D. Marcu and G. Hirst. 1994. An implemented formalism for computing linguistic presuppositions and existential commitments. In H. Bunt, R. Muskens, and G. Rentier, editors, International Workshop on Computational Semantics, pages 141--150, December. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Updating Discourse Context with Active Logic - Gurney, Purang, Perlis (Correct)
....2. These are the rules that we will use as a basis for our implementation of discourse context updating which we will present in section 4. We will motivate our implementation as one which (a) preserves the correct results of Heim and also (b) deals with other examples such as D 7 , D 8 , and D 9 below that Heim s rules do not account for. These three examples are superficially similar to those above. However they present problems for a computational theory of presupposition and context that have not been widely discussed (but see the section 6 where we mention [ 9 ] 1 For our ....
....such as D 7 , D 8 , and D 9 below that Heim s rules do not account for. These three examples are superficially similar to those above. However they present problems for a computational theory of presupposition and context that have not been widely discussed (but see the section 6 where we mention [ 9 ] 1 For our purposes here we will only work with examples where presupposition is caused by the use of a definite description. What we say could also be said for some other sources of presupposition, including factive verbs as in D4 , possessives as in D3 and cleft sentences. D 7 = h The ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Daniel Marcu and Graeme Hirst. An implemented formalism for computing linguistic presuppositions and existential commitments. pages 141--150. International Workshop on Computational Semantics, 1994.
A Uniform Treatment of Pragmatic Inferences in Simple and.. - Marcu, Hirst (1995) (1 citation) Self-citation (Marcu Hirst) (Correct)
....phenomenon preferred to keep defeasibility outside the mathematical world. For Frege (1892) Russell (1905) and Quine (1949) everything exists ; therefore, in their logical systems, it is impossible to formalize the cancellation of the presupposition that definite referents exist (Hirst, 1991; Marcu and Hirst, 1994). We can taxonomize previous approaches to defeasible pragmatic inferences into three categories (we omit here work on defeasibility related to linguistic phenomena such as discourse, anaphora, or speech acts) 1. Most linguistic approaches account for the defeasibility of pragmatic inferences by ....
....using an implementation written in Common Lisp that uses Screamer (Siskind and McAllester, 1993) a macro package that provides nondeterministic constructs. 2 Stratified logic 2.1 Theoretical foundations We can offer here only a brief overview of stratified logic. The reader is referred to Marcu (1994) for a comprehensive study. Stratified logic supports one type of indefeasible information and two types of defeasible information, namely, infelicitously defeasible and felicitously defeasible. The notion of infelicitously defeasible information is meant to capture inferences that are anomalous ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
D. Marcu and G. Hirst. 1994. An implemented formalism for computing linguistic presuppositions and existential commitments. In H. Bunt, R. Muskens, and G. Rentier, editors, International Workshop on Computational Semantics, pages 141--150, December.
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