Dynamic Bracketing and Discourse Representation

Visser, Albert; Vermeulen, Kees

doi:10.1305/ndjfl/1040046091

Cited by 18 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, the donkey equivalence makes clear that a notion of scope is absent with existentials. In the style of dynamic semantics offered by Visser and Vermeulen (1996) and Vermeulen (1993), ∃x is therefore often interpreted as a simple random assignment action:…”

Section: The Dynamics Of Quantifiersmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Normally, there is no meaning assigned to them. Visser and Vermeulen (1996) observe that normally '[g]rammar is syncategorematic in [the] approach to semantics' (p.322), and that 'no semantical objects are ascribed to the symbols fixing grammatical structure' (ibid.). Visser and Vermeulen subsequently aimed at devising formalisms where the role of grammar is categorematical rather than syncategorematical.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

On appositives and dynamic binding

Nouwen

2007

Research Language Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantified appositives have a limited distribution which is reminiscent of quantified discourse anaphora. This article investigates whether this parallel can be fleshed out by means of a two-dimensional dynamic semantics. The proposal works towards an explanation of why quantified appositives are generally infelicitous. Crucial is the fact that variables bound by a strong quantifier have a singular value, while the antecedents for discourse anaphora introduced by the quantifier are plural.

show abstract

Section: The Dynamics Of Quantifiersmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

On appositives and dynamic binding

Nouwen

2007

Research Language Computation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Assignments with such additional structure are utilised in the evaluation systems of, for example, Visser and Vermeulen (1996), van Eijck (2001), Dekker (2002, 2012 and Butler (2007Butler ( , 2010. With a sequence assignment, in addition to assigned values being specific sequences, it is possible to test for sequence length.…”

Section: Sequence Assignmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Linguistic Expressions and Semantic Processing

Butler

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The mathematics of context and context extension has developed into a topic in its own right; see, e.g., [71]. A version of DRT called incremental dynamics is presented in [23].…”

Section: E Further Readingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discourse Representation in Context

Eijck

Kamp

2011

Handbook of Logic and Language

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Discourse representation in context is the attempt to capture certain aspects of the interpretation of natural language texts that are beyond the mere truth conditions of the text. Prime examples are interpretation of indefinites and pronouns in context, and interpretation of tenses, in French and other languages.One of the debates surrounding the advent of discourse representation theory (DRT, [37]) and file change semantics (FCS,[35]) had to do with the issue of representationalism. Should we assume the representation structures to say something about what goes on in the mind of the interpreter, or not. On this issue, the followers of the Montague tradition tend to have strongly antimentalist views. Semantics, in the Montagovian perspective, is not about what goes on in the mind, but about how language relates to reality.Montague tried to settle the issue of representation languages ('logical form') once and for all by means of a careful demonstration that immediate interpretation of natural language fragments in appropriate models, without an intervening logical form, was possible. DRT and FSC, in their original presentations, re-introduced logical forms into the picture. The first attempts at rational reconstruction of DRT and FCS were geared at showing that the representation language (the boxes of DRT) could be eliminated again. This led to the development of compositional versions of DRT such as dynamic predicate logic (DPL), and dynamic versions of Montague grammar based on DPL. The snag was that these rational reconstructions were not quite faithful to the original enterprise. See [25] for a detailed account of the relationship between DRT and DPL, in the context of a historical study 1

show abstract

Dynamic Bracketing and Discourse Representation

Abstract: In this paper we describe a framework for the construction of entities that can serve as interpretations of arbitrary contiguous chunks of text. An important part of the paper is devoted to describing stacking cells, or the proposed meanings for bracket-structures.

Cited by 18 publications

References 10 publications

On appositives and dynamic binding

On appositives and dynamic binding

Linguistic Expressions and Semantic Processing

Discourse Representation in Context

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About