Semantic Underspecification: Which Technique For What Purpose?
Semantic Underspecification: Which Technique For What Purpose?
复制标题
语义不明确:哪种技术用于什么目的?
DOI:
10.1007/978-1-4020-5958-2_4
复制
发表时间:
2008
期刊:
影响因子:
--
通讯作者:
H. Bunt
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
H. Bunt
In recent years a variety of representation formalisms have been proposed that support the construction of underspecified semantic representations, such as Quasi-Logical Form, Underspecified Logical Form, Underspecified Discourse Representation Theory, Minimal Recursion Semantics, Ontological Promiscuity, Hole Semantics, the Constraint Language for Lambda Structures, and Normal Dominance Constraints. These formalisms support methods of underspecification which sometimes seem very different but in fact have similar underlying concepts, and in other cases appear deceptively similar, using the same terminology but with different interpretations. UDRT and Normal Dominance Constraints, for example, at first blush seem quite different but upon closer inspection have much in common; on the other hand, the term ‘metavariable’ is used by different authors to refer to different concepts in different underspecification formalisms. Recent studies have produced interesting results about the relative expressive capabilities of some of these formalisms. Koller (2004) has for instance shown that under certain conditions the underspecified representations of Hole Semantics can be translated into normal dominance constraints, and vice versa. Ebert (2005) has shown that the most prominent underspecification formalisms for the representation of scopal phenomena all suffer from lack of expressive power. This paper aims at contributing to the understanding of the merits of the various underspecification formalisms by considering what different underspecification techniques have to offer for dealing with a range of phenomena that motivate the use of underspecified semantic representations.
影响因子:
3.4
作者:
Kurtzman,HS;MacDonald,MC
通讯作者:
MacDonald,MC