Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Computational Linguistics - 1996
DOI: 10.3115/992628.992722
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Applying lexical rules under subsumption

Abstract: Lexical rules are used in constraintbased grammar formalisms such as llead-Driven l)hrase Structure Grammar (IIPSG) (Pollard and Sag 1994) to express generalizations atnong lexical entries. '['his paper discusses a number of lexical rules from recent I[PSG analyses of German (tlinri<;hs and Nakazawa 1994) and shows that the grammar in some cases vastly overgenerates and in other cases introduces massive spurious structural ambiguity, if lexical rules ap: ply under unification. Such l)rot)lems of overgeneration… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0
1

Year Published

2000
2000
2008
2008

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
1
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Viewing definiteness as a lexical process, we introduce the Definite Lexical Rule (DLR). Two assumptions are implicit in this rule: (1) that it is triggered by subsumption, not unification 12 (see Hinrichs & Nakazawa (1996) for a discussion and other examples of this concept); (2) that when a value at the end of a path is modified, all paths that are reentrant with it are modified as well.…”
Section: Definiteness As a Lexical Processmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Viewing definiteness as a lexical process, we introduce the Definite Lexical Rule (DLR). Two assumptions are implicit in this rule: (1) that it is triggered by subsumption, not unification 12 (see Hinrichs & Nakazawa (1996) for a discussion and other examples of this concept); (2) that when a value at the end of a path is modified, all paths that are reentrant with it are modified as well.…”
Section: Definiteness As a Lexical Processmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Sciullo & Williams, 1987), mas também descreve a informação lexical de modo estruturado e elegante, como se almejava na década de 1970de (Jackendoff, 1975, atendendo ainda requisitos formais, necessários à sua implementação em sistemas de PLN (Sanfilippo, 1995;Handke, 1995;Pollard, 1997;Pollard & Sag, 1996). Embora não seja objetivo deste trabalho apresentar uma revisão críti-ca do modelo HPSG, e sim apresentá-lo como uma alternativa lexicalista para a descrição gramatical, mencionem-se as críticas à capacidade gerativa irrestrita das regras de redundância em alguns casos (Hinrichs & Nakazawa, 1996;Briscoe & Copestake, 1999). Se, por um lado, esse problema coloca um desafio pra a teoria, por outro, a busca pela sua solução tem motivado grande parte das pesquisas no âmbito da HPSG, atualmente.…”
Section: A Descrição E a Formalização Da Informação Lexical No Modelounclassified