Ax Grammars for Natural Languages
Ax Grammars for Natural Languages
复制标题
自然语言的 Axe 语法
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1991
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
H. Koster
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
H. Koster
有限格上的AAx文法（agfls）是两层文法的一种简单形式，它是自然语言语法的一种形式化表达。本文介绍了自适应模糊逻辑的概念和表示法。一个简短的例子是他们在描述一个片段的英语语言，其次是分析和歧义等问题的讨论。1信息学和语言学信息学和语言学对句法有着共同的兴趣。在这个世纪的60年代，新兴的信息科学全心全意地接受了形式语言理论，这在当时已经可以从逻辑学和数学语言学中获得。在接下来的几十年里，信息学家极大地扩展和丰富了形式语言理论。他们设计了ecient解析算法，并将理论用于编程语言的描述和编译器的构建，软件工程环境，交互式用户界面和其他形式的语法指导软件。这一整套理论和实践在现代语言学中也是可用的。信息学现在可以向语言学偿还历史债务了|饶有兴趣1.1根据劳动分工，语言学家不应该写程序。开始，他们对软件开发人员的职业装备不足，教育不足。此外，对编程的迷恋往往使他们无法发挥自己的专长。语言学家应该写语法而不是程序。封装在程序中的语言知识就像是一具躺在涂着白色灰泥的坟墓中的尸体。即使该程序工作正确和eciently，它是注定要消失的最后，由于缺乏维护。没有人会从C程序或LISP程序的灰烬中复活知识：我们可以肯定程序员已经陶醉于巧妙的技巧的开发，而不会费心去写文档。另一方面，文法是一种纯粹的“描述”，没有任何操作上的考虑，它允许许多不同的实现。一种语法可以作为许多不同的语法的基础。
AAx Grammars over a Finite Lattice (agfls), a simple form of two-level grammars admitting quite eecient implementations, are proposed as a formalism to express the syntax of natural languages. In this paper the concepts and notation of agfls are described. A brief example is given of their use in describing a fragment of the English language, followed by a discussion of issues like parsing and ambiguity. 1 Informatics and Linguistics Informatics and Linguistics have a common interest in syntax. In the sixties of this century the emerging science of Informatics wholeheartedly embraced the theory of Formal Languages, which was already at that time available from Logics and Mathematical Linguistics. In the next decades, informaticians have greatly enlarged and enriched Formal Language theory. They have devised eecient parsing algorithms and put the theory to useful work in the description of programming languages and the construction of compilers, software engineering environments, interactive user interfaces and other forms of syntax-directed software. This whole body of theory and practice is available in its turn to modern Linguistics. Informatics can now pay back its historical debt to Linguistics | with interest. 1.1 On a division of labour Linguists should not write programs. To begin with, they are ill-equipped and ill-educated for the profession of software developer. Furthermore, a fascination with programming tends to keep them from exercising their own speciality. Linguists should write grammars rather than programs. Linguistic knowledge encapsulated in a program is like a corpse in a white-plastered grave. Even if the program works correctly and eeciently, it is doomed to disappear in the end, due to lack of maintenance. Nobody shall resuscitate the knowledge from the ashes of a C-program or LISP-program: we can be sure the programmer has reveled in the exploitation of clever tricks and could not be bothered to write documentation. On the other hand, a grammar is a pure" description, without any operational considerations, which admits of many different implementations. A grammar can serve as the basis of many dierent pieces of