Refine
Year of publication
- 2005 (72) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (72) (remove)
Language
- English (72) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (72)
Keywords
- Bindungstheorie <Linguistik> (4)
- Japanisch (4)
- Koordination <Linguistik> (4)
- Anapher <Syntax> (3)
- Informationsstruktur (3)
- Niederländisch (3)
- Pronomen (3)
- Reflexivpronomen (3)
- Computerlinguistik (2)
- Koreanisch (2)
Institute
- Universitätsbibliothek (14)
- Physik (3)
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (2)
- Extern (2)
- Mathematik (2)
- Wirtschaftswissenschaften (1)
This paper discusses the NP-internal agreement strategies observed in an empirical (corpus based) study of Portuguese, and proposes an analysis which is formalized in the framework of Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG). The empirical study suggests that what were previously thought to be rare or non-existent strategies occur with surprising frequency. Capturing these strategies poses problems for many standard approaches to agreement. The formalization shows how they can be captured with a relatively conservative extension of the existing HPSG theory of agreement.
This paper focuses on passive constructions in Dutch. Specifically, we focus on worden, as well as krijgen passives in Dutch, for which we propose a uniform, raising analysis in HPSG. We also show that such an analysis can be carried over to account for passives cross-linguistically. Specifically, we look at corresponding structures in German and show that there is no need for a dual raising and control analysis for the German "agentive" (werden) and the German "dative" (kriegen) passives, respectively, as has been proposed in Müller (2002) and Müller (2003).
In Pollard & Sag (1994) and in Ginzburg & Sag (2000) phrases are either headed or non-headed, and if they are headed, there is a relation of selection between the daughters: either the head daughter selects its non-head sister(s), as in the phrases of type 'head-complements', or the non-head daughter selects its head sister, as in the phrases of type 'head-adjunct'. In the non-headed phrases, by contrast, there is no selection; in a coordinate structure, for instance, there is no relation of selection, neither between the conjuncts nor between the conjunction and the conjuncts. The central claim of this paper is that there are also phrases which are headed but in which neither daughter selects the other. To model such phrases I propose a new type, called 'head-independent'. Its properties are spelled out and its range of application is illustrated with various examples, including asymmetric coordination and apposition.
This paper provides a treatment of Polish Plural Comitative Constructions in the paradigm of HPSG in the tradition of Pollard and Sag (1994). Plural Comitative Constructions (PCCs) have previously been treated in terms of coordination, complementation and adjunction. The objective of this paper is to show that PCCs are neither instances of typical coordinate structures nor of typical complement or adjunct structures. It thus appears difficult to properly describe them by means of the standard principles of syntax and semantics. The analysis proposed in this paper accounts for the syntactic and semantic properties of PCCs in Polish by assuming an adjunction-based syntactic structure for PCCs, and by treating the indexical information provided by PCCs not as subject to any inheritance or composition, but as a result of applying a set of principles on number, gender and person resolution that also hold for ordinary coordinate structures.
Persian free relatives
(2005)
Free relatives (FRs) in Persian are Unbounded Dependency Constructions, containing gaps or resumptive pronouns (RPs). In some positions only gaps are allowed, and in some other positions only RPs. The structure of Persian FRs is bipartite, containing two constituents: a phrasal part and a sentential. Persian FRs are sensitive to the matching effect and show distinct properties from noun phrases, ordinary relative clauses, and interrogative complements. This paper proposes a unified HPSG account which assumes that the phrasal part of a FR is the head and the filler at the same time. The propped approach is presented in two versions (with and without traces) and can take care of the dependency between the gap or the RP and the licencing constituent with a truly single mechanism.
Algorithmic approaches to anaphor resolution are known to benefit substantially from syntactic disjoint reference filters. Typically, however, there is a considerable gap between the scope of the formal model of grammar employed for deriving referential evidence and its implementation. While accounting for many subtleties of language, such formal models at most partially address the algorithmic aspects of referential processing. This paper investigates the issue of implementing syntactic disjoint reference for robust anaphor resolution. An algorithmic account of binding condition verification will be developed that, on one hand, captures the theoretical subtleties, and, on the other hand, exhibits computational efficiency and fulfils the robustness requirements. Taking as input the potentially fragmentary parses of a robust state-of-the-art parser, the practical performance of this algorithm will be evaluated with respect to the task of anaphor resolution and shown to be nearly optimal.
We present a method for automatic RMRS semantics construction from dependency structures, following the semantic algebra of Copestake et al. (2001). We have applied this method to a subset of the TIGER Dependency Bank for German (Forst et al., 2004) to obtain a semantic treebank for (HPSG) parser evaluation. We describe the semantics construction mechanism and give evaluation figures from manual validation of the treebank. These indicate high precision of the automatic RMRS construction process.
This contribution is concerned with integrating the phenomenon of selectional restrictions in HPSG. Firstly, the question of treating selectional restrictions purely in the semantic module is tackled, as there are some contextual (or pragmatic) influences, which can repair the ill-formedness of violated selectional restrictions. Secondly, we present existing approaches to selectional restrictions within the framework and, lastly, make our own proposal which describes the subject as part of the semantics-pragmatics interface. In particular, we show how a semantic ontology can be integrated.
HPSG accounts of filler-gap dependencies hold considerable potential for explaining the cross-linguistic variation in unbounded dependency constructions (UDCs), specifically filler-gap dependencies. This potential comes from the SLASH specifications that are posited in all nodes along the extraction path (the path between filler and gap). However, as Hukari and Levine (1994, 1995, 1996) have observed, the HPSG analysis presented by Pollard and Sag (1994) fails to embody the generalizations required in order to explain key universal properties of UDCs, in particular the ˋregistration' of such dependencies in cases of subject- and adverb-extraction. This demonstration led Bouma et al. (2001) to propose a revised UDC analysis that avoids these difficulties by ˋthreading' the SLASH specfications through all heads within an extraction domain. However, Levine (2002) points out that this analysis encounters a new difficulty concerning the interaction of extraction and coordination. This paper revisits these issues, arguing that a small modification of the BMS analysis provides a solution to the important problem observed by Levine.
This paper investigates the binding of pronouns and reflexives in picture noun phrases, and focuses on data showing that reflexives and pronouns are not in complementary distribution in picture NPs with possessors. In particular, we discuss data showing that whereas reflexives can take either the possessor or the subject of the sentence as antecedent, pronouns are restricted to an antecedent other than the possessor phrase. We suggest that this asymmetry can be straightforwardly explained if we assume that (1) the possessor of a picture NP is not part of the head noun's argument structure and (2) Binding Theory is stated over dependents structure, the representation encompassing both a head's argument structure and other phrases dependent on it in various ways. If the possessor of a picture NP (PNP) is not part of the head's argument structure, it follows that reflexives in PNPs with possessors will be exempt from Binding Theory, which paves the way for an analysis of the reflexive data. Furthermore, we also show that if BT is regarded as defined over dependents structure, it follows that a pronoun in a picture NP with a possessor must be disjoint from that possessor phrase.