A continuation semantics of interrogatives that accounts for Baker's ambiguity

Wh-phrases in English can appear both raised and in-situ. However, only in-situ wh-phrases can take semantic scope beyond the immediately enclosing clause. I present a denotational semantics of interrogatives that naturally accounts for these two properties. It neither invokes movement or economy, nor posits lexical ambiguity between raised and in-situ occurrences of the same wh-phrase. My analysis is based on the concept of continuations. It uses a novel type system for higher-order continuations to handle wide-scope wh-phrases while remaining strictly compositional. This treatment sheds light on the combinatorics of interrogatives as well as other kinds of so-called A'-movement.Comment: 20 pages; typo fixe

The partition semantics of questions, syntactically

Groenendijk and Stokhof (1984, 1996; Groenendijk 1999) provide a logically attractive theory of the semantics of natural language questions, commonly referred to as the partition theory. Two central notions in this theory are entailment between questions and answerhood. For example, the question "Who is going to the party?" entails the question "Is John going to the party?", and "John is going to the party" counts as an answer to both. Groenendijk and Stokhof define these two notions in terms of partitions of a set of possible worlds. We provide a syntactic characterization of entailment between questions and answerhood . We show that answers are, in some sense, exactly those formulas that are built up from instances of the question. This result lets us compare the partition theory with other approaches to interrogation -- both linguistic analyses, such as Hamblin's and Karttunen's semantics, and computational systems, such as Prolog. Our comparison separates a notion of answerhood into three aspects: equivalence (when two questions or answers are interchangeable), atomic answers (what instances of a question count as answers), and compound answers (how answers compose).Comment: 14 page

Binding Alongside Hamblin Alternatives Calls for Variable-free Semantics

No abstract

Characterizing Quotation

No abstract

Exact Recursive Probabilistic Programming

Recursive calls over recursive data are widely useful for generating probability distributions, and probabilistic programming allows computations over these distributions to be expressed in a modular and intuitive way. Exact inference is also useful, but unfortunately, existing probabilistic programming languages do not perform exact inference on recursive calls over recursive data, forcing programmers to code many applications manually. We introduce a probabilistic language in which a wide variety of recursion can be expressed naturally, and inference carried out exactly. For instance, probabilistic pushdown automata and their generalizations are easy to express, and polynomial-time parsing algorithms for them are derived automatically. We eliminate recursive data types using program transformations related to defunctionalization and refunctionalization. These transformations are assured correct by a linear type system, and a successful choice of transformations, if there is one, is guaranteed to be found by a greedy algorithm

On the Static and Dynamic Extents of Delimited Continuations

We show that breadth-first traversal exploits the difference between the static delimited-control operator shift (alias S) and the dynamic delimited-control operator control (alias F). For the last 15 years, this difference has been repeatedly mentioned in the literature but it has only been illustrated with one-line toy examples. Breadth-first traversal fills this vacuum. We also point out where static delimited continuations naturally give rise to the notion of control stack whereas dynamic delimited continuations can be made to account for a notion of `control queue.'