Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T10:55:30.764Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Parsing with Situation Semantics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2008

Thomas Polzin  and
Hannes Rieser
Thomas Polzin
Affiliation:
Faculty of Linguistics and Literary Studies, University of BielefeldPO Box 8640, D-4800 Bielefeld, Germany
Hannes Rieser
Affiliation:
Faculty of Linguistics and Literary Studies, University of BielefeldPO Box 8640, D-4800 Bielefeld, Germany
Get access

Abstract

This paper integrates several related lines of research in an implemented model. Its main aim is to show how principles of situation semantics concerning meanings, constraints and the preferred ontology can be represented and mapped onto expressions of natural language in a straightforward way. For assembling larger chunks of information a unification-based approach is used. The semantics is grafted upon a shift- reduce parser which does the main work in associating expressions with meanings. In order to capture the much debated difference between sentence and utterance meaning the whole machinery provides first an abstract meaning (conceived as a constraint) where the parameters are non-anchored. Subsequently, a model in the technical sense provides anchors for parameters and thus yields the utterance meaning of the sentence parsed. Finally, it is checked whether this semantic representation of the parsing result can be regarded as a genuine situation semantic object. This is done by showing that it confirms to the axioms of a situation theoretic model. As a result, parses are far more constrained and theory-guided than usual. The idea of parsing used goes back to work originally done by Barwise and Perry, the coding of semantic entities owes much to proposals issued by K. Devlin and D. Westerdåhl. The whole model is implemented in PROLOG

Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , December 1991 , pp. 141 - 189
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Aho, A. V., Sethi, R. & Ullman, J. D. 1988. Compilers, principles, Techniques and Tools, Bell Laboratories, Inc., Addison Wesley.Google Scholar
Barwise, J. 1989. The Situation in Logic. CSLI Lecture Notes. Standford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Barwise, J. & Perry, J. 1983. Situations and Attitudes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, R. 1990. Three Lecturess on Situation Theoretic Grammar. To appear in M., Filgueiras (ed.), Lecture Notes in Artifical Intelligence. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Devlin, K. 1989. Logic and Information, Vols I, II. Draft Version. Standford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Eisele, A. & Dörre, J. 1986. A Lexical Functional Grammar System in Prolog. COLING 1986 (pp. 551–553).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenstad, J. E., Halvorsen, P. K., Langholm, T. & Benthen, J. v. 1987. Situations, Language and Logic. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gazdar, G. & Mellish, C. 1989. Natural Language Proceing in PROLOG. Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Pollard, C. & Sag, I. A. 1987. Information-based Syntax and Semantics. Vol. 1, Fundamental, CSLI Lecture Notes No. 13. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Polzin, T. & Rieser, H. 1987 Implementing Determiner-Free Aliass: The Compoitionality of Meaning. In Braun, G. et al., Situations in PROLOG. “Kolibri”, Technical Report 14. Bielefeld.Google Scholar
Polzin, T. & Rieser, H. 1989. Implementing singular Aliass: The Compositionality of Meaning. In Polzin, T. et al., More Situations in PROLOG. “Kolibri”, Technical Report 19. Bielefeld.Google Scholar
Polzin, T. & Rieser, H. 1991. Parsing Belief-Sentences. “Kolibri”, Technical Report 33. Bielefeld.Google Scholar
Shieber, S. M. 1986. An Introduction to Unification-based Approaches to Grammar. CSLI Lecture Notes No. 4. Stanford: CSLI.Google Scholar
Stabler, E. P. 1983. Deterministic and Bottom-up Parsing in Prolog. In Bundy, A. (ed.), Proceedings of AAAI-83. Los Altos: Kaufmann (pp. 383–386).Google Scholar
Westerståhl, D. 1989. Basic Concepts of Situation Theory: Some Possible Axioms and Models. Preliminary Lecture Notes. Bielefeld University.Google Scholar