On Pregroups, Freedom, and (Virtual) Conceptual Necessity

Pregroups were introduced in (Lambek, 1999), and provide a founda-tion for a particularly simple syntactic calculus. Buszkowski (2001) showed that free pregroup grammars generate exactly the -free context-free lan-guages. Here we characterize the class of languages generable by all pre-groups, which will be shown to be the entire class of recursively enumerable languages. To show this result, we rely on the well-known representation of recursively enumerable languages as the homomorphic image of the inter-section of two context-free languages (Ginsburg et al., 1967). We define an operation of cross-product over grammars (so-called because of its behaviour on the types), and show that the cross-product of any two free-pregroup grammars generates exactly the intersection of their respective languages. The representation theorem applies once we show that allowing ‘empty cat-egories ’ (i.e. lexical items without overt phonological content) allows us to mimic the effects of any string homomorphism.

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

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

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