Typed feature formalisms as a common basis for linguistic specification

Typed feature formalisms (TFF) play an increasingly important role in CL and NLP. Many of these systems are inspired by Pollard and Sag\u27s work on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar (HPSG), which has shown that a great deal of syntax and semantics can be neatly encoded within TFF. However, syntax and semantics are not the only areas in which TFF can be beneficially employed. In this paper, I will show that TFF can also be used as a means to model finite automata (FA) and to perform certain types of logical inferencing. In particular, I will (i) describe how FA can be defined and processed within TFF and (ii) propose a conservative extension to HPSG, which allows for a restricted form of semantic processing within TFF, so that the construction of syntax and semantics can be intertwined with the simplification of the logical form of an utterance. The approach which I propose provides a uniform, HPSG-oriented framework for different levels of linguistic processing, including allomorphy and morphotactics, syntax, semantics, and logical form simplification

An Abstract Machine for Unification Grammars

This work describes the design and implementation of an abstract machine, Amalia, for the linguistic formalism ALE, which is based on typed feature structures. This formalism is one of the most widely accepted in computational linguistics and has been used for designing grammars in various linguistic theories, most notably HPSG. Amalia is composed of data structures and a set of instructions, augmented by a compiler from the grammatical formalism to the abstract instructions, and a (portable) interpreter of the abstract instructions. The effect of each instruction is defined using a low-level language that can be executed on ordinary hardware. The advantages of the abstract machine approach are twofold. From a theoretical point of view, the abstract machine gives a well-defined operational semantics to the grammatical formalism. This ensures that grammars specified using our system are endowed with well defined meaning. It enables, for example, to formally verify the correctness of a compiler for HPSG, given an independent definition. From a practical point of view, Amalia is the first system that employs a direct compilation scheme for unification grammars that are based on typed feature structures. The use of amalia results in a much improved performance over existing systems. In order to test the machine on a realistic application, we have developed a small-scale, HPSG-based grammar for a fragment of the Hebrew language, using Amalia as the development platform. This is the first application of HPSG to a Semitic language.Comment: Doctoral Thesis, 96 pages, many postscript figures, uses pstricks, pst-node, psfig, fullname and a macros fil

Representing grammar, meaning and knowledge

Among the expertises relevant for successful natural language understanding are grammar, meaning and background knowledge, all of which must be represented in order to decode messages from text (or speech). The present paper is a sketch of one cooperation of grammar and meaning representations -- with some remarks about knowledge representation -- which allows that the representations involved be heterogeneous even while cooperating closely. The modules cooperate in what might be called a PLURALIST fashion, with few assumptions about the representations involved. In point of fact, the proposal is compatible with state-of-the-art representations from all three areas. The paper proceeeds from the nearly universal assumption that the grammar formalism is feature-based and insufficiently expressive for use in meaning representation. It then demonstrates how feature formalisms may be employed as a semantic metalanguage in order that semantic constraints may be expressed in a single formalism with grammatical constraints. This allows a tight coupling of syntax and semantics, the incorporation of nonsyntactic constraints (e.g., from knowledge representation) and the opportunity to underspecify meanings in novel ways -- including, e.g., ways which distinguish ambiguity and underspecification (vagueness). We retain scepticism vis-à-vis more ASSIMILATIONIST proposals for the interaction of these -- i.e., proposals which foresee common formalisms for grammar, meaning and knowledge representation. While such proposals rightfully claim to allow for closer integration, they fail to account for the motivations which distinguish formalisms - elaborate expressive strength in the case of semantic representations, monotonic (and preferably decidable) computation in the case of grammar formalisms, and the characterization of taxonomic reasoning in the case of knowledge representation

Constraint-based semantics

Montague\u27s famous characterization of the homomorphic relation between syntax and semantics naturally gives way in computational applications to CONSTRAINT-BASED formulations. This was originally motivated by the close harmony it provides with syntax, which is universally processed in a constraint-based fashion. Employing the same processing discipline in syntax and semantics allows that their processing (and indeed other processing) can be as tightly coupled as one wishes - indeed, there needn\u27t be any fundamental distinction between them at all. In this paper, we point out several advantages of the constraint-based view of semantics processing over standard views. These include (i) the opportunity to incorporate nonsyntactic constraints on semantics, such as those arising from phonology and context; (ii) the opportunity to formulate principles which generalize over syntax and semantics, such as those found in HEAD-DRIVEN PHRASE STRUCTURE GRAMMAR; (iii) a characterization of semantic ambiguity, which in turn provides a framework in which to describe disambiguation, and (iv) the opportunity to underspecify meanings in a way difficult to reconcile with other views. The last point is illustrated with an application to scope ambiguity in which a scheme is developed which underspecifies scope but eschews auxiliary levels of logical form

Multilingual language resources and interoperability

This article introduces the topic of ‘‘Multilingual language resources and interoperability’’. We start with a taxonomy and parameters for classifying language resources. Later we provide examples and issues of interoperatability, and resource architectures to solve such issues. Finally we discuss aspects of linguistic formalisms and interoperability