H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, Th. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pages 277 -- 322. Mathematisch Centrum Tracts, Amsterdam, 1981.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....as a covert adjustment of what he calls the conversational score, a sort of creative accounting needed to make conversational ends meet. Van der Sandt s accommodation [vdS92] to take a more recent example, is a sophisticated cutand paste operation on Discourse Representation Structures (c.f. [Kam81]) Accommodation, then, has been viewed as an essentially non monotonic operation, overwriting our previous record of what had happened in a discourse to fit with new demands. The view espoused in this paper will be quite the contrary: accommodation will be analyzed as a monotonic operation, in ....

....(and also related proposals such as Mercer s [Mer92] it is whole sentences which produce a change in the context of interpretation. However in Karttunen Heim style treatments of presupposition such as that introduced in this paper, as well as in treatments of anaphora due to Heim [Hei82] Kamp [Kam81] and Groenendijk and Stokhof [GS91] a finer grained iteration is involved, with sub sentential constituents producing their own e#ects on local contexts of interpretation. We begin by assuming some set of atomic proposition symbols. A model is a pair I#, where W is a set of worlds and I is an ....

Kamp, H., 1981. "A Theory of Truth and semantic Representation ", in Groenendijk, J., Janssen, T. and Stokhof, M. (eds.) Formal Methods in the Study of Language.

.... via constraints, but there is no built in structure between situations (as opposed to the hierarchy of situations in PROSIT) The primary motivation underlying ASTL is to figure out a framework in which semantic theories such as situation semantics [8] and Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) [37] can be described and possibly compared. Such an attempt can be found in [15] In DRT, a discourse representation structure (DRS) is defined at each stage in a discourse describing the current state of the analysis. A DRS consists of two parts: a set of domain markers (discourse referents) ....

....coalesced with well developed linguistic theories such as lexical functional grammar [45] and led to rigorous formalisms [31] On the other hand, situation semantics has been compared to other influential mathematical approaches to the theory of meaning, viz. Montague Grammar [21, 26, 42] and DRT [37]. 6 Concluding Remarks Serious thinking about the computational aspects of the situation theory is just starting. There have been only a few proposals [16, 40, 43] which mainly offer a Prolog or Lisp like programming environment with varying degrees of divergence from the ontology of situation ....

H. Kamp. "A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation," in J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Amsterdam, Holland: Mathematical Center, 1981, pp. 277--322.

....for the use of intensional logic in the analysis of assignment statements x : t (assign to x the value t) in programming. Variable states in programming are very much like possible worlds in Montague style natural language semantics. The dynamic turn in natural language semantics, around 1980 [29, 35] started as a plea to take the context change potential of definite descriptions ( the morning star ) and indefinite descriptions ( a farmer ) seriously. Change of context is an action, and contexts are very much like variable states in programming. This time a border crossing in the other ....

....a state is a thing that enables the lookup of values of a set of stores or registers. For simplicity, let us assume that we have a set of registers R, and that these registers are used for storing values of type e. Then a register r is like a discourse referent in discourse representation theory [35], or a variable of dynamic predicate logic [27] To talk about register assignment we need expressions (r E) where r is a register and E is an expression of type e. In a more general set up we could introduce registers for other types, together with expressions (r T E T ) for storing a new ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....these di#culties, a predicate free is introduced that applies to those reference markers that have not yet been constrained in the present model. Such mix up of syntax and semantics is avoided in our approach. Rational Reconstructions of DRT When dynamic semantics for NL first was proposed in [21] and [17] the approach invoked strong opposition from the followers of Montague [27] Rational reconstructions to restore compositionality were announced in [13] and carried out in the papers mentioned above. All of these reconstructions are based in some way or other on DPL [13] and they all ....

....mentioned above. All of these reconstructions are based in some way or other on DPL [13] and they all inherit the main flaw of this approach: the destructive assignment problem. Interestingly, DRT itself did not su#er from this problem: the discourse representation construction algorithms of [21] and [22] are stated in terms of functions with finite domains, and carefully talk about taking a fresh discourse referent to extend the domain of a verifying function, for each new NP to be processed. The present approach, based on ID rather than DPL, makes clear how the instruction to take ....

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....detailed; often it s not even clear what these researchers intend as a model. There is, however, a discourse interpretation procedure that is speci fied in detail and has some of the characteristics of the model construction procedure I have in mind; I m thinking of the DRS construction algorithm [23, 24]. The DRS construction algorithm consists of a set of rules that map discourses belonging to the language into certain interpretive structures . The output structures are called Discourse Representation Structures or DRSs. A DRS is a pair consisting of a set of discourse referents and a set ....

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. 13roenendij'k, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Forreal Methods in the Studyof Language. Mathematical Centre, Amsterdam, 1981.

....theoretic) approach (Dowry, Wall, and Peters [10] and eliminated the function which provides inter pretations for each lexical item in the language. Instead, this is replaced by an Interpretive Component (which can be viewed in the large as related to Kamp s Discourse Representation Theory [11]) The only requirement on the model is that it contain elements that map onto the lexical items of the language (thus allowing for self reference) In fact, the only fixed semantics of the system associates lexical items in the language with these representative elements in the model. In the ....

H. Kamp, "A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation", J.A.G. Groenendijk, T.M.V. Jansen, and M.B.J. Stokhof, eds., Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....slices of pizza. It has 8 POSSIBLE readings because the D operator may apply to each of the two arguments of eat, and the two NPs can take scope over each other. Thus, 2x2x2 8. 2 have extended Link s and Roberts s theories to quantify over events in Discourse Representation Theory (cf. Kamp [10], Heim [9] Aone [2] so that these readings can be sys tematically generated and represented in the seman tics module. However, the most PLAUSIBLE reading is the distributive distributive reading , where each of the five students ate four slices one at a time, as represented in a discourse ....

Bans Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In Groenendijk et al., editor, Truth, Interpretation, and Information. Forts, 1981.

....l: An In erlingua Based Architecture for MT To translate a entcnce, this system must do the following things: Map the source sentence into an internal rep resentation Of what was said. We call this 63 the source DR ; it is isomorphic to the Discourse Representation Structures described in [Kamp, 84] and [Heim, 82] except that its terms are taken from the backend knowledge base rather than from the words of the source language. Map the source DRS into the interlingua, which is equivalent to the source DRS, both in form and in content. Thus it contains as sertions corresponding to exactly ....

H. Kamp, "A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation", in M. Groenendijk, J. Janssen, and M. Stokhoff, eds., Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Dordrecht: Forts, 1984.

....done to bring the pieces together and to build implementations faithful to the semantics. Several proposals have now been made to account for possible relations between anaphora and antecedents within and across sentences, including treatments of the interaction between quantifiers and anaphors [W, K, H, B]. Kamp and Helm both introduce an intermediate level of representation of sentences and give a semantics to that level while Barwise s syntax directed interpretation relation also takes as arguments input and output contexts which are partial assignments of values to variables. However, none of ....

Kamp, H. A theory of truth and semantic representation, in J. Groenendijk et al (eds.) Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Amsterdam, Math. Center, 1981.

.... contain titanium ) Webber [19] further developed this procedure for introducing and characterizing discourse entities available for anaphoric reference A similar mechanism of context change is embedded in formal dynamic theories of discourse, includ ing Kamp s Discourse Representation Theory [11] and Heim s File Change Semantics [10] We briefly describe Heim s approach, to show this similarityJ Heim s files constitute an intermediate level of rep resentation between the sentences of a text and the model which gives them their truth values. A sentence can be viewed as denoting a ....

Kamp, H. A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen and M. Stokhof (eds.), Truth, Interpretation and Information, Dordrecht: Forts, 1981, pp. 1-41.

..... x n be a set of individual variables and #D M , #R M i i#I , #q M j j#J be a model of a first order langauge with binary generalized quantifiers, where D M is the domain of a set of individuals, R M i D M#(i) #(i) is the arity of R) a relation on D M , and q M j Kamp[21, 22] s Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) and Gabbay[7] s Labelled Deductive Systems (LDS) can also be considered as Dynamic Semantics, but in the sense that dynamic semantics regards meaning as state transitions, they are not dynamic semantics, but rather Procedural Semantics as well as ....

Hans Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In Groenendijk et al., editors, Mathematisch Centrum Tracts, pages 277--322. Foris, Amsterdam, 1981.

....models (or simulation structures) in meta level architectures ( 37] 19] see also [32] What is different in our case is that the partial models may be dynamic. Furthermore, similarities can be found to the approach called dynamic interpretation of natural language (e.g. see [17] 20] [23]) In this approach the dynamic interpretation of a sentence in natural language is defined as an operator that transforms the current information state into a new one where the content of the sentence is included. With respect to dynamics the type of meta level architecture covered here is less ....

J.A.W. Kamp, A theory of truth and semantic representation, In: Formal methods in the study of language. Mathematical Centre Tracts 135, Amsterdam, 1981.

....solve these diculties, a predicate free is introduced that applies to those reference markers that have not yet been constrained in the present model. Such mix up of syntax and semantics is avoided in our approach. Rational Reconstructions of DRT When dynamic semantics for NL rst was proposed in [21] and [17] the approach invoked strong opposition from the followers of Montague [27] Rational reconstructions to restore compositionality were announced in [13] and carried out in the papers mentioned above. All of these reconstructions are based in some way or other on DPL [13] and they all ....

....mentioned above. All of these reconstructions are based in some way or other on DPL [13] and they all inherit the main aw of this approach: the destructive assignment problem. Interestingly, DRT itself did not su er from this problem: the discourse representation construction algorithms of [21] and [22] are stated in terms of functions with nite domains, and carefully talk about taking a fresh discourse referent to extend the domain of a verifying function, for each new NP to be processed. The present approach, based on ID rather than DPL, makes clear how the instruction to take fresh ....

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....to keep an explicit representation of these discourse objects. A theory of this kind would allow the interpretation and generation of referring expressions with anaphoric and deictic relations [Pineda and Garza (1997) Currently, we are exploring the possibility to extend Kamp s discourse theory [Kamp (1981) ; Kamp and Reyle (1993) with explicit rules to handle spatial deictic references. The aim is to combine in a systematic manner discourse referents introduced linguistically with referents provided by a pointing mechanism. In the same way that Kamp s discourse rules, which are related to the ....

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal methods in the study of language, number 135 in Mathematical Centre Tracts, pp. 277--322. Amsterdam Press, Holland, (1981).

....temporal context. Then, I describe the formalism and use it to de ne a grammar and a lexical semantics for the interpretation of discourses containing temporal adjuncts. 2 The Discourse Representation Theory The Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) which originated from the works of [5] and [6], is at the moment one the most promising proposals for the processing of tense and aspect. In this theory, Discourse Representation Structures (DRS) are built dynamically, taking into account the anaphoric nature of tense and aspect. 7] gives a detailed description of DRS construction rules, ....

Hans Kamp. A theory of truth and semantics representation. In T. Janssen J. Groendijk and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematish Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....expressiveness of Montague s framework, in order to cover the phenomena just mentioned. Some important proposals are Kamp s Discourse Representation Theory, Groenendijk and Stokhof Dynamic Predicate Logic, and Chierchia and Turner s Property Theory. Kamp s Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) [Kam81, Hei82], appeared in the early eighties. This model has provided a formal framework to tackle the problem of discourse representation and anaphora resolution. Their approach brought new light to the problem of discourse representation, and for the last decade it has been the paradigm for almost any work ....

H. Kamp. A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In J. Groenendijk, Th. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pages 277--322. Mathematisch Centrum Tracts, Amsterdam, 1981.

....expressiveness of Montague s framework, in order to cover the phenomena just mentioned. Some important proposals are Kamp s Discourse Representation Theory, Groenendijk and Stokhof Dynamic Predicate Logic, and Chierchia and Turner s Property Theory. Kamp s Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) [Kam81, Hei82], appeared in the early eighties. This model has provided a formal framework to tackle the problem of discourse representation and anaphora resolution. Their approach brought new light to the problem of discourse representation, and for the last thirteen years it has been the paradigm for almost ....

....Logic, or extensions of it, such as Montague s Intensional Logic [Mon74a] to expand the scope of the logical quantifiers beyond the boundaries of the sentence in which they appear. Some approaches have been proposed, the more successful among them are Kamp s Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) [Kam81], and Groenendijk and Stokhof s Dynamic Predicate Logic (DPL) GS91] Although these theories have brought new light to the problem of discourse representation, they are perhaps not the ideal setting to accomplish discourse analysis. DRT, for example, departs completely from the classical model, ....

H. Kamp. A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In J. Groenendijk, Th. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pages 277--322. Mathematisch Centrum Tracts, Amsterdam, 1981.

....to be executed to achieve an intended state of the world and also which linguistic actions have to be carried out in order to fulfill these plans. A rather linguistically and logically oriented theory for the treatment of context is the Discourse Representation Theory (drt) as first described in [ Kamp, 1981 ] This theory provides means to identify and describe references occurring in longer stretches of discourse. Later extensions of this theory concern e.g. the introduction of relationships between individual discourse segments and the treatment of intentions standing behind these discourse ....

Hans Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J.A.G. Groendijk, T.M.V. Janssen, and M.B.J. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematical Centre Tracts, Amsterdam, 1981.

....in explicit bindings and protect outside environments from dynamic side e ects by means of block operations. In a sense, the present calculus o ers a full account of the phenomenon of local variable use in DFOL. Kohlhase [24] gives a tableau calculus for DRT (Discourse Representation Theory, see [23]) that has essentially the same scope as the [14] calculus for DPL: the version of DRT disjunction that is treated is externally static, and the DRT analogue of [ is not treated. The Kohlhase calculus follows an old DRT tradition in relying on an implicit translation to standard FOL: see [29] for ....

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....key elements of our approach to discourse structure: coherence relations combined with DRT; structural openness, and the concept of key events. Our basic approach is to follow (Asher 1992) and augment Kamp s discourse representation theory with a number of Hobbsian discourse coherence relations (Kamp 1981; Hobbs 1979; Hobbs 1985; Polanyi 1985; Mann and Thompson 1987) The coherence relations we have examined in most detail are Narration, Explanation, Elaboration, Result and Background; these are the discourse relations most relevant to temporal structure, and the only ones we discuss below. On ....

Kamp, H. (1981). A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof (Eds.), Formal methods in the study of language, pp. 277--322. Amsterdam: Mathematical Centre.

....9 1 1 Dynamic Logic Programming Dynamic logic programming is the result of making dynamic versions of rst order predicate logic executable. The main sources of inspiration for this are the dynamic variable binding strategies that have become fashionable in natural language analysis (DRT [8], Anaphora Logic [2] DPL [7] the idea of implementing identity assertions as assignment commands familiar from constraint programming, and more in particular from Alma 0 [1] and the general injunction to explore logical dynamics emanating from the works of Johan van Benthem, e.g. from [3] ....

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

.... 4 0] 4,C) 1,B) 0,J) 3,A) 2,M) Loved 4 1] 31 ( 4,M) 0,J) 3,A) 2,M) 1,B) Loved 4 0] 4,M) 1,B) 0,J) 3,A) 2,M) Loved 4 1] CS 22 Related Work Rational Reconstructions of DRT based on DPL When dynamic semantics for NL rst was proposed in [25] and [20] the approach invoked strong opposition from the followers of Montague [31] Rational reconstructions to restore compositionality were announced in [16] and carried out in [15, 7, 22, 33, 34, 32, 8, 12, 28, 29] All of these reconstructions are based in some way or other on DPL [16] and ....

....32, 8, 12, 28, 29] All of these reconstructions are based in some way or other on DPL [16] and they all inherit the main aw of this approach: the destructive assignment problem. Interestingly, DRT itself did not su er from this problem: the discourse representation construction algorithms of [25] and [26] are stated in terms of functions with nite domains, and carefully talk about taking a fresh discourse referent to extend the domain of a verifying function, for each new NP to be processed. New Rational Reconstruction of DRT The present approach, based on ID rather than DPL, makes ....

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....which are taken to reflect surface clause order 1 Our use of the term anaphora does not include anaphoric relations such as those established by pronouns and definite descriptions. Accounts of these relations have been actively pursued in other discourse oriented semantic theories such as DRT (Kamp, 1981) and Dynamic semantics (Groenendijk Stokhof, 1991) Obviously, a full account of the phenomenon of anaphora in discourse will have to take these into account. But they are not our present concern. 2 In all the elementary trees shown in the paper, Pi marks the anchor of the tree, # marks ....

Kamp, Hans (1981). A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In J. Groenendijk, Th. Janssen & M. Stokhof (Eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pp. 277--322. Amsterdam: Mathematisch Centrum Tracts.

....technical manuals of specific nature. The systems provide word for word as well as phrase translation with multiple alternatives that can only be decided through human interaction. A lot of work in formalising the semantics and composition of Western languages, particularly English, has been done [4, 5, 6, 7]. Such semantic representations are based on context free grammars and strongly tied with the language syntax [8] This only allows us to construct systems based on a specific language with out any portability to other languages. Recently a new paradigm of natural language processing is developed ....

H. Kamp, "A theory of truth and semantic representation" in Papers from the Second Symposium on Logic and Language, Editors, L. Kalman and L. Polos, Budapest 1990.

....of terms under provable equality as elements of the canonical model) 7. A Variation on the Theme To justify the plural in the title of this paper, first note that the approach to axiomatising dynamic predicate logic carries over without a hitch to the analysis of Discourse Representation Theory [8, 5]. The version for DRT looks even more elegant because the shift rules are absorbed by the set theoretic notation for DRSs. This reflects the fact that the syntax of DRT is more abstract than that of DPL. To keep as close as possible to the previous calculus, we consider a version of DRT where DRS ....

....DRS v 1 v n v n 1 v m C 1 C k : 1. v 1 vn # vn 1 vm = #, 2. # i M(C i ) # v 1 vm . We can now define the condition F I C 1 Cn # D as F I C 1 Cn , D . Here is a semantics in terms of partial assignments, following the original set up in [8]. Definition 27 ( Semantics of DRT) M, f = # never M, f = P t 1 t n i# #[ t 1 ] M f , t n ] M f # # P M M, f = D i# there is no g with M, f, g = D M, f, g = F I C 1 Cn i# f : F # dom(M) g : F # I # dom(M) M, g = C 1 , M, g ....

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....and pragmatics, the contents and contexts are kept separate. The initial problem that motivated the present theory is the interpretation of nominal and temporal anaphora in discourse. The key idea in the way of thinking about the semantics of discourse in context exemplified in Heim [21] and Kamp [23] is that each new sentence or phrase is interpreted as an addition to, or update of, the context in which it is used and that this update often involves connections between elements from the sentence or phrase with elements from the context. In the approach of Kamp [23] which we will follow ....

....in Heim [21] and Kamp [23] is that each new sentence or phrase is interpreted as an addition to, or update of, the context in which it is used and that this update often involves connections between elements from the sentence or phrase with elements from the context. In the approach of Kamp [23], which we will follow more closely here than the largely equivalent approach of Heim [21] this idea is implemented in the form of interpretation rules each associated with a particular lexical item or syntactic construction. When applied to a given sentence S, these rules identify the semantic ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

....to be addressed for a systematic treatment of vernacular mathematics. In vernacular proofs, variable letters are introduced and used in a way that does not conform to the usual interpretation offered for referring expressions in the formal semantics of natural language (Kamp and Reyle, 1993; Kamp, 1981; Heim, 1982; Groenendijk and Stokhof, 1990; Groenendijk and Stokhof, 1991; Heim, 1982) although such phenomena do appear to arise in everyday language. These phenomena must be addressed if we wish to use computer aided reasoning systems to check the informal correctness proofs of computer ....

....letters act rather like names of potential antecedents for anaphora in the context. Unlike pronouns, variable letters are explicitly coindexed with the appropriate referents in the discourse. We can analyse such expression in theories of discourse phenomena, such as Discourse Representation Theory (Kamp, 1981; Kamp and Reyle, 1993) In the case of (1) and (2) we can aim to produce a representation corresponding to the Discourse Representation Structure that is something like: x a (x) name 0 (x; a) where a can then be used as a name to refer to x in the subsequent discourse. We could take a ....

Kamp, H. (1981). Theory of truth and semantic representation. In Groenendijk, J., Janssen, T., and Stokhof, M., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Mathematical Centre Tracts 135, pages 277--322. Amsterdam.

.... (Williams, 1977; Reinhart, 1983; May, 1985) 2 kinds of pronouns lambda binder is LF operator QR takes place at LF Problems with Sag s theory Empirical: sloppy identity is more exible than predicted Theoretical: must be extended to deal with multi sentence discourse, as in eg DRT (Kamp, 1980; Heim, 1982) or E type approach (Evans, 1977; Heim, 1990) Today s Talk: Ellipsis reveals aspects of the structure and the interpretation of multi sentence discourse This shift in perspective is relevant to both the empirical and theoretical problems of Sag s theory 2 A Beautiful Theory ....

Hans Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T.M.V. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pages 277-322. Dordrecht, 1980. Volume 136.

....ever since the time when the problem was discovered. 1. 3 Presuppositions in Dynamic Semantics A major advance in dealing with projection questions came with the development of Dynamic Semantics, initially in the two forms of File Change Semantics [Heim 1982] and Discourse Representation Theory [Kamp 1981]. In her seminal paper [Heim 1983] the author showed how the framework of Dynamic Semantics makes it possible to account for many of the most uncontroversial projection data (pertaining to the behaviour of presuppositions in conjunctions, conditionals and under quantification) virtually without ....

....with aspects of the Projection Problem (and specifically with the related issues of accommodation) But for us its central importance lies elsewhere. Van der Sandt makes use of DRT. But he adopted a form of it which differs significantly from early versions of the theory, like the ones of [Kamp 1981] or [Kamp and Reyle 1993] Both in these earlier versions and in that of van der Sandt the basic interpretation strategy is cumulative: To interpret a discourse s 1 ; s n , begin by building a representation K 1 of s 1 , then use this representation as context for the interpretation of s 2 ....

Kamp, Hans. 1981. A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Part 1, ed. J. A. G. Groenendijk, T. M. Janssen, and M. B. Stokhof. 277 -- 322. Mathematisch Centrum: Amsterdam .

....by adding to calculus algebraic features allowing one, in particular, to deal with equality in an ecient way. In the rst case, we nd the works on CRS [38] XRS [49] and other higher order rewriting systems [58, 44] in the second case the works on combination of calculus with term rewriting [46, 5, 21, 30] to mention only a few. Our previous works on the control of term rewriting [35, 56, 3] led us to introduce the calculus. Indeed we realized that the tool that is needed in order to control rewriting should be made explicit and could be itself naturally described using rewriting. By viewing the ....

....Notes in Theoretical Computer Science. 20] F. Fages and G. Huet. Uni cation and matching in equational theories. In Proceedings Fifth Colloquium on Automata, Algebra and Programming, L Aquila (Italy) volume 159 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 205 220. Springer Verlag, 1983. [21] J. Gallier and V. Breazu Tannen. Polymorphic rewriting conserves algebraic strong normalization and con uence. In 16th Colloquium Automata, Languages and Programming, volume 372 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 137 150. Springer Verlag, 1989. 22] J. A. Goguen, C. Kirchner, H. ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk et al., editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

No context found.

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, Th. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pages 277 -- 322. Mathematisch Centrum Tracts, Amsterdam, 1981.

No context found.

Kamp, Hans (1981). "A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation" in Formal Methods in the Study of Language, J. Groenedijk, J. Janssen, M. Stokhof, eds. Amsterdam: Mathematical Center Tracts.

No context found.

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language: Part 1, pages 277 -- 322. Mathematisch Centrum, 1981.

No context found.

H. Kamp, "A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representations", Formal Methods in the Study of Natural Language, Part 1, Mathematisch Centrum, Tract 135, pp. 277-322, Amsterdam, 1981.

No context found.

Hans Kamp, `A Theory of Truth and semantic Representation', in Groenendijk, Janssen & Stokhof (eds.) Formal Methods in the Study of Language

No context found.

Hans Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Jansenn, and M. Stokhof, editors, Truth, Interpretation and Information, pages 1--41. Foris Publications, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1984.

No context found.

Hans Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T.M.V. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pages 277--322. Dordrecht, 1980. Volume 136.

No context found.

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In P. Gardenfoers, editor, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

No context found.

Hans Kamp, `A Theory of Truth and semantic Representation', in Groenendijk, Janssen & Stokhof (eds.) Formal Methods in the Study of Language

No context found.

H. Kamp. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J.; T. Janssen; Groe- nendijk and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1981.

No context found.

Kamp, Hans. 1981. A Theory of Truth and Semantic Rep- resentation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, and M. Stokhof (eds), Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Amster- dam: Mathematical Center.

No context found.

Kamp, H. (1981), "A theory of truth and semantic representation", In: Groenendijk et al. (eds), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Amsterdam, pp. 277-322.

No context found.

Kamp, J.A.W. 1981, A theory of truth and semantic representation, In: Groenendijk et. al. (eds), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Amsterdam, Floris, pp. 277-322.

No context found.

Kamp, H. (1981), "A theory of truth and semantic representation", In: Groenendijk et al. (eds), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Amsterdam, pp. 277-322.

No context found.

Kamp, H. (1981), "A theory of truth and semantic representation", In: Groenendijk et al. (eds), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Amsterdam, pp. 277-322.

No context found.

Kamp, H. (1981), `A theory of truth and semantic representation', In: Groenendijk et. al. (eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Amsterdam, 277-322.

No context found.

Kamp, H.: 1981, A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation, in J. Groenendijk, Th. Janssen, and M. Stokhof (eds.), Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Part I, Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 277-322.

No context found.

Hans Kamp. 1981. A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. Formal Methods in the Study of Language, 136 pp. 277-322, Mathematical Centre Tracts.

No context found.

Kamp, Hans (1981). A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation.In J. Groenendijk, Th. Janssen & M. Stokhof (Eds.), Formal Methods 20 in the Study of Language, pp. 277--322. Amsterdam: Mathematisch Centrum Tracts.

No context found.

Hans Kamp. 1981. A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, Th. Janssen, and M. Stokhof, editors, Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pages 277 { 322. Mathematisch Centrum Tracts, Amsterdam.

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