Lascarides, A. and Asher, N. (1993). Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations, and Common Sense Entailment. Linguistics & Philosophy, 16(5):437--493. 66 BIBLIOGRAPHY  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....used in terms of probability is not the only possibility. One could also, for instance, draw a profitable analogy between the treatment of presupposition in this paper and the common sense driven analyses of discourse and temporal relations in the work of Asher, Lascarides and Oberlander (see e.g. [LA93]) who use a special purpose non monotonic logic. One might take various temporal expressions (e.g. tensed verbs) as presupposing some temporal reference with accommodation then being necessary to build the most plausible link between previously introduced temporal discourse referents and the new ....

Lascarides, A. and Asher, N., 1993. Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment, Linguistics and Philosophy 16:5, pp 437--495.

....continue the description conveyed by the structure to which the tree adjoins. Other aspects of meaning that relate the two arguments are derived anaphorically or inferentially (e.g. based on the relationship between the tense aspect of the two arguments (Hitzeman et al. 1995; Kehler, 1994; 2000; Lascarides Asher, 1993; Webber, 1988) The anchor of this tree can also remain lexically unrealized, when it is used to connect adjacent clauses without overt connectives, such as Mary walked towards the car. The door was open . The tree in Figure 1.3(b) is selected by connectives whose first argument is resolved ....

Lascarides, Alex & Nicholas Asher (1993). Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16(5):437-- 493.

.... and in fact, many researches have been using general reasoning frameworks in Artificial Intelligence such as abduction (Hobbs et al. 1993) probabilistic network (Charniak and Goldman, 1989) truth maintenance system (Zernik and Brown, 1988) default logic (Quantz, 1993) and conditional logic (Lascarides, 1993). In this paper, we propose another alternative, that is, circumscription (McCarthy, 1986; Lifschitz, 1985) Even though circumscription is one of the most popular formalisms in the community of nonmonotonic reasoning research, it is surprising that very few has examined feasibility of ....

Lascarides, A. and Asher, N. 1993. Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations, and Commonsense Entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, Vol. 16, pages 437 -- 493.

....used in terms of probability is not the only possibility. One could also, for instance, draw a pro table analogy between the treatment of presupposition in this paper and the common sense driven analyses of discourse and temporal relations in the work of Asher, Lascarides and Oberlander (see e.g. [LA93]) who use a special purpose non monotonic logic. One might take various temporal expressions (e.g. tensed verbs) as presupposing some temporal reference with accommodation then being necessary to build the most plausible link between previously introduced temporal discourse referents and the new ....

Lascarides, A. and Asher, N., 1993. Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment, Linguistics and Philosophy 16:5, pp 437-495.

.... [ Lascarides, 1995 ] and [ Lascarides et al. 1996 ] following [ Frank and Reyle, 1995 ] interpret these TDFS descriptions within an extended version of discourse representation theory integrated with an approach to discourse interpretation based on a conditional default logic (SDRT DICE, Lascarides and Asher, 1993 ] Thus, the process of compositional semantic interpretation can be implemented using successive applications of typed default unification, and this allows us to formalise underspecification, broadening, coercion, co composition and co predication as an interaction between lexical semantic ....

Lascarides, A. and Asher, N. 1993. Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and common sense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy 16:437--493.

....a reaction to the completion of event 1. Here, the reaction relation holds between event 2 and the beginning of a new state marking the completion of event 1. This 23 The discourse relations enablement and response are not used in others treatments of discourse rhetorical relations, such as Lascarides and Asher 1993, Mann and Thompson 1986 and Polanyi 1988, but are newly introduced by GS, who does not give precise criteria for distinguishing between them. 24 We could say consequence of , but we will avoid this because consequence has connotations of causality. 25 One which in this case happens to be ....

Lascarides, A. and N. Asher (1993) Temporal interpretation, discourse structure and common sense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy 16, 437--493.

....(50) This problem was to have been looked into, but obviously nobody did. look into the problem] Vincent Della Pietra, in conversation) 51) Of course this theory could be expressed using SDRSs, but for the sake of simplicity we have chosen not to. express this theory using SDRSs] from text of Lascarides and Asher (1993)) Less frequent, but still evidenced, are cases in which a target in the passive voice receives its interpretation from a source in the active voice. 4 We discuss Hume s third category of relation, Contiguity, in Section 3.7.1. 5 The phrase shown in brackets after each example indicates the ....

....for instance the fact that causes precede effects. 5.3. 1 Background and Past Work Tense interpretation has received much attention in linguistics (Partee, 1984; Hinrichs, 1986; Nerbonne, 1986, inter alia) and natural language processing (Webber, 1988; Kameyama, Passonneau, and Poesio, 1993; Lascarides and Asher, 1993, inter alia) Several researchers (Partee, 1984; Hinrichs, 1986; Nerbonne, 1986; Webber, 1988) have sought to explain the temporal relations induced by tense by treating it as anaphoric, drawing on Reichenbach s separation between event, speech, and reference times (Reichenbach, 1947) To account ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Lascarides, Alex and Nicolas Asher. 1993. Temporal interpretation, discourse relations, and common sense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16(5):437--493.

....relations that hold between them. In this paper, we show how one can find and exploit approximate solutions for both of these problems by capitalizing on the occurrences of certain lexicogrammatical constructs. Such constructs can include tense and aspect (Moens and Steedman, 1988; Webber, 1988; Lascarides and Asher, 1993), certain patterns of pronominalization and anaphoric usages (Sidner, 1981; Grosz and Sidner, 1986; Sumita et al. 1992; Grosz, Joshi, and Weinstein, 1995) it clefts (Delin and Oberlander, 1992) and discourse markers or cue phrases (Ballard, Conrad, and Longacre, 1971; Halliday and Hasan, 1976; ....

Lascarides, Alex and Nicholas Asher. 1993. Temporal interpretation, discourse relations, and common sense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16(5):437-- 493.

....as they appear in the discourse, and not as they occur temporally. This manner of incorporation makes it very easy to make predictions about how a new eventuality may be related to existing ones. It turns out that the right frontier idea from rhetorical relations (Polanyi (1988) Webber (1991) Lascarides Asher (1991,1993)) works here as well. It claims that when a structure like the temporal trees is built for discourse relations, a new node may only be added as the daughter of a node that is on the right frontier. The right frontier in our case includes any reference time which is the rightmost reference time in ....

Lascarides, Alex and Nicholas Asher. 1993. Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy 16. 437-493.

....fact, the principal criticism made about the present methodology (Bateman and Rondhuis (1994) Seligman (1994) has been that it concentrates exclusively on cue phrases. There are certainly other means of signalling discourse structure. A great many researchers (see e.g. Moens and Steedman (1988) Lascarides and Asher (1993)) have shown that tense and aspect are cues to the temporal structure in a text. Scott and de Souza (1990) have explored a large number of syntactic devices as signallers of rst relations. Several researchers (e.g. Sidner (1983) Grosz and Sidner (1986) have suggested that the pattern of ....

Lascarides, A. and Asher, N. (1993). Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and common sense entailment. To appear in Linguistics and Philosophy.

....of Pro active focus 21 Of course, Grice only discussed the application of the CP and maxims to inferring implicatures. 10 He seems to have ignored or been unaware of the pragmatics of determining the proposition expressed. Still, a more recent pragmatic approach to determining content (Asher and Lascarides (1993)) apply strategies based on some of Grice s maxims to determining the proposition expressed. The difference here is that the examples are not counterfactuals. This step is made to simplify 11 matters since counterfactuals introduce extra complications. However, I do not see that the treatment of ....

Asher, N. & A. Lascarides 1993. Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and common sense entailment, in Linguistics and philosophy 16. 437-493.

....pluperfect which triggers the jump back in time. Additionally, we also need to derive a rhetorical relation binding the two sentences together which is due to our world knowledge about the described situations. Former approaches model this phenomenon via a non monotonic reasoning system. Asher Lascarides (1993), for instance, employ a default logic in order to grasp these data. Similarly, a proposal by van den Berg (1996) following Polanyi (1988) offers a logic which rewrites the generated representation. Finally, a formalism by ter Meulen (1996) models the discourse structure in (1a b) by overriding ....

....by the when clause (i.e. 3g) However, note that the situation of Jane s deciding to take a look is temporally unrelated to the sequence described in (3a e) Whether she made this decision during the call, after the call or after she left the phone booth is not derivable from this text. 2 Lascarides Asher (1993) cannot provide an explanation for this kind of sequence, because they do not discuss when clauses. It is important to note that this clause locates sentence (3f) in a deeply embedded discourse segment. If we neglected this effect of the when clause, the non monotonic reasoning system would derive ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Lascarides, A. & N. Asher (1993). Temporal interpretation, discourse structure and commonsense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy 16, 437--493.

....is no topic shared between the two sentences in the discourse. 10) Max came in. Mary s hair is black. For reasons of space, I will not be able to give a formal account of the analysis of the discourses in (9) Rather, I will give an informal description of the analysis. The reader is referred to Lascarides and Asher (1991, 1993), Lascarides and Copestake (1995) and Lascarides et al. (1995) for details of the formal application of DICE. I label the DRSs representing (9a,b) as ff; fi and the DRSs representing (9c(i iii) as fl; ffi; ffl respectively in Figure 1. The DRS fl will represent the indefeasible interpretation He ....

Lascarides, A. and Asher, N. (1993). Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and common sense entailment.

....possible worlds selection functions. Its truth conditions are completely standard except for the fact that the modal constraint centering (Chellas [1980] calls it mp) is not imposed on worlds selection functions. Such weak conditionals have been used to express pragmatic generalizations before, by Lascarides and Asher [1993] for example. What I will say about presuppositions and conversational implicatures dovetails with and complements their account of the interpretation of temporal and rhetorical relations left implicit in texts. I can now formalize representative examples of pragmatic generalizations and other ....

Lascarides, A., N. Asher.: 1993, 'Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment.' Linguistics and Philosophy 16, pp. 437-494.

....approach of the generative lexicon or GL (Pustejovsky, 1995) In a similar vein, recent advances in discourse interpretation have furnished a way of integrating pragmatics and semantics together into a context sensitive theory of discourse interpretation. SDRT is one such approach (Asher 1993, Lascarides and Asher 1993); exploiting the rhetorical function of information, it also introduces a complex and context sensitive type structure into the notion of discourse update viz. new information may be added to the context in a number of di erent ways re ecting distinct rhetorical functions. In the pair of examples ....

....can be supplied. SDRT makes use of a special purpose logic with limited access to other domains for building up logical forms of discourses from underspeci ed logical forms for clauses. This glue logic has a limited and partial access to the information content of discourse constituents, Lascarides and Asher (1993) and Asher and Fernando (1997) argue, because a full access to information content would render the task of computing logical forms hopelessly complex. Though we do not believe all of linguistic understanding should necessarily be computationally simple, computing logical forms, which is the ....

Lascarides, Alex and Nicholas Asher. 1993. Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment, in Linguistics and Philosophy, 16, pp.437-493.

No context found.

Alex Lascarides and Nicholas Asher. 1993. Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and commonsense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16:437--493.

....We will provide a precise and systematic account of how people compute bridging inferences, by formalising the process in a formal representation of discourse semantics known as SDRT (Asher, 1993) which incorporates rhetorical relations. An accompanying formal theory of pragmatics known as DICE (Lascarides and Asher, 1993) models how the construction of this discourse semantics is influenced by the reader s background knowledge. By mixing these ingredients, we hope to furnish a richer theory of how given information is processed than has been attempted so far, where both background knowledge and rhetorical ....

....as a mode of transport. But crucially, one uses the above lexical knowledge and world knowledge, as opposed to other world knowledge about camels, because this knowledge must be utilised to meet the coherence constraints imposed by the way (7b) connects to (7a) 7a) is stative, and according to Lascarides and Asher (1993), states normally provide background information. If this were the case here, however, then the camel being outside would temporally overlap the arrival, thereby blocking the camel from being the mode of transport because of the lexical semantics of arrive. But another coherence constraint on ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Lascarides, A. and N. Asher (1993) Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment, in Linguistics and Philosophy, 16, pp.437--493.

No context found.

Lascarides, A. and Asher, N. (1993). Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations, and Common Sense Entailment. Linguistics & Philosophy, 16(5):437--493. 66 BIBLIOGRAPHY

No context found.

Lascarides, A. and A. Nicholas: 1993. Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, Vol. 16(5), pp. 437-493.

No context found.

Lascarides, Alex & Nicholas Asher (1993). Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Commonsense Entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16(5):437--493.

No context found.

Alex Lascarides and Nicholas Asher. 1993. Temporal interpretation, discourse relations, and common sense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16(5):437--493.

No context found.

Lascarides, A., Asher, N. (1993). Temporal Interpretation, Discourse Relations and Common Sense Entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16, 437-493.

No context found.

Alex Lascarides and Nicolas Asher. 1993. Temporal interpretation, discourse relations, and common sense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy, 16(5):437-- 493.

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