| { |
| "paper_id": "W87-0107", |
| "header": { |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T06:44:42.052538Z" |
| }, |
| "title": "D e p a rtm e n t o f C o m p u te r and In form a tion S cien ce L in k \u00f6p in g u n iv ersity S-581 83 L IN K \u00d6 P IN G", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "S", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "W E D E N", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": {}, |
| "email": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": "", |
| "venue": null, |
| "identifiers": {}, |
| "abstract": "", |
| "pdf_parse": { |
| "paper_id": "W87-0107", |
| "_pdf_hash": "", |
| "abstract": [], |
| "body_text": [ |
| { |
| "text": "T w o m od els fo r sem a n tic in terp re ta tio n th at are cu rren tly bein g d e v e lo p e d are con strzu n t-ba sed m od els (e.g. F en sta d et al. 1985, H alvorsen 1987) F irst, I w a n t to in v estig a te and d e m o n stra te th e p ossibilities o f in tegra tin g s y n ta ctic, se m a n tic 3nd p ra g m a tic k n ow led g e in th e in te rp re ta tio n p rocess w hile still h avin g th at k n o w led g e in sep a ra te m od u les. S e co n d , I w a n t to in v estiga te the possibilities o f trea tin g d ia log u e p h e n o m e n a su ch as in d e x ica lity and co h e re n ce w ith in such a system .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 138, |
| "end": 178, |
| "text": "F en sta d et al. 1985, H alvorsen 1987)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": "1." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "T h e resu lts w ill b e u sed in th e d esign o f a larger and m ore general system , LIN LIN (th e L in k \u00f6p in g N a tu tra l L an gu age In terf2ice; see A h re n b e rg et al., 1986; A h ren berg 1987).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": "1." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A s a p p lica tio n I h a v e ch ose n a sim ple d ra w in g sy ste m w h ere the h u m an pairtner can d ra w , m a n ip u la te and ask q u estion s a b o u t geom e trica l figures o n a screen. T h e reason fo r th is ch o ice is th a t a visib le d o m a in m akes it q u ite o b v io u s w h eth er the system is in te rp re tin g in p u ts co rre ctly o r n ot.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": "1." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "T h e sy s te m is still u n d er co n s tr u c tio n . T h e m o rp h o lo g ica l 2ind sy n ta ctic co m p o n e n ts are in o p e ra tio n w h ile th e sem a n tic co m p o n e n ts are still to be in tegra ted in the system and th e p ra g m a tic c o m p o n e n ts d o n o t yet exist. In this p ap er I th erefore co n ce n tra te o n th e p r o b le m o f exp ressin g and d istrib u tin g sem a n tic constradnts, i.e. the rules th at exp ress th e co n tr ib u tio n s o f lexica l and gram m aticeJ elem en ts to th e in te rp re ta tio n o f the exp ression s o f w h ich th ey are part. F irst, I give a sh ort o v erview o f the s y s te m 's a rch ite ctu re .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": "1." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A system for object-oriented dialog in Swedish Lars Ahrenberg Proceedings of NODALIDA 1987, pages 96-106 -97 -", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Introduction", |
| "sec_num": "1." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "T h e in tera ction w ith F A L IN is restricted to sim ple sequ en ces o f the kind th a t can be expressed by finite a u tom a ta . T h e basic sequences are, w ith the u se r's m oves first:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System overview", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Q u e s tio n /A n s w e r , In s tru c tio n /E x e cu tio n and A s s e r tio n /A c c e p ta n c e . T h e system m ay also ask question s o f the user in the p rocess o f in terp reta tion and in fo rm h im /h e r o f p rob lem s w ith the inp u t.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System overview", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "T h e system w ill alw ays try to classify an inpu t in term s o f th e illo cu tio n a ry ca tegories th at are allow ed. T h is cla ssifica tion to a large e x te n t d eterm in es w h a t a ction s the system w ill execu te and w h a t in form ation it w ill present to the user.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System overview", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "T h e smalyzer aind the k n ow led ge bases th at it heis access to are illu strated in figure 1.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System overview", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "T h e m orph d iction a ry con sists o f a stem d ictio n a ry and a set o f a ffix d iction a ries, all o f th em co m p iled in to letter trees. A ll entries are in their su rface fo rm (cf. K arlsson , 1986 ). F ixed expression s com p risin g m ore than on e grap h ical w o r d su ch as t dag G iven a strin g su ch aa cirklarna (th e circles) the d ictio n a ry search w ill result in the stru ctu re ( l a ) . T h e first elem en t o f this stru ctu re, N , indicates sy n ta ctic ca te g o ry and the s e con d elem en t, ICirkel, identifies a lexem e set. T h e co n te n t o f the lexem e set m ay be ( l b ) w h ere ea ch d ifferen t item identifies a n od e in th e n etw ork . A t th a t n ode In the in terp re ta tion p rocess an input sen ten ce is assigned three structures: a con stitu e n t stru ctu re (c-stru ctu r e ), a fu n ction a l stru ctu re (f-stru ctu re) and a sem antic 98 Proceedings of NODALIDA 1987 A n o b je c t in sta n ce has a unique internal n am e and a d e scrip tio n . A n illustration is given in (3 ).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 188, |
| "end": 209, |
| "text": "(cf. K arlsson , 1986", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System overview", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(3) C ircle29 : A n o th e r q u estion is w h a t sy n ta ctic con stitu en ts sh ou ld be con sidered relevan t for the ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System overview", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "( ( T Y P E (C E N T R E (R A D IU S (C O L O U R < k C ir c le # l) P o in t l3 ) 6) B la ck ) (R E S U L T -O F D ra w 4 )) T h", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "System overview", |
| "sec_num": "2." |
| } |
| ], |
| "back_matter": [ |
| { |
| "text": "T h is paper rep orts w ork in progress o f the p r o je c t \" A n alysis 2uid G e n e ra tio n o f N atural L anguage T e x ts \" fin a n ced b y the N ation al Sw edish B o a rd fo r T e ch n ich a l ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Acknowledgements", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "bib_entries": {}, |
| "ref_entries": { |
| "FIGREF0": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "and m odels e m p lo y in g o b je c t-o r ie n te d k n o w led g e rep resen ta tion form a lism s such as fram e system s o r se m a n tic n etw ork s (e.g. B o b r o w t W e b b e r , 1980; S on d h eim er et ad. 1984, H irst 1 98 7). T h is p a p er d escrib es a diaJogue sy ste m for Sw edish in w h ich I w ish to co m b in e featu res o f b o th m o d e b . A large p art o f its lin gu istic k n ow led ge, in clu d in g sem an tic and p ra g m a tic k n o w led g e, is exp ressed 33 con stra in ts. T h e sem a n tic o b je c ts a ssociated w ith lin gu istic exp ression s in th e in te rp re ta tio n p rocess 3 ie elem en ts o f a sem an tic n etw o rk . M o r e o v e r , c o n s tr 2unts and o b je c t d escrip tion s p la y a m a jo r role also in the tre a tm e n t o f c o n te x t. T h e sy ste m , ca lle d F A L IN , is b ein g d e v e lo p e d w ith the fo llo w in g pu rp oses in m in d:", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF1": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "re 1: A n ov erview o f F A L IN 's analyzer. a y ) or hur m \u00e5nga (h o w m a n y) are inclu d ed in the stem d ictio n a ry . T h e m orph d ictio n a ry can be search ed in d ifferen t m od es, e.g. one m ay ch oose to look for only one analysis o f a given strin g, or all o f th em , or one m ay inclu de or exclu d e the possibility o f a nalyzin g a w ord aa a co m p o u n d . A m orp h in the d ictio n a ry is associated w ith a set o f m orph em es. W ith each m orp h em e there are associated a co n tin u a tio n class o f su ffix lexicon s and, op tio n a lly , a flag guidin g the co n tin u ed search. A m orp h em e is either a stem or an affix. A stem m orp h em e carries in form a tion a b o u t syntewrtic ca te g o ry , m o rp h o s y n ta ctic features and m ean in g. T h e m ean in gs o f a stem m orp h em e are co lle cte d in a lex em e set, where a lexem e iden tifies a un iqu e sem a n tic o b je c t as value o f a sem an tic a ttribu te. B asically, there is on e lexem e fo r ea ch sense o f the m orp h em e. A n afHx m orp h em e is associated w ith m o r p h o s y n ta ctic featu res and, p o ssib ly , in form a tion a b o u t ca teg ory changes that it ind u ces.", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF2": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "furth er in form a tion a b ou t this sense o f the m orp h em e ca n b e fo u n d . F or instan ce, (^C i r c le # ! m a y represen t th e geom etrica l co n c e p t o f a circle w hereas <k C ircle#2 m ay represen t the sense o f \" stu d y circle \" . Y P E i z C i r c l e # ! ) ( T Y P E i i C i r c l e # 2 ) ) T h e L e x ic a l-F u n ctio n a l G ram m ar is a p h rase-stru ctu re gram m ar w ith ann otated fu n ction a l sch em a ta in th e style o f Kaplan<S^Bresnan (1 9 8 2 ). It d eviates in several resp ects fro m th e cu rren t th eory smd p ra ctice o f L F G , h ow ever. T h ere are no sem antic form s and n o a ttrib u te P R E D . Instead o f P R E D an a ttrib u te L E X is used. T h e value o f L E X is a lexem e set. A n im p orta n t d ifferen ce b etw een L E X and P R E D is th at L E X is n o t o b lig a to ry . C on seq u e n tly p rop erties such as coh eren ce and com pleten ess o f fu n ction a l stru ctu res are n ot d eterm in ed b y fu n ction a l in form a tion , bu t are indu ced fro m sem a n tic co n stra in ts a ssociated w ith o b je c t ty p e d efin ition s.", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF3": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "(s-stru ctu re ). T h e c-stru ctu re is a p hrase-stru cture tree w hereas the other tw o stru ctu ru s are d escrip tor stru ctu res en cod in g in form a tion in term s o f a ttribu tes and V2dues. T h e f-stru ctu re en cod es gram m atical in form a tion , in p 2Lrticular in form ation a bou t gram m atical relations and m o rp h o sy n ta ctic features. T h e s-stru ctu re en codes in form ation a b ou t the inp u t sen ten ce regarded as a m essage. T h u s , it is n o t a sem an tic stru ctu re in a strict sense, since it represents a co n te x tu a lly adeq u ate in te rp re ta tio n o f the inpu t and co n te x tu a l feu:tors are used in its co n stru ctio n . P a rtia l stru ctu res for sentence (2) are sh ow n in figures 2a-2c.(2) R ita en cirkel i \u00f6vre h \u00f6gra h \u00f6rn et.(D ra w a circle in the u pp er right corn er.) A fu n ctio n a l stru ctu re.", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF4": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "A sem a n tic stru ctu re. w e ll-fo rm e d th e three stru ctu res m u st be in a relation o f p ro p er co rresp o n d en ce.T h e con stra in ts on p rop er corresp on d en ces betw een c-stru ctu re and f-stru ctu re are stated in the lex ica l-fu n ction a l gr2unm ar w hereas the con strain ts on propercorresp on d en ces betw een f-stru ctu re aind s-stru ctu re are in clu d ed in the defin ition s o f in d ivid u al o b je c t ty p e s and a ttribu tes. A ls o fu n ctio n a l attribu tes are assigned such con st radnts. I refer to these latter rules colle ctiv e ly as S y n t2u :tic/S e m a n tic corre sp on d en ces, o r S y n /S e m -c o rr e sp o n d e n c e s for sh ort. T h e d om a in k n ow led ge o f the system is e n co d e d in a sem an tic n etw ork w ith d ata stru ctu res rep resen tin g o b je c t typ es, o b je c t instan ces and a ttribu tes. T h e o b je c t types represent co n c e p ts su ch as \" circle \" , \" lin e\" and \" in stru ction \" and carry in form ation a b ou t su p ertyp es and su b ty p e s, p a rt-w h o le relation sh ips and \" p ro to ty p e s \" . A p r o to ty p e expresses con stra in ts on the values o f a ttribu tes th at a ie allow ed for instan ces o f the ty p e. A s said a b o v e th ey also carry lin gu istic in form ation sp ecific to the ty p e. F or in sta n ce, the o b je c t ty p e for \" circle\" w ill con ta in the in form a tion th at it is in clu d ed in th e lexem e set ICirkel. T h e o b je c t ty p e for \" in stru ctio n \" w ill con ta in the in form a tion th a t an in stru ction can be co n stitu te d b y m eans o f an im perative utterem ce. S im ilarly, a ttrib u tes representing sem an tic roles con ta in in form ation a b ou t h o w th ey are exp ressed lin gu istica lly, w h eth er b y lexem es or gram m atica l relations.", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF5": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "e d iscou rse d om a in b asically con sists o f all the o b je cts th at exist, i.e. are part o f the n etw ork at any given stage in the discou rse. H ow ever, w ith o u t im posin g som e kind o f s tra tifica tion on the d iscou rse d o m 2dn it w ill n ot b e p ossible to handle anaphoric or im p licit reference. T h e re h ave been va riou s su ggestions h ow this sh ould be done (e.g. G rosz, 1977; A lsh a w i, 1987). T h e first m e th o d th at w ill be exp lored in this system is to in tro d u ce an o b je c t rep resen tin g the s y s te m 's view o f \" a dialogu e state\" at any given m o m e n t. T h e d escrip tion o f this o b je c t, w h ich w ill com p rise co n te x t factors such as speaker, a ddressee, cu rren t to p ics, cu rren t visible o b je cts etc, w ill then be u pd a ted for each n ew u tteran ce. T h e p ro cesso r con sists o f a ch a rt parser com m u n ica tin g w ith m od u les th a t classify d e scrip tion s and d eterm in e their referents, if any. T h e ch art parser presen tly w orks in a b o tto m -u p m od e b u ild in g c-stru ctu re and f-stru ctu re in paredlel. T h u s, the co n sisten cy o f fu n ction a l in form a tion is ch eck ed w h en ever a task is e xecu ted . T h e 100 Proceedings of NODALIDA 1987 -101parser has certain d eterm in istic traits, w h ich I will n ot d escribe here, b u t it w ill adways find an analysis if there is one. T h e role o f the classifyin g co m p o n e n t is to determ in e an a p p rop ria te o b je c t typ e for an s-structu re con stitu en t. S om etim es a T Y P E -d e s c r ip to r can be d e term in ed easily from the lexical in form ation , b u t there are several co m p lica tio n s, such as d isa m b igu a tion and the han dlin g o f headless phrases. A general requ irem en t is th a t, if a lexem e set heis been in d ica ted , the value o f T Y P E m ust be an elem en t o f th a t set. O th e r d escrip tors o f the sem an tic stru ctu re are required to be co m p a tib le w ith the TY P E J-descriptor a ccord in g to its p ro to ty p e . T h e task o f the referent id en tifica tion co m p o n e n t is to d eterm in e referents o f the d escription fou n d in an s-stru ctu re con stitu en t. N ot all s-stru ctu re co n stitu e n ts will refer to an aJready existin g in d ivid u al, o f cou rse. F or these there is still a need to determ ine a m od e o f a p p lica tion o f the d e scrip tio n , i.e. the co n d itio n s u n der w h ich a referent w ill exist. T h e sem antic stru ctu re eLSSOciated w ith a co n stitu e n t w ill n orm a lly n o t b e co n s tru cte d until the con stitu en t is ju d g e d sy n ta ctica lly co m p le te b y the parser, i.e. w h en an in a ctive edge is p rop osed for in tro d u ctio n in to the ch a rt. T h u s , a co n stitu e n t su ch as en svart fr\u00e5ga (a black q u estion ) m ay b e rejected b y the analyzer on th e grou nd s th at d escrip tion s o f question s ca n n ot con ta in d e scrip tors refering to co lo u r. Sim ilarly, sen ten ces such as (4) and (5) w ill be d isa m b igu a ted w hen sem an tic con strain ts are taken in to a cco u n t. F or instan ce, an a ctive edge span n in g the w o rd s fly tta cirkeln o f (5) and lo ok in g for a loca tiv e a dverbial can co m b in e sy n ta ctica lly w ith an in active edge spa n n in g the w ords i h orn et, b u t the p ro p o se d edge w ill be re je cte d on sem an tic grou nds, sin ce th e lo ca tio n expressed b y the latter w ord s w o n 't b e o f the a pp rop riate typ e for a m o v e m e n t a ction . (4) R ita cirk eln i h \u00f6rn et. (D ra w th e circle in the corn er.) (5) F ly tta cirkeln i h \u00f6rn et. (M o v e th e circle in the corn er.)", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF6": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "h e relation b etw een s y n ta ctic stru ctu re and sem an tic stru ctu re is p erceived in different w a ys b y differen t theories. O ften som e form o f an isom orp h ism h yp oth esis is a d op ted . In form a l sem an tics and oth er sch ools auiopting a \" ru le -to -ru le \" -p rin cip le the corresp on d en ce is a d eriva tion a l corresp on d en ce, n ot a stru ctu ral on e. T h is app roach has also been used in natural language p rocessors, e.g. in the R o se tta p ro je c t (A p p e lo 101 Proceedings ofNODALIDA 1987NODALIDA -102et al. 1987. O th er n atural language p rocessors rely im p licitly or exp licitly on stru ctu ra l iso m orp h y b etw een s y n ta ctic and sem an tic stru ctu res (e.g.L ytinen, 1987; D anieli et al., 1987). W h ile I b elieve that sim ple o n e -to -o n e relations betw een syn ta ctic and sem an tic elem en ts are su fficien t to o handle sim ple language fragm en ts, I also feel th a t there are lim its to such a m e th o d o lo g y . T h ere are s y n t2Lctic con stitu en ts that co rresp on d to n o sem a n tic o b je c t (e.g. form a l su b jects and o b je c ts ), there are those th at co rresp on d to m ore than on e sem an tic o b je c t (e.g. locu tio n a ry and illocu tion ary co n te n ts) and there are ca ses w here several sy n ta ctic con stitu en ts relate to one and the sam e sem a n tic o b je c t (e.g. id iom s, a d je ctiv a l a ttrib u te s). Such stru ctu ra l m od ification s are easily exp ressed b y d escrip to r sch em a ta. M o re o v e r, semauitic sch em a ta can be associated w ith s y n ta ctic o b je c ts and, in th e oth e r d ire ctio n , fu n ctio n a l sch em ata can be associated w ith sem a n tic o b je cts . A lso , d e scrip to r sch em a ta can be aissociated w ith co n te x tu a l fax:tors in very m u ch the sam e w ay as th ey are associated w ith syn ta ctic o b je cts .", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF7": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "co r resp on d e n ce rules. H alvorsen (1983) defines the corre sp o n d e n ce s in term s o ftran sla tion rules w h ich a ssociate fu n ction a l stru ctu res w ith sem an tic stru ctu res. T h e sem an tic stru ctu res h ave q uite a restricted fo rm , h ow ever, (equ ivalen t to form u las o f illo cu tion a ry lo g ic ) and em p lo y on ly a lim ited n u m ber o f a ttribu tes. H alvorsen (1 9 8 7 ), on th e oth er hand, states the corre sp o n d e n ce s already at c-stru ctu re level. T h e co rresp on d en ces b etw een functionaJ and sem an tic stru ctu res are ca p tu red by m eans o f a p r o je c tio n o p e ra to r, cr. T h e p ro je ctio n o p e ra to r takes fu n ction a l structures as argu m en ts and return s the corre sp o n d in g sem an tic stru ctu re. A sch em a associating the su b je c t co n s titu e n t w ith the first a rgu m en t o f a verb is w ritten as in (6 ).(6){{a T) A R G l ) = ( ct( t S U B J )) S chem as o f this kin d are a tta ch ed b o th to lexical entries and to rules in the graunmar.A sch em a su ch as (6 ) w o u ld b e a tta ch e d to every verbad stem in the language that allow s this co rre s p o n d e n ce , i.e. the great m a jo rity o f verbs. T h e lexical en try for the verb a l stem kick is specified as fo llow s {ibid. p. 9 ):(7) KICK V S-ED {{a T) REL) = KICK (T PRED) = ' K I C K ' {{a t) ARGl) = ((t(t SUBJ)) {{a T) ARG2) = (ct(t OBJ))T h e re are som e d isa d va n ta g es w ith this m e th o d , h ow ever. F irst, corresp on d en ces o f the ty p e in (6 ) are n ot stated as rules, in p articu la r n ot as rules a b o u t su b jects and first a rgu m en ts, b u t as sp ecific in form ation a b ou t in d ivid u al w o rd s, and, since there are m a n y adternative corresp on d e n ce s, lexical entries ten d to be o verloa d ed with in form a tion . T h is is actu ally a generzd p ro b le m w ith le x ica l-fu n ction a l gram m ars where 102 Proceedings of NODALIDA 1987-103lex ic2J entries are fully sp ecified . S econ d , the role o f the fu n ction a l p red ica te ' K I C K ' is unclear. If in form ation a b ou t p red icate-a rgu m en t stru ctu re is m o v e d fro m fu n ction a l stru ctu re to sem an tic stru ctu re, as H alvorsen suggests it sh ou ld , it seem s to be o f very little significance. In F A L IN corresp on d en ces o f th e ty p e (6 ), alth ou gh in a sUghtly differen t fo rm , are associated d irectly w ith the attribu tes SU BJ and A R G l as elem en ts o f the n etw ork . T h rou g h inh eritan ce th ey b e com e available to any relation th a t a cce p t A R G l (or one o f its su ba ttribu tes) sls an attribu te. Sem an tic a ttribu tes such as A R G l and A R G 2 can b e regarded as a b stra ct sem an tic roles (cf. W ach tel 1987). R oles such as b ein g the agent o f an act o f d ra w in g or the speaker o f an u tteran ce are d ifferen tiation s o f A R G l , w hereas the result o f a d ra w in g , i.e. the p ictu re, and the m essage o f an u tteran ce \u00a3ire d ifferen tia tion s o f A R G 2 . A lth ou g h these a ttribu tes are n ot in th em selves represen tin g graimmaticaLl fu n ctio n s, they allow the form u la tion o f sim ple rules for the in te rp re ta tio n o f gram m atica l relations. R ules th at in d u ce a d ifferen t m a p p in g b etw een graim m atical relation s and sem an tic argum ents, such as rules for passive co n stru ctio n s, w ill also h ave th eir results stated on the description s o f the a ttribu tes in v olv ed instead on th e d escrip tion s o f in d ivid u al verbs. In d ivid u al verbs need on ly be specified for the kinds o f m a p p in g th ey p erm it. T h u s, if w e inclu de b oth the a ctiv e and the passive cases in th e sam e rule, w e get som eth in g o f the fo rm o f (8 ). T h e arrow s h ave their usual in terp reta tion s as m etavariables for corresp on d in g stru ctu res. T o distingu ish fu n ction a l and sem an tic structures the latter are in d exed b y a low ered 's ' and the form er by an 'f ' . Schem as w ith ou t arrow s state con d ition s on the stru ctu re in w h ich the a ttrib u te itself occu rs. (8) S U B J: { (P A S S IV E Y E S ) ( t^ A R G 2 ) = / (P A S S IV E N O ) (T A R G l ) = i } s s C on versely, the d escrip tion o f A R G l w ill b e as in (9 ), w h ere (A V O B J ) identifies the agent relation in a passive clause. (9 ) A R G l : { (Tj P A S S IV E Y E S ) ( t^ A V O B J ) = / (Tj P A S S IV E N O ) (Tj S U B J ) = } By d istrib u tin g the fu n ctio n a l sch em as in the sem 2uitic netw ork w e red u ce m u ch o f the lexical overloa^ling in ord in a ry lexica l-fu n ction a l granunars. E very d ifferen t sense o f a m orph em e is given its ow n en try . M o re o v e r, w hen a stem is p art o f an id io m or other p oly m orp h em ic item , in form ation a b o u t this is n ot on ly a tta ch ed to the stem , bu t also 103 Proceedings of NODALIDA 1987 -104to the relevan t n od e in the n etw ork. F o r instan ce, the m orp h em e ta (tak e) is a ssociated w ith a L E X -v a lu e , !T ak e, th at have a fairly large n u m ber o f differen t senses. In this set w e w o u ld also fin d the a ction & T a k e -a w a y , expressed in Sw edish as ta bort. T h is item is d istin gu ish ed from all the oth ers in the sam e set by a special co n d itio n on fu n ctio n a l stru ctu res expressin g it, i.e. th at it con ta in s the tw o d escrip tors in (10) at to p level. H ere, P R T is sn a ttrib u te represen tin g a verbal p article. (10 ) <kTake-away (T L E X ) = !T a ( tJ P R T L E X ) = !B ort A fu n ction a l stru ctu re m a y corre sp o n d to a co n te n t stru ctu re in tw o differen t m odes. I d istingu ish a co n stitu tiv e (or illocu tion a ry) m o d e fro m a strict (or lo cu tio n a ry ) m od e. T h e u ttera n ce o f an exp ression con stitu tes an illocu tion a ry a ct, i.e. an o b je c t instance o f a p a rticu la r illocu tion a ry ty p e . T h e d escrip tion o f this o b je c t is said to corresp on d to the fu n ctio n a l stru ctu re o f the expression in the co n stitu tiv e m od e. T h e d escription s o f the o b je c ts referred t o in th e u tteran ce, on the oth er h an d , are said to corresp on d s trictly w ith th e f-stru ctu res o f their refering expression s. C o n stitu tiv e corresp on d en ce w ill b e in d ica ted b y d ou b le arrow s, iy auid to d istingu ish it fro m strict co rre sp o n d e n ce. O f th e lin gu istic elem en ts th at pEirticipate in co n stitu tiv e sch em a ta I w ill here only co n sid er m o o d d e scrip tors. A rule for the im p erative m o o d m ay be form u lated as follow s: (11 ) (M O O D Im p era tiv e ): (1V T Y P E ) = ^In s tru c tio n A G E N T ) = <DS S P E A K E R > (^ P A T I E N T ) = <DS A D D R E S S E E > A C T ) = A C T A R G l ) = {it P A T I E N T ) H ere DS is a reference to the d escrip tio n o f the discou rse state. W h en an s-structu re is co n s tru cte d b y m ean s o f (11 ) the cu rren t values for the in d ica ted a ttribu tes o f the d iscou rse state w ill b e retrieved . T h e fo u rth sch em a relates the tw o different co rresp on d in g s-stru ctu res to each o th e r, thus in tegratin g the locu tion a ry m eaning into the d e scrip tio n o f th e illocu tio n a ry a ct. T o be p rop e rly corre sp on d in g an f-stru ctu re and an s-stru ctu re m ust m eet certain general requ irem en ts. T h e fu n ction a l a ttribu tes and d e scrip tors C2ui be d ivid ed into tw o classes, sem an tica lly relevan t and sem an tically irrelevan t. T h e latter descriptors 104 Proceedings of NODALIDA 1987 -105play no role in the corresp on d en ce relation , whereas every sem an tica lly relevant fu n ction a l d escrip tor m ust corresp o n d to a stru ctu re o f sem an tic d escrip tors a ccord in g to one o f the sy n /s e m -co rre s p o n d e n ce s defined for it. B o th f-stru ctu res and s-structu res m ust be con sisten t and d eterm in ed. M o re o v e r, the s-stru ctu re con stitu en ts m ust be ty p ed , co m p a tib le w ith a p ro to ty p e and specified as to h ow th ey apply as d escription s o f o b je cts in the d iscou rse d om ain . N ot all in form a tion in s-structu res have a cou n terp a rt in fu n ctio n a l d escrip tors, h ow ever. It m ay instead be retrieved from the d iscou rse state. A ll this m eans th a t there is n o requ irem en t on strict isom orp h y , w h eth er d erivation a l or stru ctu ra l, b etw een f-stru ctu res and s-structu res. Still, the use o f sch em a ta and the p ostu la tion o f on ly tw o classes o f co rresp on d en ces m ake the fram ew ork b o th p rin cip led and restricted . d ia log sy stem f\u00f6 r svenska. N L P L A B M em o 86-01. D ep a rtm en t o f co m p u te r and in form a tion scien ce, L in k \u00f6pin g university: Lin k \u00f6pin g. A h re n b erg , L. 1987. P arsing in to D iscourse O b je c t D escrip tion s. In P r o ce ed in g s, Third C o n fe r e n c e o f the A C L E u rop ea n Chapter, C op en h a gen 1-3 A p ril, 1987, p p . 140-147. A lsh aw i H. 1987. M em o ry and c o n te x t fo r language in terp reta tio n . Caunbridge U niversity Press: C am b rid ge. A p p e lo , L ., F ellin ger, C . and L an dsbergen , J. 1987. S u bg ra m m a rs, R u le Classes and C on trol in the R o se tta T ran sla tion System . In P ro ceed in g s, Third C o n fe r e n c e o f the A C L E u rop ea n C hapter, C open h agen 1-3 A p ril, 1987, p p . 118-133.", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF8": { |
| "uris": null, |
| "text": "B o b ro w , R . J ., W e b b e r, B. L. 1980. K n ow led g e R epresen tation for S y n ta ctic /S e m a n tic Processin g. In P roceed in g s, F irst A n n u a l N ation a l C o n fe r e n c e on A rtificia lIn telligen ce, S ta n ford , A u gu st 1980, p p. 316-323. en sta d , J. E ., H alvorsen , P -K , L a n gh olm , T . and van B en th em , J. 1985. E qu ation s, S ch em a ta and S itu ation s; A fram ew ork for lin gu istic sem an tics. M a n u scrip t, C SL I, S ta n ford U niversity.G rosz, B . J. 1977. T h e R ep resen ta tion and Use o f F o cu s in D ialogu e U nderstanding. (P h D thesis) S R I T ech n ieh a l N o te N o. 151, S R I In tern ation al: M e n lo P ark. H alvorsen , P -K . 1983. S em an tics fo r L e x ica l-F u n ctio n a l Graunmar. L in gu istic Inquiry 14n tic In terpretation in C on stra in t-b a se d G ra m m a rs. T ech n ieh a l R ep o r t C S L I-T R -8 7 -1 0 1 , C en tre for the S tu d y o f L a n gu age and In form a tion : S ta n ford. K a p la n , R . ic B resn an , J. 1982. L e x ica l-F u n ctio n a l G ran u n ar: A F orm a l S ystem for G ra m m a tica l R ep resen ta tion . In B resnan J. (e d .) 1982: The M en ta l R ep r ese n ta tio n o f G ra m m a tica l R ela tio n s, T h e M I T Press: C a m b rid g e M a ss., p p. 173-281. K a rlsson , F. 1986. A p a ra d ig m -b a sed m o rp h o lo g ica l analyzer. In K a rlsson , F . (e d .) 1986: P a p ers fr o m the F ifth Scandinavian C o n fe r e n c e o f C om p u ta tion a l Lin gu istics, H elsinki, D e c e m b e r 1 1 -1 2 1985. U niversity o f H elsinki; H elsinki, p p . 95-112. L y tin en , S. L. 1987. In tegra tin g synteoc and sem an tics. In N iren b u rg, S. (e d .) 1987: M a ch in e tra n slation . C eunbridge U niversity Press: C a m b rid g e , p p . 302-316. M o re n o , D ., F erra ra , F ., G em ello, R . and R u llen t, C . 1987. In tegratin g S em antics and F lexib le S y n ta x b y E x p lo itin g Isom orp h ism betw een G r a m m a tic d and Sem juitical R e la tion s. In P r o ce ed in g s, Third E u ro p ea n C h apter A C L C o n fe r e n c e , C open h a gen , A p ril 1-3, 1987, p p . 278-283. S on d h eim er, N. K ., W eisch ed el, R . M . and B o b r o w , R . J. 1984. Sem antic In terp reta tion U sing K L -O N E . In P r o ce ed in g s o f C olin g '84, S ta n ford U niversity, Cal. 2-6 July 1984, p p . 101-107. W a ch te l, T . 1987. D iscou rse stru ctu re in L O Q U I. In R e c e n t D evelo p m en ts and A p p lica tio n s o f N atu ral L anguage U nderstanding. U N IC O M Sem inars L td: L on d on , p p . 161-86. 106 Proceedings of NODALIDA 1987", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| } |
| } |
| } |
| } |
