ABSTRACT. The aim of this paper is twofold: (i) to introduce the framework of update semantics and to explain what kind of phenomena may successfully be analysed in it; (ii) to give a detailed analysis of one such phenomenon: default reasoning. KEY WORDS: dynamic semantics, defaults, epistemic modalities.

In a series of papers, Petra Hendriks, Helen de Hoop, and Henriette de Swart Lave applied optimality theory (OT) to semantics. These authors argue that there is a fundamental difference between the form of OT as used in syntax on the one hand and its form as used in semantics on the other hand. Whereas in the first case OT takes the point of view of the speaker, in the second case the point of view of the hearer is taken. The aim of this paper is to argue that the proper treatment of OT in natural language interpretation has to take both perspectives at the same time. A conceptual framework is established that realizes the integration of both perspectives. It will be argued that this framework captures the essence of the Gricean maxims and gives a precise explication of Atlas & Levinson's (1981) idea of balancing between informativeness and efficiency in natural language processing. The ideas are then applied to resolve some puzzles in natural language interpretation. 1

The paper proposes a theory relating syntax, semantics, and intonational prosody, and covering a wide range of English intonational tunes and their semantic interpretation in terms of focus and information structure. The theory is based on a version of combinatory categorial grammar which directly pairs phonological and logical forms without intermediary representational levels.

This book deals with the semantics of natural language expressions that are commonly taken to refer to individuals: pronouns, definite descriptions and proper names. It claims, contrary to previous theorizing, that they all have a common syntax and semantics, roughly that which is currently associated by philosophers and linguists with definite descriptions as construed in the tradition of Frege. As well as advancing this proposal, I hope to achieve at least one other aim, that of urging semanticists dealing with pronoun interpretation, in particular donkey anaphora, to consider a wider range of theories at all times than is sometimes done at present. I am thinking particularly of the gulf that seems to have emerged between those who practice some version of dynamic semantics (including DRT) and those who eschew this approach and rely on some version of the E-type analysis for donkey anaphora (if they consider this phenomenon at all). In my opinion there is too little work directly comparing the claims of these two schools (for that is what they amount to) and testing them against the data in the way that any two rival theories might be tested. (Irene Heim’s 1990 article in Linguistics and Philosophy does this, and

Contents 1. Introduction : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 3 2. The Problem of Anaphoric Linking in Context : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 4 3. Basic Ideas of Discourse Representation : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 5 4. Discourse Representation Structures : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 14 5. The Static and Dynamic Meaning of Representation Structures : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 17 6. Sequential Composition of Representation Structures : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 21 7. Strategies for Merging Representation Structures : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : 27 8. Disjoint Mer

Abstract not found

We describe a logic which is the same as first-order logic except that it allows control over the information that passes down from formulas to subformulas. For example the logic is adequate to express branching quantifiers. We describe a compositional semantics for this logic; in particular this gives a compositional meaning to formulas of the `information-friendly' language of Hintikka and Sandu. For first-order formulas the semantics reduces to Tarski's semantics for first-order logic. We prove that two formulas have the same interpretation in all structures if and only if replacing an occurrence of one by an occurrence of the other in a sentence never alters the truth-value of the sentence in any structure.

Abstract not found

We use the idea that actions performed in a conversation become part of the common ground as the basis for a model of context that reconciles in a general and systematic fashion the differences between the theories of discourse context used for reference resolution, intention recognition, and dialogue management. We start from the treatment of anaphoric accessibility developed in DRT, and we show first how to obtain a discourse model that, while preserving DRT's basic ideas about referential accessibility, includes information about the occurrence of speech acts and their relations. Next, we show how the different kinds of `structure' that play a role in conversation -- discourse segmentation, turn-taking, and grounding -- can be formulated in terms of information about speech acts, and use this same information as the basis for a model of the interpretation of fragmentary input.

The central claim of this dissertation is that an elliptical VP is a proform. This claim has two primary consequences: first, the elliptical VP can have no internal syntactic structure. Second, the interpretation of VP ellipsis must be governed by the same general conditions governing other proforms, such as pronouns. The basic condition governing the interpretation of a proform is that it must be semantically identified with its antecedent. A computational model is described in which this identification is mediated by store and retrieve operations defined with respect to a discourse model. Because VP ellipsis is treated on a par with other proforms, the ambiguity arising from “sloppy identity ” becomes epiphenomenal, resulting from the fact that the store and retrieve operations are freely ordered. A primary argument for the proform theory of VP ellipsis concerns syntactic constraints on variables within the antecedent. I examine many different types of variables, including reflexives, reciprocals, negative polarity items, and wh-traces. In all these cases, syntactic constraints are not respected under ellipsis. This indicates that the relation governing VP ellipsis is semantic rather than syntactic. In further support of the proform theory, I show that there is a striking similarity in the antecedence possibilities for VP ellipsis and those for pronouns. Two