討論

사회: 수고하셨습니다. 세부분으로 나누어 자세히 말씀해주셨습니다. 토론회 순서는 주제 논문이 진행된 것과는 거꾸로， processing, 범주화， 언어습득의 순으로 다루겠습니다. 자세히 말씀해주셨지만 먼저 심리학을 하시는 김정오 선생님께서 언어 처리 문제에 있어서 전단계가 되는 지각측면과 관련하여 processing에 대하여 상세히 말씀해주시고 조선생님의 말씀에 대해서 의견을 제시해 주시겠습니다

Passives in English and Montague Grammar

This paper attempts to provide a syntactic and semantic analysis of passive operations in order to provide a proper treatment of the various types of passive constructions in English. In section 2, it is argued that one syntactic rule of passive is not sufficient. In section 3, the phrasal type of passive rule is critically examined. It is argued that a lexical rule, as well as a phrasal rule, is necessary. In sections 4 and 5, two types of passive rules are formalized under the framework of Montague grammar, taking the previous formalizations into consideration. The formulated rules are illustrated with appropriate examples showing detailed syntactic derivations and accompanying translations. In sections 6 through 8, several problematic examples are examined and suggestions are provided for an appropriate treatment of the examples. It is concluded that two types of rules are necessary for a satisfactory account of the passive constructions in English

Semantic Meaning of Questions

This paper defines the semantic content of questions. In section 1 I discussed the theoretical background. In section 2 I noted weakness in Hintikka's approach to the logic of questions. It was discussed and assumed that the semantics of questions can be constructed in terms of answers. In section 3 the answerhood was defined. Answers were argued to be statements, but not noun phrases. In section 4 types of answers were discussed. The notions of possible answers, true answers, and complete answers were defined. Conventional implicatures of questions were discussed in section 5. It was concluded that an alternative question conventional1y implicates that one and only one .of the presented alternatives is true. A WH-question is assumed to implicate that there exists at least one true answer to it. In section 3 I discussed expressed meanings of questions. The expressed meaning of a question was defined in terms of its true answers, which collectively constitute a complete answer to the question. That is, a question denotes the set of propositions expressed by all true answers. This set actual1y defines a complete answer to the given question. These two aspects of meaning-expressed and implicate -constitute the semantic content of a question

토론

감사합니다. 최근에 들어서 수년동안 언어학 분야와 전산학 분야의 공동연구 내지 작업이 이루어지는 가운데, 1986년도 한국과학재단의 지원을 받아‘목척기초연구’라고 하는 정책연구 중에 ‘자연언어처리의 기초연구’라는 3년 계획의 연구과제가 주어진 바 있습니다. 그 과제를 마침 이 자리에 계시는 서울대 언어학과의 장석진 선생님께서 맡아 오셨기 때문에，연구의 목적이나，진행과정에 대해서 듣는 것으로 이 토론회를 시작하도록 하겠습니다. 장석진 : 지금 이청민 사회께서 이야기하신 대로，과학재단에서 후원하는 목적 기초 연구과제로서，1986년에 시작했고 이제 3차년도에 들어가고 있습니다. ‘목적기초과제’라는 것은 ‘특정과제’와 대조되는 말입니다. 즉 특정과제가 가깝게 산업과 직결된다고 하면，목적기초는 그러한 의미에서는 basic하고 학구적인 것이지요