Hybrid Type-Logical Grammars, First-Order Linear Logic and the Descriptive Inadequacy of Lambda Grammars

In this article we show that hybrid type-logical grammars are a fragment of first-order linear logic. This embedding result has several important consequences: it not only provides a simple new proof theory for the calculus, thereby clarifying the proof-theoretic foundations of hybrid type-logical grammars, but, since the translation is simple and direct, it also provides several new parsing strategies for hybrid type-logical grammars. Second, NP-completeness of hybrid type-logical grammars follows immediately. The main embedding result also sheds new light on problems with lambda grammars/abstract categorial grammars and shows lambda grammars/abstract categorial grammars suffer from problems of over-generation and from problems at the syntax-semantics interface unlike any other categorial grammar

Multi-dimensional Type Theory: Rules, Categories, and Combinators for Syntax and Semantics

We investigate the possibility of modelling the syntax and semantics of natural language by constraints, or rules, imposed by the multi-dimensional type theory Nabla. The only multiplicity we explicitly consider is two, namely one dimension for the syntax and one dimension for the semantics, but the general perspective is important. For example, issues of pragmatics could be handled as additional dimensions. One of the main problems addressed is the rather complicated repertoire of operations that exists besides the notion of categories in traditional Montague grammar. For the syntax we use a categorial grammar along the lines of Lambek. For the semantics we use so-called lexical and logical combinators inspired by work in natural logic. Nabla provides a concise interpretation and a sequent calculus as the basis for implementations.Comment: 20 page

A Compositional Treatment of Polysemous Arguments in Categorial Grammar

We discuss an extension of the standard logical rules (functional application and abstraction) in Categorial Grammar (CG), in order to deal with some specific cases of polysemy. We borrow from Generative Lexicon theory which proposes the mechanism of {\em coercion}, next to a rich nominal lexical semantic structure called {\em qualia structure}. In a previous paper we introduced coercion into the framework of {\em sign-based} Categorial Grammar and investigated its impact on traditional Fregean compositionality. In this paper we will elaborate on this idea, mostly working towards the introduction of a new semantic dimension. Where in current versions of sign-based Categorial Grammar only two representations are derived: a prosodic one (form) and a logical one (modelling), here we introduce also a more detaled representation of the lexical semantics. This extra knowledge will serve to account for linguistic phenomena like {\em metonymy\/}.Comment: LaTeX file, 19 pages, uses pubsmacs, pubsbib, pubsarticle, leqn

Paracompositionality, MWEs and Argument Substitution

Multi-word expressions, verb-particle constructions, idiomatically combining phrases, and phrasal idioms have something in common: not all of their elements contribute to the argument structure of the predicate implicated by the expression. Radically lexicalized theories of grammar that avoid string-, term-, logical form-, and tree-writing, and categorial grammars that avoid wrap operation, make predictions about the categories involved in verb-particles and phrasal idioms. They may require singleton types, which can only substitute for one value, not just for one kind of value. These types are asymmetric: they can be arguments only. They also narrowly constrain the kind of semantic value that can correspond to such syntactic categories. Idiomatically combining phrases do not subcategorize for singleton types, and they exploit another locally computable and compositional property of a correspondence, that every syntactic expression can project its head word. Such MWEs can be seen as empirically realized categorial possibilities, rather than lacuna in a theory of lexicalizable syntactic categories.Comment: accepted version (pre-final) for 23rd Formal Grammar Conference, August 2018, Sofi

Comparing and evaluating extended Lambek calculi

Lambeks Syntactic Calculus, commonly referred to as the Lambek calculus, was innovative in many ways, notably as a precursor of linear logic. But it also showed that we could treat our grammatical framework as a logic (as opposed to a logical theory). However, though it was successful in giving at least a basic treatment of many linguistic phenomena, it was also clear that a slightly more expressive logical calculus was needed for many other cases. Therefore, many extensions and variants of the Lambek calculus have been proposed, since the eighties and up until the present day. As a result, there is now a large class of calculi, each with its own empirical successes and theoretical results, but also each with its own logical primitives. This raises the question: how do we compare and evaluate these different logical formalisms? To answer this question, I present two unifying frameworks for these extended Lambek calculi. Both are proof net calculi with graph contraction criteria. The first calculus is a very general system: you specify the structure of your sequents and it gives you the connectives and contractions which correspond to it. The calculus can be extended with structural rules, which translate directly into graph rewrite rules. The second calculus is first-order (multiplicative intuitionistic) linear logic, which turns out to have several other, independently proposed extensions of the Lambek calculus as fragments. I will illustrate the use of each calculus in building bridges between analyses proposed in different frameworks, in highlighting differences and in helping to identify problems.Comment: Empirical advances in categorial grammars, Aug 2015, Barcelona, Spain. 201