GAZDAR, GERALD. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12.155--184.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....coordination of like categories , where the conjuncts being coordinated are of the same category. Coordination involves the combination of constituents using conjunctions like and and or. The coordination of like categories is implemented using an approach 107 equivalent to that used in [Gazdar 1981], which regards a coordinate structure as a string of any syntactic category composed of two or more substrings of that category linked by a conjunction. To encode this generalisation, the polymorphic functor category (X X) X is used, where X stands for any category. In the grammar di#erent types ....

Gazdar, G. Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure. Linguistic Inquiry, v. 12, n. 2, p. 155-184, 1981.

....the revival of modern Phrase Structure Grammars. This revival was initiated by the work of Brame, and others [Brame 1975] Brame 1976] but decisively by Gazdar, who showed that unbounded dependencies can be explained in a framework which uses phrase structure rules and category valued features [Gazdar 1981]. The development of phrase structure theories following GPSG has been concerned to take account of linguistic generalities through the addition of features to the lexicon, and thereby reduce the number of phrase 1 In the strict account of Japanese, auxiliaries are fully inflected verbs which ....

....and the Mother share semantics. Gunji proposes use of the the Filler Head schema as an alternative mechanism, and this possibility is explored in the next Subsection. 2. 7 Filler Head Schema In English, and some other languages, there are phenomena which are classified as unbounded dependencies [Gazdar 1981], and this set includes such things as topicalization and wh questions. In Examples 5 and 6 the object 10 Mother(slashhi) Filler(NP[1] Kim Head(S(slash[1] Subject(NP) Sandy Head(VP,slash[1] Head(V) loves Comp(NP,slash[1] trace[1] Figure 6: Topicalization: Kim, Sandy loves of the verb ....

Gazdar 1981 Gazdar, G., "Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure", Linguistic Inquiry 13, pp155-184,1981.

....linear logic and categorial grammars. In this work we show how linear logic can be used to provide an attractive encoding of phrase structure grammars for parsing structures involving unbounded dependencies. The resulting grammars are closely related to Generalized Phrase Structure Grammars [4, 5]. As part of the presentation we show how a variety of issues, such as island and coordination constraints can be dealt with in this model. 1 Introduction Over the last several years a number of researchers have proposed applications of Girard s Linear Logic [7] to computational linguistics. ....

....logic. In this work we show how linear logic can be used to provide a straightforward, perspicuous encoding of phrase structure grammars for parsing structures involving unbounded dependencies. The resulting grammars are closely related to the Generalized Phrase Structure Grammars of Gazdar [4, 5]. This work builds on earlier work by Pareschi and Miller [24, 25] Some of this work has been described previously in the proceedings of the 1992 JICSLP [9] and in the author s dissertation [10] The outline of this paper is as follows: In Section 2 we will review the basic principals of ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Gerald J. M. Gazdar. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 12(2):154--184, 1981.

.... 1994) The most interesting property of this variety of RNR for our purposes here is the fact that unlike other kinds of coordination it escapes the Coordinate Structure Constraint, which prevents movement of one conjunct independent of the other in standard coordination (Ross 1967; Schachter 1977; Gazdar 1981). 73) shows cases of impossible movement of conjuncts in standard coordination; 74) shows that passivization, raising, unaccusative raising, wh movement and topicalization can all apply to the first conjunct in non coordinate RNR, without affecting the second conjunct. 73) a. The ....

Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 12, 155--184.

....further lexical regularities in both morphology and semantics, and Bresnan (1976, 1982) pioneered the development of a syntactic framework (Lexical Functional Grammar) in which central grammatical phenomena such as passivization could be explained within the lexicon. A parallel line of work by Gazdar (1981) called Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar sought to provide a nontransformational syntactic framework, by employing metarules over a context free grammar. Gazdar et al. 1985) constrained the power of those metarules by restricting them to lexically headed phrase structure rules. Pollard and ....

Gazdar, G.: 1981, `Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure'. Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155--84.

....Interestingly, the information that is required on the nodes between a base position and the target of a constituent that is moved is coded in a state of the automaton, while the labels of the nodes remain unchanged. In this respect this approach differs from the slashfeature mechanism ([2]) that enables the computation of nonlocal dependencies in a weakly context free formalism too. The limits of both approaches are however similar: it is not possible to move an unbounded number of elements out of one constituent. This might however not be true for natural languages. The problem ....

Gerald Gazdar. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 12:155184, 1981.

....further lexical regularities in both morphology and semantics, and Bresnan (1976, 1982) pioneered the development of a syntactic framework (Lexical Functional Grammar) in which central grammatical phenomena such as passivization could be explained within the lexicon. A parallel line of work by Gazdar (1981) called Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar sought to provide a nontransformational syntactic framework, by employing metarules over a context free grammar. Gazdar et al. 1985) constrained the power of those metarules by restricting them to lexically headed phrase structure rules. Pollard and ....

Gazdar, G.: 1981, `Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure'. Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155--84.

.... of giving non transformational accounts of truly unbounded dependencies: Bresnan Kaplan (1982) Zaenen (1983) proposed a direct characterization with an unbounded feature passing mechanism within LFG, an idea further elaborated by Kaplan Zaenen (1989) with the notion of functional uncertainty; Gazdar 1981, Gazdar et al. 1985) proposed a treatment based on the category valued feature SLASH, inherited according to GPSG s Foot Feature Principle, a mechanism adapted to HPSG by Pollard Sag (1987, 1994) categorial grammarians have used function composition (cf. Dowty 1988, Steedman 1985) and Kroch ....

Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12:155--184.

....subj values entail that the case of the subject selected by the VP complement must be realized on the subject of the raising verb taking that complement. 10 Extraction The general outlines of the HPSG treatment of unbounded extractions follow the three part strategy developed in GPSG (Gazdar 1981, GKPS 1985) ffl An extra constituent is constrained to match a constituent missing from its clausal sister, and what is missing is represented in the description of the clausal sister as the value of the extraction recording feature slash. ffl The clausal sister must be missing a constituent ....

....universal claims are in fact language specific. Nonetheless, certain broad classes of effects do emerge from the analysis of extraction constructions. For example, linking gaps to lexical selection 48 predicts most of the English (generalized) left branch phenomena discussed by Ross and by Gazdar (1981), given that non head left branches are not sisters of a lexical head. Similarly, the Conjunct Condition of Ross Coordinate Structure Constraint (precluding the extraction of only one of a set of conjuncts, as illustrated in (53a) is also a consequence of the Nonlocal feature inheritance ....

Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12: 155-184.

.... Constraints on Extraction and Adjunction # Gosse Bouma Groningen University Rob Malouf Stanford University Ivan Sag Stanford University Draft of July 1, 1997 1 Introduction Feature based analyses of filler gap dependencies of the sort pioneered by Gazdar (1981) make a number of strikingly correct cross linguistic predictions. Most notable among these, given that information about the extracted element is locally encoded throughout the extraction path, is the prediction that some natural language phenomena might be sensitive to extraction information, ....

.... loc 1 # Kim who S # slash 1 # NP we VP # slash 1 # V know S # slash 1 # NP Dana V # slash 1 # hates Subject extraction, by contrast, is either not treated as extraction at all (as in the slashless subject VP analysis of (3a) proposed originally by Gazdar (1981)) or else it involves a lexical rule 1 Gazdar used the notation S NP to indicate an S from which an NP element is extracted. Slash has thus become the standard name for the set valued feature encoding what elements are missing from a given constituent. whose outputs are specified as [slash ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 12:155--84.

....subj values entail that the case of the subject selected by the VP complement must be realized on the subject of the raising verb taking that complement. 10 Extraction The general outlines of the HPSG treatment of unbounded extractions follow the three part strategy developed in GPSG (Gazdar 1981, GKPS 1985) ffl An extra constituent is constrained to match a constituent missing from its clausal sister, and what is missing is represented in the description of the clausal sister as the value of the extraction recording feature slash. ffl The clausal sister must be missing a constituent ....

....universal claims are in fact language specific. Nonetheless, certain broad classes of effects do emerge from the analysis of extraction constructions. For example, linking gaps to lexical selection 46 predicts most of the English (generalized) left branch phenomena discussed by Ross and by Gazdar (1981), given that non head left branches are not sisters of a lexical head. Similarly, the Conjunct Condition of Ross Coordinate Structure Constraint (precluding the extraction of only one of a set of conjuncts, as illustrated in (49a) is also a consequence of the Nonlocal feature inheritance ....

Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12: 155-184.

....complexly conditioned, rules is similar to the compilation of a logical theory with defaults into a non default theory. Bird has answered the first important question, showing how destructive processes can be modeled in a monostratal theory; in some sense, this is extending the tradition begun by Gazdar (1981) in showing that certain syntactic processes could be modeled without transformations. But the issue remains as to whether the result is a lingusitically satisfying theory in terms of capturing the relevant generalizations. The lengthening rule and flapping rule are independently motivated, and it ....

Gazdar, G., 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155--184.

....presented in joint papers with Miller [5, 7] addresses all of the failings of the previous solutions, while maintaining the naturality of Miller and Pareschi s system. 2 Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar The Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar (GPSG) formalism developed by Gerald Gazdar [1, 2, 3] demonstrated that it is possible to parse grammatical structures involving unbounded dependencies, such as relative clauses and wh questions, using a phrase structure grammar. Previously it had been thought that such constructs were too complex for phrase structure grammars, which are ....

Gerald J. M. Gazdar. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 12(2):154--184, 1981.

....unbounded dependencies that are called filler gap constructions in HPSG. This is the subclass of constructions with an overt filler ; other members of this subclass include WHquestions and WH relative clauses. The HPSG treatment of unbounded dependencies is losely based on Gazdar s 1981 analysis [8]. Filler gap constructions are seen as composed of three parts: They are introduced by a special sign with a phonological null value called the trace, and they are discharged or bound by the filler constituent. Information is shared between the trace and the filler by propagating it, via the ....

Gerald Gazdar. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 12:155--184, 1981.

....h i arg s h 1 , 2 4 loc 3 nloc j slash n 3 o 3 5 i nloc j slash n 3 o 3 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 5 3 See Pollard and Sag 1987, Flickinger 1987, and Flickinger and Nerbonne 1992. 4 We follow the explicit proposals introduced by Pollard and Sag (1994) who adapt ideas developed originally by Gazdar (1981). IVAN A. SAG DANI ELE GODARD The systematic registration in argument structures of information about longdistance dependencies is the backbone of the HPSG analysis of parasitic gaps developed in Pollard and Sag (1994: chap. 9) 5 and will also play a fundamental role in our unified ....

Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12: 155--184.

....I am not sure if the present account proposes a satisfactory semantics, appears in Hoeksema(1983) as well as Landman(1989) and Schwarzschild (1992) For example: 21 See Dik(1968:p.53) for an historical survey of this issue. A more elaborate structure can also be used here (see for example Gazdar(1981)) but the point is that some parallel syntactic difference between the subjects in the two sentences should be reflected in the structural representation. 36) Mary and John ] and [ Sue and Bill ] fought each other. This sentence can be intuitively interpreted in three ways: 36 ) a. Mary and ....

Gazdar, G.(1981), "Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure", Linguistic Inquiry 12: 155-184.

....Extraction is thus treated entirely in terms of the inheritance of SLASH specifications, with binding off of the SLASH specification occurring at an appropriate point higher in the structure. This analysis of extraction dependencies is a traceless 43 variant of the one proposed originally by Gazdar (1981). The examples discussed above involving nonlocal en affixation from subject position present a difficulty for all such analyses. The problem is that in these examples, e.g. 76) the binding off of the nonempty SLASH specification is triggered by a verb that is lower in the structure. 76) La fin ....

Gazdar, Gerald: 1981, `Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure', Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155--184.

.... Constraints on Extraction and Adjunction Gosse Bouma Groningen University Rob Malouf Stanford University Ivan Sag Stanford University Draft of June, 1998 1 Introduction Feature based analyses of filler gap dependencies of the sort pioneered by Gazdar (1981) make a number of strikingly correct cross linguistic predictions. Most notable among these, given that information about the extracted element is locally encoded throughout the extraction path, is the prediction that some natural language phenomena might be sensitive to extraction information, ....

.... i NP h loc 1 i Kim who S h slash f 1 g i NP we VP h slash f 1 g i V know S h slash f 1 g i NP Dana V h slash f 1 g i hates Subject extraction, by contrast, is either not treated as extraction at all, as in the slashless subject VP analysis of (2a) proposed originally by Gazdar (1981)) or else it involves a lexical rule which applies to the verb governing the clause from which the subject is extracted, and whose output is a verbal sign specified as [slash fNPg] and selecting for an unslashed vp, as in (2b) 1 Gazdar used the notation S NP to indicate an S from which an NP ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry, 12:155--184.

.... : ate(opus) and co : and Opus drank s(fin) ate(opus) s(fin) and(ate(opus) drank(opus) 185) As usual, we will not be concerned with the value of and, but the situation is slightly different here in that and must be polymorphic and apply to an arbitrary pair of verbal categories (see Gazdar 1980). A verbal category is defined to be any category with an applicative result of s. For the sake of illustration, we make the following semantic assumption: OE(f ) g) x 1 Delta Delta Delta x n :OE(f (x 1 ) Delta Delta Delta (x n ) g(x 1 ) Delta Delta Delta (x n ) 186) where OE is the ....

Gazdar, G., 1981b. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155--184.

....(1985, 1988) Furthermore, the harmonic versions of Steedman s composition and type raising rules can also be generated by the combination of the left and right schemes for the slashes. Next, consider the rule for the gap constructor, it generalizes the slash introduction metarule of gpsg (Gazdar 1981), which is also employed in hpsg. Slash introduction simply admits the derived rule, A Bn B 1 ; Bn Gamma1 ; Bn 1 ; Bm , in psg notation, from an existing rule A B 1 ; Bn Gamma1 ; Bn ; Bn 1 ; Bm . But rather than employ a notion of slash passing, the relation ....

Gazdar, G. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155--184.

....but do not always process word by word (e.g. Pulman 1986) difficult to encode in a purely lexicalist framework. As an example, it briefly describes an analysis of English non constituent coordination. The analysis has much in common with both grammar based accounts of coordination (e.g. Gazdar 1981, Steedman 1985) and procedural accounts such as SYSCONJ (Woods 1973) 2. DYNAMIC SPECIFICATIONS This section provides a formal notation for describing the dynamics of a process i.e. the states and the possible transitions between states. The notation is designed to enable modelling of the ....

....is therefore similar to starting with the sentence: 7) John gave Mary a book about subjacency and gave Peter a paper about subjacency There are two problems with such an approach. The first is similar to that encountered by Conjunction Reduction analyses of coordination, and pointed out by Gazdar (1981). If parts of sentences which are shared by both conjunct (such as the about subjacency) are parsed separately, then there are problems in interpretation. For example 8) John gave Mary a book and Peter a paper by the same author is fine, but 9) John gave Mary a book by the same author and Peter a ....

Gazdar, G.: 1981, `Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure', Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155-184.

No context found.

GAZDAR, GERALD. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry 12.155--184.

No context found.

Gazdar, G. (1981), `Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure '. Linguistic Inquiry 12: 155--184.

No context found.

Gazdar, Gerald. 1981. Unbounded dependencies and coordinate structure. Linguistic Inquiry

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