On the generative capacity of multi-modal Categorial Grammars

In Moortgat 1996 the Lambek Calculus L (Lambek 1958) is extended by a pair of residuation modalities ◊ and □↓. Categorial Grammars based on the resulting logic L◊ are attractive for linguistic purposes since they offer a compromise between the strict constituent structures imposed by context free grammars and related formalisms on the one hand, and the complete absence of hierarchical information in Lambek grammars on the other hand. The paper contains some results on the generative capcity of Categorial Grammars based on L◊. First it is shown that adding residuation modalities does not extend the weak generative capacity. This is proved by extending the proof for the context freeness of L-grammars from Pentus 1993 to L◊. Second the strong generative capacity of L◊-grammars is compared to context free grammars. The results are mainly negative. The set of tree languages generated by L◊-grammars neither contains nor is contained in the class of context free tree languages

Grammars over the Lambek Calculus with Permutation: Recognizing Power and Connection to Branching Vector Addition Systems with States

In [Van Benthem, 1991] it is proved that all permutation closures of context-free languages can be generated by grammars over the Lambek calculus with the permutation rule (LP-grammars); however, to our best knowledge, it is not established whether converse holds or not. In this paper, we show that LP-grammars are equivalent to linearly-restricted branching vector addition systems with states and with additional memory (shortly, lBVASSAM), which are modified branching vector addition systems with states. Then an example of such an lBVASSAM is presented, which generates a non-semilinear set of vectors; this yields that LP-grammars generate more than permutation closures of context-free languages. Moreover, equivalence of LP-grammars and lBVASSAM allows us to present a normal form for LP-grammars and, as a consequence, prove that LP-grammars are equivalent to LP-grammars without product

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

The Lambek calculus with iteration: two variants

Formulae of the Lambek calculus are constructed using three binary connectives, multiplication and two divisions. We extend it using a unary connective, positive Kleene iteration. For this new operation, following its natural interpretation, we present two lines of calculi. The first one is a fragment of infinitary action logic and includes an omega-rule for introducing iteration to the antecedent. We also consider a version with infinite (but finitely branching) derivations and prove equivalence of these two versions. In Kleene algebras, this line of calculi corresponds to the *-continuous case. For the second line, we restrict our infinite derivations to cyclic (regular) ones. We show that this system is equivalent to a variant of action logic that corresponds to general residuated Kleene algebras, not necessarily *-continuous. Finally, we show that, in contrast with the case without division operations (considered by Kozen), the first system is strictly stronger than the second one. To prove this, we use a complexity argument. Namely, we show, using methods of Buszkowski and Palka, that the first system is $\Pi_1^0$-hard, and therefore is not recursively enumerable and cannot be described by a calculus with finite derivations

The Grail theorem prover: Type theory for syntax and semantics

As the name suggests, type-logical grammars are a grammar formalism based on logic and type theory. From the prespective of grammar design, type-logical grammars develop the syntactic and semantic aspects of linguistic phenomena hand-in-hand, letting the desired semantics of an expression inform the syntactic type and vice versa. Prototypical examples of the successful application of type-logical grammars to the syntax-semantics interface include coordination, quantifier scope and extraction.This chapter describes the Grail theorem prover, a series of tools for designing and testing grammars in various modern type-logical grammars which functions as a tool . All tools described in this chapter are freely available