| { |
| "paper_id": "J77-1008", |
| "header": { |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T02:49:33.548924Z" |
| }, |
| "title": "Kinds of Presupposition in M t m l Iimguagesff. In F i l l m r e and Langendoen, Studies in Ihguistic Semntics. New Yak", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "L", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Keenan", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Ehyard", |
| "middle": [ |
| "L" |
| ], |
| "last": "Keemn", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Winstan", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Holt", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Edward", |
| "middle": [ |
| "L" |
| ], |
| "last": "Keenan", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "\"", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "On", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "J&bovits", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "George", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Wff", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Relative Well-Fomednesstl", |
| "middle": [ |
| "In" |
| ], |
| "last": "Steinberg", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Roger", |
| "middle": [ |
| "C" |
| ], |
| "last": "Schank", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "A", |
| "middle": [ |
| "?" |
| ], |
| "last": "Esuppusitbn", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": { |
| "laboratory": "Logical Base for Ehglish. Unpublished Doctorel Diss&atioh", |
| "institution": "University of. Pennsylvania", |
| "location": { |
| "addrLine": "19 69" |
| } |
| }, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "B-Tw", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Dissertaticn", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Ralph", |
| "middle": [ |
| "M \" A" |
| ], |
| "last": "New", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": { |
| "laboratory": "Logical Base for Ehglish. Unpublished Doctorel Diss&atioh", |
| "institution": "University of. Pennsylvania", |
| "location": { |
| "addrLine": "19 69" |
| } |
| }, |
| "email": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": "", |
| "venue": null, |
| "identifiers": {}, |
| "abstract": "In this section, we define t h e inferences we are interested i n [ pmsupposition and entailment), and carment on our use of the t m \" p w t i c s \" 2nd wcontext\". In order to specify the sub-classes of inferences we are studying, we need same preliminary assumptions and definitions. Inferences, in general., must be made given a particular body of p~grratic informtion and with respect to texts. Sbce sentences are the simplest cases of t e x t s , we are concentrating on them. Presuppositions and entailments are particularly useful inferences for studying texts havkg sentences containing anbedded sentences, and they may be studied t o a limited extent independent of prap&ic jnformatian. 1.1 Subformula-derived We assume that the primary goal of the syntactic cornpnent of a natural language system is t o translate Awn natural language sentences to meaning representations selected i n an artificial language. Assume further, t h a t the meaning representations selected for Ihglish sentences have a syntax which may be appmximated by a context-free p m. By \"approximated1', we mean that t h e r e is a context-free &ramm of the semantic representations, though the language given by t h e g~mrar may include sane s t r i n g s which have no interpretation. (For instance, the syntax of ALGOL is often appmxhted by a Backus-Naur form specification. Since we have assumed a context-free syntax for the semantic representations, we may speak of the semantic representations as well-formed fcmulas and as having well-farmed subfmnulas and tree representations.", |
| "pdf_parse": { |
| "paper_id": "J77-1008", |
| "_pdf_hash": "", |
| "abstract": [ |
| { |
| "text": "In this section, we define t h e inferences we are interested i n [ pmsupposition and entailment), and carment on our use of the t m \" p w t i c s \" 2nd wcontext\". In order to specify the sub-classes of inferences we are studying, we need same preliminary assumptions and definitions. Inferences, in general., must be made given a particular body of p~grratic informtion and with respect to texts. Sbce sentences are the simplest cases of t e x t s , we are concentrating on them. Presuppositions and entailments are particularly useful inferences for studying texts havkg sentences containing anbedded sentences, and they may be studied t o a limited extent independent of prap&ic jnformatian. 1.1 Subformula-derived We assume that the primary goal of the syntactic cornpnent of a natural language system is t o translate Awn natural language sentences to meaning representations selected i n an artificial language. Assume further, t h a t the meaning representations selected for Ihglish sentences have a syntax which may be appmximated by a context-free p m. By \"approximated1', we mean that t h e r e is a context-free &ramm of the semantic representations, though the language given by t h e g~mrar may include sane s t r i n g s which have no interpretation. (For instance, the syntax of ALGOL is often appmxhted by a Backus-Naur form specification. Since we have assumed a context-free syntax for the semantic representations, we may speak of the semantic representations as well-formed fcmulas and as having well-farmed subfmnulas and tree representations.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Abstract", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "body_text": [ |
| { |
| "text": "As long as the assumption of context-free syntax for semantic representations is satisfied, the same algorithms and data structures of our system can be used regardless of choice of semantic primitives or type of semantic representation.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Let S and S f be sentences w i t h meaning representations L and Lr respectively. If there is a well-formed subforuila P of L and sane tree trwmformation F such that Lf = F(P), then we say S t may be subformula-derived h S. The type of -tree transfornations that are acceptable for F have been formalized and studied extensively i n ccmnputat ional linguistics as f inite-state tree transformat ions.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The main point of this work is that the presuppositions and entailments of a sentence may be subfomula-derived. We have built a system by which we m y specify subformulas P and tree tmnsformations F. The system then automitically generates presuppositions and e n t a i h m t s from an input sentence S.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "We use context to refer to the situation in which a sentence m y occur. Thus, it would include all discourse prior to the sentence under consideration, beliefs of the interpreter, i. e. , in shwt thestate of the i n t q r e t e r . We use p m t i c s t o describe bll phenomena (and computations mdelling them) that reflect the effect of context.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Fmgmt ics and Context", |
| "sec_num": "1.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A sentence S entails a sentence S t if and onlv if in everv context which S is m e , S t is also true. We may say then that St is an entaibmt of S. This definition is used within linguistics -8 r as a t e s t rather than as a rule in a f o m l system. One discovers a p i r i c a l l y whether St is an entailment of S by trying to construct a context in which S is true, but in which St is false.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": ". 3 Ehtai3men-t", |
| "sec_num": "1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Entailment is not the same as material implication. For instance, let S by \"John managed to kiss Mary,' which entails sentence S f , \"John kissed Mary. l1 Givon (1973) We have shuwn that entailments may be s u b f d a -d e r~v e d , that is, that they may be computed by structural means. As an example, consider the sentence S below; one could represent its rrreaning representatbn as L.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 155, |
| "end": 167, |
| "text": "Givon (1973)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": ". 3 Ehtai3men-t", |
| "sec_num": "1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "S entails S f , with meaning representation Lf . Notice that it is questionakde whether one understands sentence S or t h e word Ivforce\" if he d e s not knaw t h a t S t is true whenever S is. In this sense, entailment is certainly necessary knowledge ( though not sufficient) for understan-natural* language. We w i l l see this again for presupposition. presuppoges that there is a greatest prime n -.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": ". 3 Ehtai3men-t", |
| "sec_num": "1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The fact that there is none explaine why the sentence is anamlous. As an example of a subfonmila derived presupposition consider sentences S1 and S1' below. It i s easy to see that whether S1 is true or false, S1' is assumed to be true.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": ". 3 Ehtai3men-t", |
| "sec_num": "1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "John stopped beating Mary.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Sl:", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "LJ: (IN-LTKE-PAST (stop (EVENT (beat John Mary) ) ) ) S1' : John had been beating Mary.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Sl:", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Ll and L1' are semantic representations for S1 and S1' respectively. The w e l lf o m d subformula in this case i s all af L3.. The tree transformation from W. to L1' offers a n o n~v i a l e-le of a subfonmila-derived presupposition.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "11': (IN-THCPAST (HAVE-EN (BE-ING (beat John Mary))))", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Notice that one might wonder whether sentence S1 and the meaning of \"stopt1 w e r e understood i f one did not. h u w t h a t Sly rust be true whether John stopped o r not. In this sense, presupposition is necessary (but not sufficient) knowledge for understanding natural language.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "11': (IN-THCPAST (HAVE-EN (BE-ING (beat John Mary))))", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "We have s h m that presuppositions (as we have defined them above) m y be subfonmila-d-ved. Henceforth, we w i l l use \"entailment\" t o mean an entai3.nm-t whjch is not also a presupposition.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "11': (IN-THCPAST (HAVE-EN (BE-ING (beat John Mary))))", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "-11-", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "11': (IN-THCPAST (HAVE-EN (BE-ING (beat John Mary))))", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "M s section is divided into two subsections, Section 2.1 deals with presuppositions, section 2.2 with entailments. All example sentences are", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Elementary Examples", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "ntmimred. An (a) sentence has as presuppsition or entailment the comsponding (b) sentence.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Elementary Examples", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Presuppositions arise fm two different structural sources: syntactic constructs (the syntactic or relational strzlctur?e) and lexical items (semantic structure 1 .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Presupposition", |
| "sec_num": "2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Perhaps the mst intriguing cases of presupposition are those that arise f h m syntactic constructs, for these demnstrate c w l e x interaction between semantics and syntax.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A construction bown as the cleft sentence gives rise to presuppositions for the corresponding surface sentences. Consider that if someone says (1) to you, you m i & t respond with (2a).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "1. I am sure one of the players won the game for us yesterday, but I do not knm who did.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "2. a. It is B who won the game.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "b. Scaneone won the game.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The form of the cleft sentence is the word \"it\" followed by a tensed form of the word \"be1', follawed by a noun phrase or p~p o s i t i o n a l phrase, followed by a relative clause.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Note particularly that the presupposition (2b) did not arise frcw any of the individual words. Rather, the pempposition, which is clearly senwtic since it i s part of the tmth qmditions of the sentence, arose fram the syntactic constmct. Thus, t h e syntactic (or relational) s t r u m of the sentence can carry important samntic information.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "C l e f t sentences i l l u s t~t e one important use of presuppositions: mreference. C l e f t sentences asert the identity of one individual with anothw fidividual referred to peviously i n the dialogue. 3. a. John's brother plays for the Phillies.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "b, John has a brother.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "4. a. The team that fhe Phillies play today has won three games in a m w .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "b. The Phillies play a team today.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Syntactic constructs", |
| "sec_num": "2.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The Athletics, who won the World Series last year, play today. ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "a.", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "m l y that there is soone referent which must have that quality. On the other hand, nonrestrictive r e l a t i v e clauses, such as ( 5 ) p s u p p o s e that the particular object named also has in addition the quality mehtioned in the relative clause. Sentence (5a) might be taken as a parapkase of \"The Athletics play today, and the Athletics won the World Series last year.\" W e can easily imagine (6a) being spoken at the beginning of a press conference to inform the news agency of the t r u t h of (6b). , itagain\", \"other\", and \"anotherr1, carry the maning of sanething being repeated. These words have presuppositions that the i t e m occurred at Seast o n e hfo* 9. a. B did not play again today.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Nata particularly that the d c t i v e clauses as i n (4) p u p p o s e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Hmever", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Nata particularly that the d c t i v e clauses as i n (4) p u p p o s e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "b. B did not play at least once before.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Nata particularly that the d c t i v e clauses as i n (4) p u p p o s e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Note that these words include various syntactic categories. ttAlso\" , \"too\" 3 \"again\" , are adverbial elements (adjuncts ) . ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Nata particularly that the d c t i v e clauses as i n (4) p u p p o s e", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A t least five distinct semantic classes of words having entailments have been identified by Karttunen (1970) . In the following exmples, the (b) sentence is entailed by the (a) sentence.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 93, |
| "end": 109, |
| "text": "Karttunen (1970)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Classification of words having entailmnts", |
| "sec_num": "2.2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Redibates such as l % e be a positicplt, \"have the oppmtmityu, and ' %e &Left, are called \"~nly-ifv verbs be~xiuse the embedded satence is entailed only if the predicate is in the negative. Far instance, (1Oa) entails (lob), but (11) has no entailment.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Classification of words having entailmnts", |
| "sec_num": "2.2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "10. a. The P h i l H e s w e r e not in a position to w i n the pennant.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Classification of words having entailmnts", |
| "sec_num": "2.2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "b. The Phillies did not w i n the pennan-tr.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Classification of words having entailmnts", |
| "sec_num": "2.2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "11, a. The Phillies were i n a position to w i n the pennant.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Classification of words having entailmnts", |
| "sec_num": "2.2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "V e r b s such as ttforce\", \"causetr, and are \"if\" verbs, for the embedded sentence is entailed if they are in t h e positive.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Classification of words having entailmnts", |
| "sec_num": "2.2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Bench forced the game t o go into extra innings.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "a. Johnny", |
| "sec_num": "32." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The game went i n t o e x t m innings.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "b.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Johnny Bench did not force the game to go into extra innings.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "13.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Note that (12a) entails (12b), but (13) has no such entailment.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "13.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A \"negative-if\" verb entails the negative of the embedded sentence when the verb is positive. If the entailment is positive, we m y call these \"positive tm-way implicative\" verbs. There are also \"negative two-way implicative1t vefbs. Cansider 18and (19). W e nuw turn our attention to various factors that must be accounted f w in ccaxputing pres~positions and e n t a i h m t s of canpound sentences.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "13.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In this section, the fc3llcrwix-g question is considered: Suppose that a sentence S has a set of e n t a i m t s and a set of presuppositions. Suppose further, that S is &ded in another sentence S t . Are the e n t a h t s and presuppositions of S also entailments and presuppositions of S t as a whole?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Catrplex IScamples: M d e d Ehtailments and hsuppositions", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "This has been referred to as the pmjection problem for entailmints ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Catrplex IScamples: M d e d Ehtailments and hsuppositions", |
| "sec_num": "3." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "As an example sentence, consider (11, which presupposes (2).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Presupposition", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "1. Jack regretted that John left.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Presupposition", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In tha folluwing sections, we w i l l consider the effect on presupposition 2of embeddk.lg (1) mdes v a r h predicates taking enbedded sentences.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "John left.", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "-19-", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "John left.", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Many predicates taking embedded sentences could be called holes because they let presuppositions of embedded sentences t h r o m to betrone presuppositions of the compound sentence. \"harett is such a predicate;", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Moles --", |
| "sec_num": "3.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "( 3) presupposes (2 1 , 3. Mary is aware that Jack regretted that John left.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Moles --", |
| "sec_num": "3.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A l l prwdmtes taking embedded sentences, except for the v@bs of saying, the predicates of p p o s i t i o n a l attitude, and the connectives appear to be holes.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Moles --", |
| "sec_num": "3.1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The For instance, (4) presupposes (5), not (2).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "8peech acts", |
| "sec_num": "3.1.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Mary asked whether Jack regretted that John left.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "4.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Mary claimed John left.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "5.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Analysis of predicates af propositional attitude is very similar to that of speech acts. SOE predicates of popositicnal attitude are \"believe\", ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Predicates of propositional attitude", |
| "sec_num": "3.1.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The effect of connectives is rather complex, as (8) and (9) demrmsmte.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Connectives", |
| "sec_num": "3.1.4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Sentence (8) presupposes (21, but ( 9 ) clearly does not.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Connectives", |
| "sec_num": "3.1.4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Jack was there, then Jack regretted t h a t John left.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "If", |
| "sec_num": "8." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "9. If John left, t%en Jack regretted that John left. Let A and B be the antecedent and consequent respectively of the conpow1d", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "If", |
| "sec_num": "8." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "sentence \"if A -then B\".", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "If", |
| "sec_num": "8." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The examples of (8) and (9) are complex, f &r they seem to demonstrate that the context set up by the antecedent A must be part of the canputation. FW the examples given then, (8 > psupposes (10) , and (9 ) presupposes (11) which is a tautology.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "If", |
| "sec_num": "8." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "10. If Jack was there, then John left. ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "If", |
| "sec_num": "8." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The five cases disussed above outline a solution to the projection pmblem fop presuppositions.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Mary l e e .", |
| "sec_num": "14." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In the examples, we w i l l embed (15) under various predicates, to see hm the c~t a i h n t (16) of (15) is affected.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Entailments", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Fred prevented Mary fmPn leaving.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "15.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Mary did not leave.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "16.", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Corrresponding to the class of holes for presuppositions, two cases arise for entaihmts. 21. John said that bed prevented Mary f m leaving.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Chain of entailments", |
| "sec_num": "3.2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A second subclass of verbs includes \"deny\". They are analogous to \"negative if verbs1'. When \"denyu is i n the negative, embedded entailments are blocked. Hawever, when lldenyN is positive the entailnmts of the ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Job clximd that Mary aid not leave.", |
| "sec_num": "22." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Srraby (1975) analyses these predicates i n the same way as the speech acts. \"Believet' , \"think\" , and \"suspect\" are examples of a subclass analogous t o ''if predicatesv1 or t o \"say\", \"declare1', and %ffhvV. v~u b t t t", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Prediqates of propositional attitude", |
| "sec_num": "3.2.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "is an example of a second subclass analogous to \"negative two-way Implicative predicates\" such as \"failv. 26. John believed that Mary did not leqve.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Prediqates of propositional attitude", |
| "sec_num": "3.2.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For \"if A then Bn , the entailments are of the form \"if A then Cfr , where C is an entailment of B, For ''A and B\" , t h e entailments are the union of the entailments of A and of the entailments of B, since both A and B are entailed by \"A and B\". For \"A or B\", t h m do not seem to be any useful entailments. Then, we may lassociate with that parti-path the txee .trensforsmtion yielding the presupposition of that syntactic construct. For instance, cleft sentences are syntactically marked as the ward I ' i t U , followed by a tensed form of l1beH 9 follwed by either a noun phnase or a prwpositianal Just before popping to a higher sententid level a projection function i s applied, which is merely a CASE statement for the four? cases described in We have only outlined hew to q u t e presupposition and e n t a i h n t . ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Connectives", |
| "sec_num": "3.2.4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The limitations of the system are of two kinds: those that could be handled witbin the f h m w o k of the system but are not because of limitstims of man-hours, and those that could not be handled wi* the present flxamwrk.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "what the SystemDOes Not Do", |
| "sec_num": "4.3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The system i s currently limited i n four ways, each of which could be removed, given time. One set of restrictions results froen the fact that our pragrmn represents only a small part of a camplete natural langauge processing system. Only the syntactic component is included (though these inferences, which are semantic, are canputed while parsing). fQ a consequence, no a n b i g u i q is resolved except that which is syntactically resolvable.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Limitations t h a t could be removed", |
| "sec_num": "4.3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Second, though a trmsforsm.tional output component is included to facilitate reading the output, it has a very limited range of constructions.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Limitations t h a t could be removed", |
| "sec_num": "4.3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The principles used i n designing the component are sound though.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Limitations t h a t could be removed", |
| "sec_num": "4.3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A third aspect is caputation time. Since our main interest was a new type of computation for a syn-tactic ccxnponent, we have not stressed efficiency in time nor storage; rather, we have concentrated on writing the system f a i r l y rapidly. Considering the nLnnber of conceptually simple, efficiency meesures t h a t we sacrificed for speed i n implementing the system, we are quite pleased that the average CPU time to canpute the presupposition and e n t a i h n t s of a sentence is twenty seconds on the DEC -10. eneies muld have be devised in order i~ encode these depehdencies.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Limitations t h a t could be removed", |
| "sec_num": "4.3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In section 5.1, the role of preeuppcsitbn and entailments as inferences is pinpointed. In section 5.2, the use of e m t i c pr-tiws is considered.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Rale of presupposition and e n t a i h m t", |
| "sec_num": "5." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The tm ninfemncelf has been used recently to refer to any conjecture made, given a text in scme natwal language. Chamiak (1973, 19721, Schank (19731, Schank and Rieger (19731, Schank, et. dl. (19751, and Wilks 1975 the r e~~t in their definition that they be independent of the 6 i t u a t h ( a l l context not =presented s t r u c U l y ) is strong. For instance, fkm sentence S Wow, one might feel that S t should be entailed; yet, it is not.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 113, |
| "end": 203, |
| "text": "Chamiak (1973, 19721, Schank (19731, Schank and Rieger (19731, Schank, et. dl. (19751, and", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Xnferring", |
| "sec_num": "5.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "John saw Jim i n the h a l l , and Mary saw Jim in his office.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "S :", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "S : John and Mary s w J h in different places.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "S :", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "By appropriately chosen previous t e x t s , S t need not be true whenever S is. . Because S t is presupposed by S, SVt becrmes a presuppositim of S, nat merely an entailment.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "S :", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Who prevented John f h n leaving?", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "S", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Someone *vented John f k m leaving.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "S'", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "John did not leave. ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "St'", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "back_matter": [], |
| "bib_entries": { |
| "BIBREF0": { |
| "ref_id": "b0", |
| "title": "~l T~a r d a Model of Children's Story ~e n s i o n v", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Eugene", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Chard&", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Chard&, Eugene, ~l T~a r d a Model of Children's Story ~e n s i o n v .", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF1": { |
| "ref_id": "b1", |
| "title": "Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Report AI TR-266. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e of 'rechnology", |
| "authors": [], |
| "year": 1972, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Report AI TR-266. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e of 'rechnology , 1972.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF2": { |
| "ref_id": "b2", |
| "title": "Jack and Janet in Search of a Theory of Knowledgen", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Eugene", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Charniak", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1973, |
| "venue": "Pmceedings o f the T h i r d International Joint Conferynce on Artificial Intelligence", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Charniak, Eugene, \"Jack and Janet in Search of a Theory of Knowledgen. In Pmceedings o f the T h i r d International Joint Conferynce on Artificial Intelligence. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Research Xnstimte , 1973.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF3": { |
| "ref_id": "b3", |
| "title": "~Corrrprehension and the Given-New Con-tpaetIt", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "H", |
| "middle": [ |
| "M" |
| ], |
| "last": "Clark", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "S", |
| "middle": [ |
| "E" |
| ], |
| "last": "Haviland", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1976, |
| "venue": "Discome Production and Comprehension", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Clark, H. M. and Haviland, S . E. , ~Corrrprehension and the Given-New Con-tpaetIt, in Discome Production and Comprehension (ed . R. Freedle ) , Lawrence Blbaum Associates, Millside, N.J., 1976.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF4": { |
| "ref_id": "b4", |
| "title": "Verbs of Judging: an Ekercise i n S m t i c Desmi~tion", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "C", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "F5.Limre", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "F5.lImre, C . Y e , \"Verbs of Judging: an Ekercise i n S m t i c Desmi~tion\".", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF5": { |
| "ref_id": "b5", |
| "title": "F i l h r e and Langendoen; studies in L i n g u i s t i c . S m t i c s", |
| "authors": [], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "In F i l h r e and Langendoen; studies in L i n g u i s t i c . S m t i c s . NLW York: Holt , Rinehart , and Winston ,ml.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF6": { |
| "ref_id": "b6", |
| "title": "The Time--Axis Phenomenontt", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Tdlmy", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Givon", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "Language", |
| "volume": "49", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "890--925", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Givon, Tdlmy , \"The Time--Axis Phenomenontt. Language 49,411973 7 : 890-925.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF7": { |
| "ref_id": "b7", |
| "title": "Tho Systems of Gr -: Report and Paraphraseu", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Z", |
| "middle": [ |
| "S" |
| ], |
| "last": "Harris", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "Harris, Structural and Transformational Linguistics", |
| "volume": "19", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Harris, Z . S . , \"Tho Systems of Gr -: Report and Paraphraseu. In Harris, Structural and Transformational Linguistics. Dordrecht , Holland : D. Reidel Publishing Co. , 19 70.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF8": { |
| "ref_id": "b8", |
| "title": "What ' s New? Acquiring new information as a process in Comprehension", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "S", |
| "middle": [ |
| "E" |
| ], |
| "last": "Haviland", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "H", |
| "middle": [ |
| "M" |
| ], |
| "last": "Clark", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1974, |
| "venue": "Journal of V e r b a l Lmrnhg and Vmbal Behavior", |
| "volume": "13", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Haviland , S . E . and Clark, H.M. , \"What ' s New? Acquiring new information as a process in Comprehension. Journal of V e r b a l Lmrnhg and Vmbal Behavior, 13, 1974. --", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF9": { |
| "ref_id": "b9", |
| "title": "What Would You Have Cone I f", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "S", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Isard", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1974, |
| "venue": "Unpublished", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Isard , S . , \"What Would You Have Cone I f . . . ?\" Unpublished, 1974.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF10": { |
| "ref_id": "b10", |
| "title": "Some Frills for PMal Tic-tac-toe : tics of Predicate ~6mplemkn-t Constru@ionst", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "K", |
| "middle": [ |
| "A" |
| ], |
| "last": "Joshi", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "R", |
| "middle": [ |
| "M" |
| ], |
| "last": "Weischedel", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": null, |
| "venue": "IEEE Transactions on", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Joshi . A, K. . and Weischedel, R.M. , ''Some Frills for PMal Tic-tac-toe : tics of Predicate ~6mplemkn-t Constru@ionst', IEEE Transactions on", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF12": { |
| "ref_id": "b12", |
| "title": "On the Saxintics of Complement Sentences", |
| "authors": [], |
| "year": 1970, |
| "venue": "Ih Papers f r o m the Sixth Region@ Meetkg of the Chicago Linguistic Society", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "k t t u n e n , L a u r i , \"On the Saxintics of Complement Sentences\". Ih Papers f r o m the Sixth Region@ Meetkg of the Chicago Linguistic Society. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1970'.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF13": { |
| "ref_id": "b13", |
| "title": "llPresupposit ions of Compound Sentences", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Lami", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Karttunen", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1973, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "169--193", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Karttunen, Lami, llPresupposit ions of Compound Sentences\". L i n . N(1973): 169-193.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF14": { |
| "ref_id": "b14", |
| "title": "Presupposition and Linguistic Context", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Lauri", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Karttunen", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1974, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "1", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "182--194", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "KArttunen, Lauri, \"Presupposition and Linguistic Context\". T n e o r e t i d Liin&stics 1, 1/2(1974):182-194:", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF15": { |
| "ref_id": "b15", |
| "title": "Conventional 3nplioa-tt.m i n Montague Gmm~", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Lauri", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Kwttunen", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Stanley", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Petem", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1975, |
| "venue": "Presented at the F h t Annual Meeting of Berkeley L,inguistic Society", |
| "volume": "15", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Kwttunen, Lauri and Petem, Stanley, \"Conventional 3nplioa-tt.m i n Montague Gmm~\". Presented at the F h t Annual Meeting of Berkeley L,inguistic Society, FelxYary 15, 1975. Berkeley, Cfl.", |
| "links": null |
| } |
| }, |
| "ref_entries": { |
| "FIGREF0": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "m the meaning representation selected it is easy to see the appropriate s u b f d and the identity tree t r a n s f o r m t i o~ which demonstrate that this is a subformula-derived entailment. (This is, of course, a t r i v i a l tree .h.ansformation. A nontrivial example appears in Section 1.4, for pnsupposition. ) Many ewmples of entailment axe given in Secticn 2.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF1": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "second, related concept i s the not ion of presupposition. Asentence S ~s~t i c n l l y ) presupposes a sentence S t i f and only if S entails S' intmdl negation of S entails S ' . (Other definitions of presupposition have been proposed, Kartumen ( 197 3 discusses various definitions . ) F m the d e f h i t l o n one can easily see t h a t all semantic presuppsZtions S f of S are dtso entailments of S. Hawever, the converse is not true, as the sentence S and S f above show. Again, this definition is primarily meant as a linguistic test for empiricdlly determining the presuppositions of a sentence and not as a r u l e in a formal system.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF2": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "Other authors have referred to the concept of presupposition as *!given informationv. Haviland and Clark (1975) as well as Clark and Haviland (1976) suggest a process by which h m s use given infc3rmation in understanding u t t m c e s . They present much psychological and linguist f b evidence that c o n f h their hypothesis.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF3": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "m h e r , the syntactic constructions associated with definite noun phmmes have presuppositions that their referents exist i n the shared infoma-Lion between the dialogue participants. By \"definite noun phrases1', we man noun phrases w k i c h make definite (as opposed to indefinite) reference . Such constructions include proper names, possessives, adj ect iVes , ~~t p i c t i v e r e l a t i v e clauses, and nonres-bictive relative clauses. For example, consider the f o l l~g (a1 sentences and their wsociated presuppositions as (b) sentences.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF4": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "r e l a t i v e clauses1' are relative clauses that m used to determine what the referent is. \"Nonrestrictive relative clauses\" are not used t o determine reference, but rather add additional information as an aside to the main assertion of the sentence. (In written Wlish, they are usually beaded by camas, i n spoken English by pauses and change of h t o n a t i~n . )", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF5": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "and \"anothert' have aspects of adjectives and of quantifiers. Again we see that the phenomenon of presupposition is a crucial part of the meaning of m y diverse classes of words. Given these btmductory examples, let us turn our attention to examples of entailment. 2.2 Entailment fitailments appear to have been studied less than presupposition. All of the examples identified as entailnmt thus far seem t o be related t o lexical entries of particular words. T b canpehensive papers that analyze wrds having entailments are lkrtbmen (1970) andGivon (1973).", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF6": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "mke the catch. b. B did not make the catch. 19. a. B did not fail to make the catch. b . B mde -the catch. For this clasa of verbs, the entailed proposition is positive if aad only if the implicative verb is negated. The five classes of words having entailments, then, are:if, only if, negative if, positive two-way h p l i c a t ive , and negative two-way implicative. A l l of the wmds cited in the literature as having entailments are predicates. In the examples here, m y were verbs; SORE w e r e adjectives such as \"ableu. However, s m are nouns such as \"proof If ; example ( 20) d a m m m t e s this. 20. a. The fact that he came is proof that he c a m s . b. He cares.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF7": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "and presuppositions. A solution to the pmblem invol~s miles for canbining semantic entities of mibedded (projected) sentences in ordm t o compute the semantic entities of the whole sentence. A soxution t o the pmjectian pmblem evolved in lbrtttmen (1973, 19741, Krttunen and P e t e r s (19751, Joshi and Weischedel (19741, Smaby (1975) and Weischedel (1975 ) . The results are briefly mported here. A sumnary of the solutions m y be found i n Weischedel (1975). Kiwttunen (1973, 1974) divided all predicates into four classes: the speech acts, predicates of propositional attifude, connectives, and all o*er predicates. The classes were defined according t o the effect of the predicate on presuppositions of M d e d sentences. We found that the same classification was appru,priate far entailments, and extended the solution to inclMe entailments, as well as presuppositions.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF8": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "v e b s of saying, or \"speech actrf v&s, permit the presuppositions to rise to be presuppositions of the conqpoUhd sentence, but those presuppositions are embedded i n the world of the claims of the actm perfoming the speech act. Smdby (19-75) f i r s t pcinted out this impofiant fact.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF9": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "would in general r e q u h complex theorem provers i n order to determine whether the presuppositions of B are implied by A, and therefm are not presuppositions of the canpound sentence. Huwever , Peters suggested (a footnote in Karttunen (1974)) that the presuppositions of \"if A then B,\"(where rraterial implication is the interpretation of \"ifthen\") , arising from the presuppositions of B are of the form \"if A then C\", where C is a presupposition of B. Further, a l l presuppusitions of A are presupposit~ons of \"if A -then B. \" This suggestion eliminates the need for theorem proving and offers instead a simple computation similar to that for the verbs of saying and the verbs of prop0siticma.l attitude.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF10": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "\"wh-sca-ne\" embedded sentence (beginning with \"who\", \"what\", ffwhen\", frwhich\", etc . ) have a l l entailments of the embedded sentence promoted to presuppositions, since the erribedded sentence is presupposed. For instance, (19 presupposes (201, and therefore presupposes that Vary did not leave\". 19. John asked who prevented Mmy from leaving. 20. Scmeone p'reventd Nary f b n leaving. For enbedded sentences of the fom \"that St!, we notice -two subclasses of speech acts. Verbs such as \"sayn, 'tdeclare\", and l t a f f h ' v are like I t i f predicateslT, fop embedded entailments are not blocked if the verb is nat in the negative. Hcrwever, i n the positive, the enibedded entaLhen't:s became entailments of the ccnpund sentence, but under the speakerrs claims. For instance, (21) entails (22).", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF11": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "Thou@ the subclasses for predicates o f propositional attitude are analogous to those of *e speech acts, the M d e d ent8i-ts of pmpositiondl attitude m c d t e s bedane entaihmts of the caqmund sentence underthe U~S , ratherthan\\mdeerthe speaker's d a i m s as i n the speech act case. For instance, ( 2 5 ) entails ( 26 ) , 25. John thought that Fred prevented Mary frwn lea*.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF12": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "the analysis of .the projecticpl problem far presuppositions and ent-ts.4. Outline of the solutions in t h e systemThe purpose of this section is to give an overall view of t h e system and an outline of the methods used to compute presupposition and entailment.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF13": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "mre complete, detailed description of the computational methods and the system see Weischedel (1976). Section 4.1 presents a block diagmm of the system; 4.2 briefly outlines the cconputation for a e various examples of sections 2 and 3; section 4.3 attempts to state some o f the limitations of the system, including the m r y and t h e requkmn^ts.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF14": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "block diagram of the system appears i n F i v 4.1. All arrows represent data flaw. A sentence S in English is input to the system. The parser is mitten as an augmented tMnsition network graph (Am). (Woods (1970 specifies the A!I' N as a formal W e 1 and as a programnhg language. ) hbile parsing, the PlTN refers to the lexicon for specific infopmation for each wrd of t h e sentence S. Laical information is of three types: syntactic informtion, informtion for generating the serrtlntic representation or translrtion , and information for making lexical inferences --presuppositions and entailments. The organization of the lexicon for computing lexicalinferences ( p s u p p s i t i o n s and entailments)is a novel aspect of the system.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF15": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "the definition of presuppositims and e n t a t s , it is clear that the system heeds a set of functions for mnipdating or trhnsfcaming trees. These appear as a sepamte block inFigure 4.1. The parser ' U s them while parsing; this is represented in the diagram as input I and value8 1' of fimctions. These funeths are written i n LISP.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF16": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "n g the lexical information, the r e l a t i a d or syntactic strzcture of the sentence, and the tree -bansfomtion functions, the parser generates the semantic representatio~ (translation) t of -the sentence and a set of presuppositions P and entailments E of the sentence.Since each presupposition P and entailment E is in the logical notation of the semantic representations of sentences, a small tmnsformational cutput component has been included t o give the presuppositions and entailments as output in English. These appear as P' and E' ; in Figure 4.1. The transformatima output; cqnponent iS also wri Ren in LISP. This output component is very small in scope and is not a major component of the work repofled hem. 4 . 2 Outline o f solution Al sketch of the computation of presupposition and e n t a i b m t is presented here ; details of computation are presented in Weischedel (1976 ) . There are four fundamental phenomena exhibited i n secticms 2 and 3 : presuppositions; f h m syntactic mnstructs, presuppositions fram particular words (lexical entries), entailments from lexical entries, and the projection phencunena.In d e r to compute presuppositions frwn syntactic constructs, two principles are inportant; detecting the syntactic construction and dealing with anibiguity. Syntactic constructs are syntactiddlly m k e d in the sentence. Thus, the pars& may be constructed such that thwe is a parse generated when those syntactic markings e present. Tn the ATN, one may m n s m c t the graphs representing the gmmmr such that there is a particular path which is traversed if and only if the syntactic ccnstruct is present.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF17": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "phnase, follcrwed by a relative clause. The path(s ) in the g~p h might be as below* Associated w i t h this path would be a t r i v i a l -tree transformation which re-tums the semantic representation of the relative clause as a presupposition, The second principle deals with ambiguity. Even though we have structured the gmphs in the way above, the same surface form may arise from t w o different syntactic constructs, one having a presupposition and the other not. In such a case, our s y s t m (and in fact any parser should be able to give semantic representations f o r both parses; with one paz-se our system yields a presupposition, w i t h t h e otparse our system would not have the presupposition. It is the role of gens semantic and -tic ccmponents to distinguish which semantic representation is intended i n the context. In fact, the difference i n t h e presuppositions with the differing parses is one criterion which general semantic and --tic canponents could use to resolve the anibiguity.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF18": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "generating presuppositians of words (lexical entries) , the chiefpmblems are how to encode the tree tmnsformatiar in the lexicm ( d i c t i o~x y ) -29and when to apply it duping parsing. In general a tlP6 tmnsfmtioll waiLd have a l e f t hand side which is the pattern to be mtched if the transformation is to apply and a right hand side giving the tMnsformed s w c t u r e . The mason we can encode the left hand side in ?As gmmmr is simple. A l l of t h e examples in t h e litemture deaiing with presuppositions fmn lexical entries have in c o m n the fact t h a t the existence of the p~supposition depends only upon the syntactic e n v i r 0 m -t of the w o r d and the word itself. Hence, we can structure the g~p h of the grammar in a way that the paths correspond to the necessary syntactic envirorunents. Upon encountering a word of the appmpriate syntactic category in such a syntactic e n v i r o m t , the system l m k s i n the lexicon under that w o r d for the (possibly empty) set of right hand sides of tree tmnsfomtions. The way of writing the right hand sides assurnes that the parser k t~v e r s i n g a path undoes the syntactic construct encoded i n that path, and assigns the components of the smmtic representation according to their logical role in the sentence rather than their syntactic mle. (This is not a new idea, but rather has been used in several systems pre-dating ours, As an example, the semantic representation of llMaryl' i n the following three sentences muld be assigned to the s a m register while parsing, \"John gave Mary a ball\", \"Mary was given a ball by Johnn, and '?A b a l l was given to Mary by John\". Thus, we can assume a convention for nanf5-g r e g i s t e r s and assigning components of the sexlantic representation to them, independent of the syntactic e n v i r o m t . To encode the right hand side of the tree transformation, we we a list whose first e l m t i s the .tree structure ~5 t h constants as literal a m and p i t i c n s of variables as plus cigns. The -30rerraini?lg elements of the list s p e c i e the registers to fill i n the variable psi-tions . This, then, is how we i n t e p t e the tree trensformations for presuppositions into the parse. The lexical examples fm entaLh=nt also must employ tree tmnsfomtions but are complicated by the five different classes of predicates yielding entailments and their dependence on whether m e sentence is negated or nat. A further canplicatim was i l l u s t~t e d in section 3, for a chain of entailmnts must be set up. For mtailments, we encode the left hand side and right hand side i n the same way as the lexical examples of presuppositions. However, for entailments, for each ri&t hand s i d e we also encode -three other pieces of information. They are the pre-condition of whether negation must be present (or absent), whether t h e entailed pmposition is negative or not, and whether the entailed propositional. corresponds to the left sub-tree crr right sub-tree. A t each sentential level, we verify that the left hand s i d e of the m e t r w s f o m t i o n is present. If it i s , we make the transformation indicated i n the lexicon and save the resulting proposition along with the otheE three pieces of informtion m t i o n e d above associated with it. W e save this i n a binary tree, one level of tree sentential level. It is a binary tree since a l l predicates taking embedded sentences seem t o permit only one or two of its arguments t o be anbedded sentences. Upon hitting the period (or question mark), a l l of the negation information is pmsent so that we m y simply traverse the tree fraan the mot, doing a compx?ison at each level to verifv that the mditions for negation being present (absent) are met. This caapletes an outline or amputation of at-ts. Next w e outline a solution to the projection problem, The s t r u c~ mlution to the projection plpblem w e d in section 3 has simple computatiorpl r e q u b a m t s . We have stxucttired the gmphs such that mcucsion OCCUPS for each embedded sentence. A t each sententh1 lewl, the p p h returns as a value a list of at least four elements: the semvltic representation of the sentence at this level, a list of presuppositions of t h i s sentence and any embedded i n it, a tree as described above for computing entailment at this and lower levels, as well as a list of semantic representations of noun phrases encountered at this U P lawer levels.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF19": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "For holes, nothing is changed. For speech act predicates and of propositioMll attitude, the pxsuppositims of enbedded sentences and ppositions in the tree for entailments are enbedded under a special semantic primitive C CLAIM for speech acts, BEIlEVF, for verbs of propositional attitude). Ehibedding under these primitives places the presuppositions and entaibents in the world of the actor's claims or beliefs.For connectives, the ccmputation is just as described i n section 3. Again, an embedding is involved, this time under a semantic primitive IF-DEN to place the propositions in the mrld of the context created by the left sentence of -l%e connective.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF20": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "For instance, external negation affects t h e c~mputation of presupposition, as does syntactic envbmmmt. In general, the tense and time o f presuppositions or entailments oannot be cmputed simply by filling slots in the semantic representation of the inference w i t h registws containing pieces of semantic representation of the input eentence; T h e m , a ~~z a t i o n of the BUILD function of an ATN is needed. M e r , the cmputationd. means to accum't: for the effect of negation on entailments of errbedded sentences, for aibedded entaihents m t e d tm presuppositions, and for the effect of opague and tmnsparent mference on presupposition are pmsented in Weischedel ( 1976 ) .", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF21": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "a fourth class, we mention the syntactic constructions allowable as input to the system. We have not allwed several complex syntactic problem a& are essentially independent of the pru>bf,ems of ccmputing ~p p o s i t i o n s and r ntailmwts, such as oonjunath reduction, c2cap1ex anapharic reference, ar prepositional phrases on ram phrases. (A resursive transiton network is given ir Weischedel (19761, indicating exactly what syntactic constructions are implemented. The n * of English quantifiers in the system is smaJ.1. Also the dietionmy is of very modest size (approximately 120 stem w r d s ) . However, our ledcon is.pattmed after the lexicon of the linguistic s t r i n g parser,. which includes 10,000 wcods. Therefore, we have avoided the p i t f a l l of gmmatical ad hocness. (The Linguistic s~i n g parser is described i n Eiage~ (1973). We have not included n o d a l tenses or svbjunctive mod. This is because the effect of mDdals and the subjwtive 0 on presupposition and entailment has m t been fully mrked out yet. A limited solution for mcrdals and subjunctives has been wozked out f a a micro-world of tictaotoe in Joshi and Weischedel (19 75 ) . 4.3.2 Tihitations d i f f i c u l t to remove W e have dealt with specific time elements f w presupposition and entailment i n a very limited way. Time has been explicitly dealt with only for -the aspectual verbs; however, time is implicitly handled in detail for all presuppositions and e n t a i h m t s thmugh t q e (see Weischedel 1976)). We have not included time otherwise, because we feel that .the same solution presented far assigning tenses to pesuppositim and e n t a t m y be adapted for explicit the elemmts. A rime serious difficulty would arise if pre,suppositicns or entailmjmts were discowred whiceh depend on different information than any considered up until this time. For instance, the occurrence of presuppositions thus far di$mvered has depended only on syntactic constructions, lexical entries, and fhe four classes of enbedding predicates (holes, comectives , speedh acts, and verbs of pr'spositional attitute). The existence of en-tailmenfs t?ius r'ar encountered has depended only on negation, syntactic constructions, lexical entries, and the four classes of -ding predicates. It i s conceivable that presuppositions and entailments w i l l be discovered which depend on other entities; for instance, presuppositions ar en l x i b e n t s of sorne predicate might be fourid to depend on the tense of the predicate. If such hanples are found, different means qf wit* lexical", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF22": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "mncenmte on such inferences. A l l of We projects seek scme caqutational means as an alternative to farmdl deductive pmcedures because those tend to cambinatorial explosion. That presupposition and entailment are inferences is obvious. H o w v~r ;", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF23": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "example, the previous text might indicate that Jimt s office is i n the hall. general, ccwnon nouns do not seem t~ offer many examples of presupposition and entailment. bxn the example, it is clear that presupposition and entailment are s t r i c t l y a subclass of inferences. Presupposition and entailment are a subclass of inferences distinguished i n several ways: F i r s t , presuplpsiticm and entailment are reliable infmces, mmep than being d y amjectures. ~p o e i t i c o l s are true whether the sentence is t r u e 011 fabe. Entaihmts AUgt be true f.f the sentence is true. Se@, presupwsition and entailment are W m c e s that seem to be tied to the structure o f language, for they m i s e frcm syntactic structure and fkun d e f i n i t i a d s t r u c m of individual words.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "FIGREF24": { |
| "num": null, |
| "text": "mein goal of this work is its de~~>nstmticm of a met-fca. w+ting the lexicon and parser for the computaticm of presupposition and entai-t, and its exhibition of the procedures and data structures necessary t o do this. Presupposition and entailment camprise a special class of inferences, distinguished in m e ways. F i r s t , they both may be canputed strmc-y (by 'bree ~s f o m a t i o n s ) , indepaWt of context not inherent in the s t m c t u m . Second, altho* inferences in general are conjecturgl, presupposition and entailment may be reliably asserted; entailments are true if the sentence entailing them is true; presuppositions are true whether the sentence presupposing them is true or fdLse. Ihird, since presupposition and entailment are tied to the definitiondl and syntactic structure o? the language, they do not spam themselves nor lead to a chain reactLon explosion, as other S m c e s may. W e suggest two areas of future research. One is t o derive a means of accounting for presuppositions arising from syntactic constructs, in a way consistent w i t h using semantic p~imitives t o account for lexical examples of presupposition and entailment. A second area is suggested by the interaction of syntax and semantics evident i n presuppositions arising from syntactic constrw-ts. A study of phenomena that c u t across the boundaries of syntax, semantics, and pragnatics and a ccmputational mdel incorporating them could prove very fruitful to our understanding of n a W languages. Indluded here is the output for seveml exemplary sentences. 'The semantic representations m a function and argwmt notaticpl developed by Harris (1970) snd M i e d by Keenan (1972). As i n logic, variables are bound otitsi.de of the foxmula i n which they are used, Any semantic primitives m y h i % beusad, a h l , g aS they \u20ac?JIlP100y the f u n c t b -ZWgWeIlt S y I l t a~. Btd.3.8 about the semantic mpresenticxm m y be found i n Weischedel (1975). We new describe the format of the output. The first item is the sentence typed in. N o t e that /, mans carma and / . means period, -we of LISP delilniters. The searantic r e p~s e n t a t i o n o f the inplt sentence itself is printed next, under the heading f f -C RFPRESENPATIOWt. Presuppositions not related to t h e existence of referents of noun phrases are p r i n t e d under the 1 -1 r'NON-NP REWPFQSITIONSfl. Presuppositions about existence of referents of noun phrases are winted .under the label l t N P -m T E D F%ESUPPOSITIONSF1. The set of entailments follows the 'labeJ, ~1ENTA7:mS\". If for any of these sets, the set is empty, then only the Label is printed. For the two sets of presuppositions and the set of entailments, the semantic pepresentation of the set of entailments in Keenan's notation is printed first, then the English -phrase genemted by the output component. Tn some cases t h e tense of a presupposition is not loxxun. In sufh instances, the output component prints the stem verb followed by the ~p1b1 r ' , m m \" . Examples of presuppositions frcm syntactic constructs appear in examples 1 and 2 ; the clef't construction gives a presupposition in 1; the definite noun phrase in 2 gives a presupposition. Presuppusith frrrm l & & entries appear in 3 and 4. lTOnly\" in 3 has a preqpmition; \"fril\" in 4 also has a presupposition. Capa~ing 4 and 5 demns-tM.te8 the canputation of a chain of entailments. S e -examples o f the projecticn problem have been included. Ekaples of predicates which are holes appear in 4 and 5. The effect of speech acts appears in 6. The effect of \"if . . . then1' (interpreted as mterial. implication) is evident i n 7 and 8. The terminal sessions follow. IT IS DR SMITH WHO TEACHES CIS591 /, I ADMIRE BEGAN TO ASSIGN THE PROJECTS /. (COLLECTIVE PROJECT /, X B 0 1 0 ) (NUMBER X0018 TWO-OR-MORE) ) /, /, X0088) ( (DRSSMITH /, X0047) (IN-THE-PAST (ATTEMPT (NOT THE CASE THAT DR SMITH FAILED TO CHALLENGE JOHN . LEFT /, THEN MARY APPRECIATED THAT HE LEFT /.", |
| "type_str": "figure", |
| "uris": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF0": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "argues that even if N S T is true, Mary. Though S entails S ' ,", |
| "num": null, |
| "html": null, |
| "content": "<table/>" |
| }, |
| "TABREF1": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "", |
| "num": null, |
| "html": null, |
| "content": "<table/>" |
| }, |
| "TABREF2": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "All of the following eramples of presuppositions arise from the lexical entries for particular words. Again, the (b) sentence in each example is presupposed by the (a) sentence.The (very large) class of factive predicates prnvi.de clear examples of presuppositions, (seeKipamky and Kiparsky (1970) .", |
| "num": null, |
| "html": null, |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>, using the syntactic construct of the nonrestrictive relative</td></tr><tr><td>clause adda the semantic infomatian that not only i s (5b) asserted true,</td></tr><tr><td>but also that (5b) m u s t be 2.1.2 Lexical entry 6. a. I regret Example (6) above demonstrates t h a t another function of presuppositim Presuppositions play an important part in t h e meaning P i L l n w x e (them with ''the fact t h a t S. '' in language is informing t h a t the presupposition should be c o n s i d e d true.</td></tr></table>" |
| }, |
| "TABREF3": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "", |
| "num": null, |
| "html": null, |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>It should be pointed out t h a t presuppositions arising f r o m lexical items have been studied primwily f o r verbs and verb-like elements such as adverbs. For instance, presuppositions have not, in general, beM associated w i t h c m n nouns. Fillmore (1971'!alsov, t t t m~</td></tr></table>" |
| }, |
| "TABREF4": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "", |
| "num": null, |
| "html": null, |
| "content": "<table/>" |
| }, |
| "TABREF6": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "Mary thinks Jack regxemed t h a t J o h left.", |
| "num": null, |
| "html": null, |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>-20.1</td></tr><tr><td>6 .</td></tr><tr><td>I t -\"</td></tr></table>" |
| }, |
| "TABREF7": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "However, there is another phenanenon , that of enibedded entailments beaming pesuppositions of", |
| "num": null, |
| "html": null, |
| "content": "<table><tr><td>canpound sentences.</td></tr></table>" |
| }, |
| "TABREF11": { |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "text": "fran the semantics of particular wads. Wher, syntactic", |
| "num": null, |
| "html": null, |
| "content": "<table><tr><td colspan=\"2\">s.tryctwe aan inteMct w i t h the entailments of words, as i n the follaJing</td></tr><tr><td>~l</td><td>e</td></tr></table>" |
| } |
| } |
| } |
| } |
