A Proof-Theoretic Approach to Scope Ambiguity in Compositional Vector Space Models

We investigate the extent to which compositional vector space models can be used to account for scope ambiguity in quantified sentences (of the form "Every man loves some woman"). Such sentences containing two quantifiers introduce two readings, a direct scope reading and an inverse scope reading. This ambiguity has been treated in a vector space model using bialgebras by (Hedges and Sadrzadeh, 2016) and (Sadrzadeh, 2016), though without an explanation of the mechanism by which the ambiguity arises. We combine a polarised focussed sequent calculus for the non-associative Lambek calculus NL, as described in (Moortgat and Moot, 2011), with the vector based approach to quantifier scope ambiguity. In particular, we establish a procedure for obtaining a vector space model for quantifier scope ambiguity in a derivational way.Comment: This is a preprint of a paper to appear in: Journal of Language Modelling, 201

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

Efficient Normal-Form Parsing for Combinatory Categorial Grammar

Under categorial grammars that have powerful rules like composition, a simple n-word sentence can have exponentially many parses. Generating all parses is inefficient and obscures whatever true semantic ambiguities are in the input. This paper addresses the problem for a fairly general form of Combinatory Categorial Grammar, by means of an efficient, correct, and easy to implement normal-form parsing technique. The parser is proved to find exactly one parse in each semantic equivalence class of allowable parses; that is, spurious ambiguity (as carefully defined) is shown to be both safely and completely eliminated.Comment: 8 pages, LaTeX packaged with three .sty files, also uses cgloss4e.st