind o\u00a3 processing involves applying a set oftransformatlonal rules to an IRS formula where a rule is a pair of IRS patterns as described above (for an example, see Fig. 2 ). When instantiating the right hand side of the rule the interpreter will create new variables for unbound pattern variables and quantify them in the appropriate way (in Fig. 2 this is the case with the pattern variable ?Q).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 354, |
| "end": 360, |
| "text": "Fig. 2", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 532, |
| "end": 538, |
| "text": "Fig. 2", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "194,", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In WISBER the user model is a section of the central assertional knowledge base (A-Box, [Poesio 88] ) which allows for storing and retrieving assertional knowledge in different contexts which denote the content of propositional attitudes of agents. Hence a new entry is added to the user model by storing the propositional content in the A-Box context which contains the user's wants.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 88, |
| "end": 99, |
| "text": "[Poesio 88]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "194,", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "We have implemented our interpretation module in an Interlisp programming environment. It is a part of the natural lahguage consultation '~ystem WISBER. The module's coverage includes all German modal verbs occuring in assections and questions, some connectives (e.g.,", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Conclusior~", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022 and, so that, because) and the most common indirect questions. On the one hand our future work will concentrate on extending the performance of the system inside the framework which is described in this paper. On the other hand we will integrate the concept of expectations, i.e. expectations the system has according to the users next utterance depending on the actual state of the dialog. Thi~ will enable us to resolve more kinds of ambiguities in user utterances.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Conclusior~", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "back_matter": [], |
| "bib_entries": { |
| "BIBREF0": { |
| "ref_id": "b0", |
| "title": "Recognizing Intentions from Natural Language Utterances", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "J", |
| "middle": [ |
| "F" |
| ], |
| "last": "Allen", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1983, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "107--166", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "J. F. Allen: Recognizing Intentions from Natural Language Utterances, in: M. Brady and R. C. Berwick (Ed.): Computational Models of Discourse, MIT Press 1983, pp. 107-166", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF3": { |
| "ref_id": "b3", |
| "title": "Marburger/ M. Po~sio: IRS -The Internal Representation Language, WISBER Berieht Nr", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Bergmann", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1987, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "87", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Bergmann et.al. 87: H. Bergmann/M. Fliegner/M. Gerlach/H. Marburger/ M. Po~sio: IRS -The Internal Representation Language, WISBER Berieht Nr. 15, Universit~it Hamburg, Faehbereieh Informatik, November 1987", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF5": { |
| "ref_id": "b5", |
| "title": "Semantisch-pragmatische Verarbeitung yon J~uflerungen im nati~rlichsprachli-ehen Beratungssystem WISBER", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "H", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Bergmann", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "/ M", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Gerlach", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1987, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "318--327", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "H. Bergmann/ M. Gerlach: Semantisch-pragmatische Verarbeitung yon J~uflerungen im nati~rlichsprachli- ehen Beratungssystem WISBER, in: W. Brauer, W. Wahl~ter (Eds.): Wissensbasierte Systeme -GI- Kongress 1987. Springer Verlag, Berlin 1987, pp. 318- 327", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF7": { |
| "ref_id": "b7", |
| "title": "QUIRK -Implementierung einer TBox zur Repri2sentation begrifflichen Wissens. WISBER Memo", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "H", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Bergmann", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "/M", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Gerlach", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1986, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "H. Bergmann/M. Gerlach: QUIRK -Implementierung einer TBox zur Repri2sentation begrifflichen Wissens. WISBER Memo, Universittit Hamburg, Fachbereich Informatik, Dezember 1986", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF9": { |
| "ref_id": "b9", |
| "title": "The Semantics of Modal Verbs", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "J", |
| "middle": [ |
| "/ J P" |
| ], |
| "last": "Boyd", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Thorne", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1969, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "5", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "57--74", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "J. Boyd / J. P. Thorne: The Semantics of Modal Verbs, in: Journal of Linguistics 5, 1969, pp. 57 -74", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF11": { |
| "ref_id": "b11", |
| "title": "Linking Propositions", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "D", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "S\u00b0 Brae", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "/", |
| "middle": [ |
| "R A" |
| ], |
| "last": "Smit", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1986, |
| "venue": "Proceedings of COLING-86", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "177--180", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "D. S\u00b0 Brae / R. A. Smit: Linking Propositions, in: Proceedings of COLING-86, Bonn 1986, pp. 177-180", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF13": { |
| "ref_id": "b13", |
| "title": "Studien zur Verwendung der Modalverben", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "G", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Br~inner", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "/ A", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Redder", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1983, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "G. Br~inner / A. Redder: Studien zur Verwendung der Modalverben, Tiibingen 1983", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF15": { |
| "ref_id": "b15", |
| "title": "A Computational Theory of the Function of Clue Words in Argument Understanding", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Cohen", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1984, |
| "venue": "Proceedings of COLING-84", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "251--258", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "R. Cohen: A Computational Theory of the Function of Clue Words in Argument Understanding, in: Pro- ceedings of COLING-84, Stanford 1984, pp. 251 -258", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF17": { |
| "ref_id": "b17", |
| "title": "An Indirect Approach to Types of Speech Acts", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "J", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Ellman", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1983, |
| "venue": "Proc. of the 8th IJCAI", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "600--602", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "J. Ellman: An Indirect Approach to Types of Speech Acts, in: Proc. of the 8th IJCAI, Karlsruhe 1983, pp. 600-602", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF19": { |
| "ref_id": "b19", |
| "title": "BNF -a Tool for Processing Formally Defined S~]ntactic Structures. Universit~t Hamburg, Fachberelch Informatik, WISBI~R-Memo Nr", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Gerlach", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1987, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "17", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "M. Gerlach: BNF -a Tool for Processing Formally Defined S~]ntactic Structures. Universit~t Hamburg, Fachberelch Informatik, WISBI~R-Memo Nr. 17, Dezember 1987", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF21": { |
| "ref_id": "b21", |
| "title": "Classification of Modality Function and its Application to Japanese Language Analysis", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "S", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Naito", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "/", |
| "middle": [ |
| "H" |
| ], |
| "last": "Shimazu", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Nomura", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "S. Naito / A Shimazu / H. Nomura: Classification of Modality Function and its Application to Japanese Language Analysis, in: Proceedings of the 23rd", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF22": { |
| "ref_id": "b22", |
| "title": "Annual Meeting of the ACL", |
| "authors": [], |
| "year": 1985, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "27--34", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Annual Meeting of the ACL, Chicago 1985, pp. 27-34", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF24": { |
| "ref_id": "b24", |
| "title": "Dialog-Oriented A-Boxing", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Poesio", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "M. Poesio: Dialog-Oriented A-Boxing, Universit/~t", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF29": { |
| "ref_id": "b29", |
| "title": "Fachbereich lnformatik, WISBER Menlo Nr", |
| "authors": [], |
| "year": 1988, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "18", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Konstruktion yon Partnermodelleintragen, Universitfit Hamburg, Fachbereich lnformatik, WISBER Menlo Nr. 18, Januar 1988", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF30": { |
| "ref_id": "b30", |
| "title": "Chin: Talking to UNIX in English: an Overview of UC", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Wilensky", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1984, |
| "venue": "Communications of the ACM", |
| "volume": "84", |
| "issue": "6", |
| "pages": "574--593", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Wilensky et. al. 84: R. Wilensky, Y. Arens, D. Chin: Talking to UNIX in English: an Overview of UC, in: Communications of the ACM 27(6), pp. 574-593 (June 1984)", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF32": { |
| "ref_id": "b32", |
| "title": "Beliefs, Points of View, and Multiple Environments", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Y", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Wilks", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "J", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Bien", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1983, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "7", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "95--119", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Y. Wilks, J. Bien: Beliefs, Points of View, and Multiple Environments, in: Cognitive Science 7, pp. 95-119 (1983)", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF34": { |
| "ref_id": "b34", |
| "title": "Towards a Self-Extending Lexicon", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "U", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Zernik", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [ |
| "G" |
| ], |
| "last": "Dyer", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1985, |
| "venue": "Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the ACL", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "284--292", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "U. Zernik, M.G. Dyer: Towards a Self-Extending Lexicon. in: Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the ACL, Chicago 1985, pp. 284-292", |
| "links": null |
| } |
| }, |
| "ref_entries": { |
| "FIGREF0": { |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "The stages of the interpretation process", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF1": { |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "QUESTION ?O) (HAS-AGENT ?O USER) (HAS-OBJECT ?0 ?X)) L Fig. 2: A rule for transformlng tho~idic~m:'7 do not know X.\" 102 '", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF2": { |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "Connective~ are a means of expressing the argumentative and logical structure of the speaker's opinions by linking' propositions. Such relations between propositions are classified into several categories such as inferential, temporal, causal linkages [Cohen 84 and Br6e/Smit 86].", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF3": { |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "<formula>) <quantification> :: = (<quantifier-operator> <variable> <formula>) <quantifier-operator> ::= EXIST I DPL ] ... [DPL means definite plural] An example of IRS and the corresponding part of the syntax of IRS Fig. 3 shows a part of the syntax definition of IRS and the representation of the sentence (6) Die Wertpapiere sollen eine Laufzeit yon vier Jahren haben 'The securities should/are supposed to have a term of four years.'", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF4": { |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "An IRS pattern", |
| "uris": null |
| } |
| } |
| } |
| } |
