Generation and Synchronous Tree-Adjoining Grammars
Files
Penn collection
Degree type
Discipline
Subject
Funder
Grant number
License
Copyright date
Distributor
Related resources
Author
Contributor
Abstract
The recent history of grammar reversing can be viewed as an effort to recover seine notion of semantic locality on which to base a generation process. For instance, Wedekind (1988) requires a property of a grammar that he refers to as connectedness, which specifies that complements be semantically connected to their head. Shieber (1981) defines a notion of semantic monotonicity, a kind of compositionality property that guarantees that it can be locally determined whether phrases can contribute to forming an expression with a given meaning. Generation schemes that reorder top-down generation (Dymetman and Isabelle, 1988; Strzalkowski, 1989) so as to make available information that well-founds the top-down recursion also fall into the mold of localizing semantic information. Semantic-head-driven generation (Shieber et al., forthcoming; Calder et al., 1989) uses semantic heads and their complements as a locus of semantic locality.