Đang chuẩn bị nút TẢI XUỐNG, xin hãy chờ
Tải xuống
We describe a method for interpreting abstract fiat syntactic representations, LFG fstructures, as underspecified semantic representations, here Underspecified Discourse Representation Structures (UDRSs). The method establishes a one-to-one correspondence between subsets of the LFG and UDRS formalisms. It provides a model theoretic interpretation and an inferential component which operates directly on underspecified representations for fstructures through the translation images of f-structures as UDRSs. . | On Interpreting F-Structures as UDRSs Josef van Genabith School of Computer Applications Dublin City University Dublin 9 Ireland j osefQcompapp.dcu.ie Richard Crouch Department of Computer Science University of Nottingham University Park Nottingham NG7 2RD UK rsc@cs.nott.ac.uk Abstract We describe a method for interpreting abstract flat syntactic representations LFG f-structures as underspecified semantic representations here Underspecified Discourse Representation Structures UDRSs . The method establishes a one-to-one correspondence between subsets of the LFG and UDRS formalisms. It provides a model theoretic interpretation and an inferential component which operates directly on underspecified representations for f-structures through the translation images of f-structures as UDRSs. 1 Introduction Lexical Functional Grammar LFG f-structures Kaplan and Bresnan 1982 Dalrymple et al. 1995a are attribute-value matrices representing high level syntactic information abstracting away from the particulars of surface realization such as word order or inflection while capturing underlying generalizations. Although f-structures are first and foremost syntactic representations they do encode some semantic information namely basic predicate argument structure in the semantic form value of the PRED attribute. Previous approaches to providing semantic components for LFGs concentrated on providing schemas for relating or translating f-structures in to sets of disambiguated semantic representations which are then interpreted model theoretically Halvorsen 1983 Halvorsen and Kaplan 1988 Fenstad et al. 1987 Wedekind and Kaplan 1993 Dalrymple et al. 1996 . More recently Gen-abith and Crouch 1996 presented a method for providing a direct and underspecified interpretation of f-structures by interpreting them as quasi-logical forms QLFs Alshawi and Crouch 1992 . The approach was prompted by striking structural similarities between f-structure r PRED coach -1 SUBJ NUM SG SPEC EVERY PRED .
