Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, G., and Sag, I. (1985). Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....of Chomsky s Theory of Government and Binding (GB) Chomsky [7] 8] The GB principles state certain structural relations between tree nodes having certain properties. In addition, we should mention some constraint based grammar formalisms, e.g. LFG (Kaplan Bresnan [14] GPSG (Gazdar et al. [12]) and HPSG (Pollard Sag [18] 19] that employ a similar notion of constraints to specify syntactic structures. However, these constraints apply to context free rules, cf. Shieber [23] 24] rather than to certain structural relations between tree nodes. Nevertheless, such constraints ....

Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, G. & Sag, I. (1985) Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Blackwell, Oxford.

....clitics can thus be involved in nonlocal dependencies. HPSG has a syntactic mechanism to account for Unbounded Dependency Constructions, namely the Nonlocal Feature Principle and the use of NONLOCAL features, which are analogous to the Foot Feature Principle and to the FOOT features used in GPSG [Gazdar et al. 1985]. Therefore it seems a reasonable choice to use the same mechanism to handle cases of nonlocal de pendencies involving clitics. 3 As discussed above, Italian pronominal clitics are in complementary distribution with full phrases as 2If the full phrase is left (or fight) dislocated, its ....

G. Gazdar, E. Klein, G. Pul- lum, and I. Sag. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Blackwell, 1985.

....disjunctive normal form. 1 Background: Unification in Grammar Several different approaches to natural language grammar have developed the notion of feature structures to describe linguistic objects. These approaches include linguistic theories, such as Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar (GPSG) [2], Lexical Functional Grammar (LFG) 4] and Systemic Grammar [3] They also include grammar formalisms which have been developed as computational tools, such as Functional Unification Grammar (FUG) 7] and PATR II [14 . In these computational formalisms, urdficaton is the primary operation for ....

Gasder, G., E. Klein, G.K. Pullurn, and I.A. Sag. Generalized Phrase Structure Gram- mar. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, England, and Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1985.

....of LP constraints. Our approach has been tested with small sets of LP constraints. The grammar was written and run in STUF, the typed unification formalism used in the project LILOG. LINGUISTIC MOTIVATION This section presents the linguistic motivation for our approach. LP statements in GPSG (Gazdar et al. 1985) constrain the possibility of linearizing immediate dominance (ID) rules. By taking the righthand sides of ID rules as their domain, they allow only the ordering of sibling constituents. Consequently, grammars must be designed in such a way that all constituents which are to be ordered by LP ....

Gerald Gazdar, Ewan Klein, G. K. Pullurn, Ivan Sag. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, UK

....by referring to the category, grammatical function, discourse r61e, and many other syntactic, semantic, morphological or phonological features. Depending on the grammar formalism, different languages are used for stating the constraints on permissible linearizations. LP rules, ftrst proposed by Gazdar and Pullurn (1982) for GPSG, are used, in different guises, by several contemporary grammar formalisms. In Functional Unification Grammar (Kay 1985) and implemented versions of Lexical Functional Grammar, pattern languages with the power of regular expressions have been utilized. Depending on the grammar model, LP ....

Gerald Gazdar, G. K. Pullum. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. A Theoretical Synopsis. Indiana Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana.

....1989] but in a manner that makes oB even less comprehensible. So if formalization means providing as complete as possible intellectual access to the formal consequences of an otherwise rigorously defined theory the project has failed if ever begun. More or less the same criticism applies to [Gazdar et al., 1985]. Even if oPSG is rigorously de fined the formalism as laid out in this book does not lead to an understanding of it s properties. More or less the same applies to categorial grammar which might have the advantage that it s formal proper ties are well studied but which suffers from the same ....

....we need to incorporate them into our grammar; prominent modals are SLASH: X, which has the meaning somewhere below me is a gap of categor X and AGR : X which says this sentence has a subject of categor l X. If a context free rendering of phrase struc ture is done properly (as for example in [Gazdar et al., 1985]) a single entry such as must be split into a vast number of different symbols so we can rea sonably assume that our grammar is rich enough to have all the X for the X we need; otherwise they must be added artificially. In that case many of the standard nearness relations can be directly encoded ....

Gerald Gazdar, Ewan Klein, Geoffrey Pullum, and Ivan Sag. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Blackwell, Oxford, 1985.

....The generator to be described in this section is a module of the Berlin MT system [Ilauenschild Busemann 1988] which translates sentences taken from administrative texts in an EC corpus from German into English and vice versa. 4 The syntax formalism used is a constructive vcrsiou of GPSG [Gazdar et al. 1985] as described in [Busemann Hauenschild 1988] The semantic representa tion language FAS (Functor Argument Stuctures) Mahr Umbach 1990] is employed as an interface between three different processes: it is the target of GPSG based analysis, for sentence semantic trans fcr, and as the source for ....

....strategy, howewer, only the mother would be undcrspccified. For instance, consider tile GPSG account of parasitic gaps, which are bandied by tile Foot Feature Principle. The slash feature may occur at more than one daughter and then require all occurrences of it to unify with the mother (cf. [Gazdar et el. 1985, p. 162fl] While this is easy to handle for a bottom up process, a top down strategy would have to guess at which daughters to instantlate a slash value. Pattern action rules. A PA rule is a pro duction rule with a pattern for local FAS trees as its left hand side and two sets of actions as ....

Gerald Gazdar, Ewan Klein, Geoffrey Pullurn, and Ivan Sag, (1985), Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Oxford: Blackwell.

....is rendered efficient by indexing constraints and categories in a connection graph and by using a bid:irectional chart patter together with a boll ore up strategy centered around head constituents. Introduction Among current syntactic theories, Genendized Pkrase Structure Grammtrs (GPSG) [4] provide an appealing solution fro describing natural languages with theh modul system of composite categories, rules, constraints and feature propagation principles. As other highly modular systems, GPSG is plagued by the difficulty of clesigfing an efficient algorithm 10r combining its various ....

....(in seconds) 238 3 Table I: A comparison of differera strate.es 7. Conchlsion The method we propose makes it possible to parse efficiently GPSG gralnmars but unlike other ap proaches [1,3,7,8] it allows the grammar to be pressed in the exact formalism described by Gazdar and his colleagues in [4] and does not require an tractable preprocessing pha,se like would do e.g. the compilation of the grintartar into an equivalen set of context free productions. Mthough we did not study in detail the suit. ability of the method when the control agreement principle is taken into account, we do not ....

Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, S., Sag, 1., "Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar", Blackwell Publishing, 1985. CPU time is ordy an indication of the efficiency of the nethod since it measures also our implementation. No particular effort was speml on tuning the implementation. 154 4

....Its transitions to the set of next states or failures to do so indicate the syntactic admissibility of the next word. Another candidate is the context free grammar, preferably augmented by the addition of complex syntactic semantic features as in GPSG (General Phrase Structure Grammar) [17] or DCL (Definite Clause Grammar [18] Such extensions of a context free grammar provide for the parsimonious expression of various types of syntactic agreement and a means of semantic interpretation. We have opted instead for a simple context free grammar (CFG) syntactic component for several ....

....by applying translation rules corresponding to the productions embedded in the tree in a bottom to top fashion. 16 The translation of the tree s root node is taken as the translation of the tree. This procedure is used in the semantic interpretation of the Montague grammar [28] and GPSG [17] as well as a number of other natural language systems, and it is the basis of most computer compilers. A natural extension is to replace the single translation of each node described above with multiple translations, each identified as the value of a set of semantic attributes associated with a ....

Gazdar, G. et al. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Oxford, UK: Blackwell, and Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985.

....Parsing: A Lcxicon drivcn Approach. to Syntacfic Analysis ,tanley STAROSTA University of lIawaii Social Scievce Rose,rob Iastitute and Pacific InterlationaI Center for 11i[ h TechnololIy Research Honolalu, awaii 9G822, U.S.A. Abetmet This paper presents a lexiconbascd approach to syntactlc analysis, Lexicase, and applies it [o a lexicon driven comlmtatlolml parsing system. The basic descriptive mechanism in a Lcxicasc grammar is lexical features. The properties of lexical items are represelted by contexthal ....

....Parsing: A Lcxicon drivcn Approach. to Syntacfic Analysis ,tanley STAROSTA University of lIawaii Social Scievce Rose,rob Iastitute and Pacific InterlationaI Center for 11i[ h TechnololIy Research Honolalu, awaii 9G822, U.S.A. Abetmet This paper presents a lexiconbascd approach to syntactlc analysis, Lexicase, and applies it [o a lexicon driven comlmtatlolml parsing system. The basic descriptive mechanism in a Lcxicasc grammar is lexical features. The properties of lexical items are represelted by contexthal ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Gazdar, G., Klein. ., Pullurn, G., and Sag, L, Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Harvard University Press. 1985.

....of any CFG for L, must grow exponentially in n, but which can be described by polynomial size ID LP grammars. The results have implications for the description of free word order languages. 2 Introduction Context free grammars in immediate dominance and linear precedence format were used in GPSG [3] as a skele ton for metarule generation and feature checking. It is intuitively obvious that grammars in this form can describe languages which are closed under the operation of taking arbitrary permutations of strings in the language. Such languages will be called symmetric. Ordinary ....

Gazdar. G. Klein, E., Pullum, G., and Sag, I., Gen- eralized Phrase Structure Grammar. Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, blass., 1985.

No context found.

Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, G., and Sag, I. (1985). Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

No context found.

G. Gazdar, E. Klein, G.K. Pullum, and I.A. Sag. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Basil Blackwell, 1985.

No context found.

GAZDAR, GERALD, EWAN KLEIN, GEOFFREY K. PULLUM, & IVAN A. SAG. 1985. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

No context found.

G. Gazdar, E. Klein, G. K. Pullum, and I. A. Sag. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammars. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 1985. Also published by Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

No context found.

G. Gazdar, E.H. Klein , G.K. Pullum and I.A. Sag, "Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar", Oxford: Blackwell, and Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press. 1985

No context found.

G. Gazdar, E.H. Klein , G.K. Pullum , & I.A. Sag (1985) Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell, and Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard University Press. register make trac cancel select customer

No context found.

Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, G. K., & Sag, I. A. (1985). Generalized phrase structure grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

No context found.

Gazdar, G., Klein, E., Pullum, G., and Sag, I. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Basil Blackwell Publisher Ltd., Oxford, 1985.

No context found.

G. Gazdar, E. Klein, G. K. Pullum, and I. A. Sag. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Blackwell, 1985.

No context found.

G. Gazdar, E. Klein, G. K. Pullum, and I. A. Sag. 1985. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Harvard University Press.

No context found.

G. Gazdar, E. Klein, G. K. Pullum, and I. A. Sag. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammars. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, 1985. Also published by Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

No context found.

Gerald Gazdar, Ewan Klein, Geoffrey Pullurn and Ivan Sag. 1985. Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Harvard University Press.

No context found.

G. Gazdar, G. Pullum and I. Sag, Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Harvard University Press, 1985.

No context found.

G. Gazdar, E. Klein, G. K. Pullum and I. A. Sag, Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Basic Blackwell Publisher, 1985.

First 50 documents  Next 50

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC