An Alternative Conception of Tree-Adjoining Derivation

The precise formulation of derivation for tree-adjoining grammars has important ramifications for a wide variety of uses of the formalism, from syntactic analysis to semantic interpretation and statistical language modeling. We argue that the definition of tree-adjoining derivation must be reformulated in order to manifest the proper linguistic dependencies in derivations. The particular proposal is both precisely characterizable through a definition of TAG derivations as equivalence classes of ordered derivation trees, and computationally operational, by virtue of a compilation to linear indexed grammars together with an efficient algorithm for recognition and parsing according to the compiled grammar.Comment: 33 page

Generation and synchronous tree-adjoining grammars

Tree-adjoining grammars (TAG) have been proposed as a formalism for generation based on the intuition that the extended domain of syntactic locality that TAGs provide should aid in localizing semantic dependencies as well, in turn serving as an aid to generation from semantic representations. We demonstrate that this intuition can be made concrete by using the formalism of synchronous tree-adjoining grammars. The use of synchronous TAGs for generation provides solutions to several problems with previous approaches to TAG generation. Furthermore, the semantic monotonicity requirement previously advocated for generation grammars as a computational aid is seen to be an inherent property of synchronous TAGs.Engineering and Applied Science

Synchronous tree-adjoining grammars

The unique properties of tree-adjoining grammars (TAG) present a challenge for the application of TAGs beyond the limited confines of syntax, for instance, to the task of semantic interpretation or automatic translation of natural language. We present a variant of TAGs, called synchronous TAGs, which characterize correspondences between languages. The formalism's intended usage is to relate expressions of natural languages to their associated semantics represented in a logical form language, or to their translates in another natural language; in summary, we intend it to allow TAGs to be used beyond their role in syntax proper. We discuss the application of synchronous TAGs to concrete examples, mentioning primarily in passing some computational issues that arise in its interpretationEngineering and Applied Science

Principles and Implementation of Deductive Parsing

We present a system for generating parsers based directly on the metaphor of parsing as deduction. Parsing algorithms can be represented directly as deduction systems, and a single deduction engine can interpret such deduction systems so as to implement the corresponding parser. The method generalizes easily to parsers for augmented phrase structure formalisms, such as definite-clause grammars and other logic grammar formalisms, and has been used for rapid prototyping of parsing algorithms for a variety of formalisms including variants of tree-adjoining grammars, categorial grammars, and lexicalized context-free grammars.Comment: 69 pages, includes full Prolog cod

An alternative conception of tree-adjoining derivation

The precise formulation of derivation for tree-adjoining grammars has important ramifications for a wide variety of uses of the formalism, from syntactic analysis to semantic interpretation and statistical language modeling. We argue that the definition of tree-adjoining derivation must be reformulated in order to manifest the proper linguistic dependencies in derivations. The particular proposal is both precisely characterizable, through a compilation to linear indexed grammars, and computationally operational, by virtue of an efficient algorithm for recognition and parsing.Engineering and Applied Science

Parsing With Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar

Most current linguistic theories give lexical accounts of several phenomena that used to be considered purely syntactic. The information put in the lexicon is thereby increased in both amount and complexity: see, for example, lexical rules in LFG (Kaplan and Bresnan, 1983), GPSG (Gazdar, Klein, Pullum and Sag, 1985), HPSG (Pollard and Sag, 1987), Combinatory Categorial Grammars (Steedman, 1987), Karttunen\u27s version of Categorial Grammar (Karttunen 1986, 1988), some versions of GB theory (Chomsky 1981), and Lexicon-Grammars (Gross 1984). We would like to take into account this fact while defining a formalism. We therefore explore the view that syntactical rules are not separated from lexical items. We say that a grammar is lexicalized (Schabes, AbeilK and Joshi, 1988) if it consists of: (1) a finite set of structures each associated with lexical items; each lexical item will be called the anchor of the corresponding structure; the structures define the domain of locality over which constraints are specified; (2) an operation or operations for composing the structures. The notion of anchor is closely related to the word associated with a functor-argument category in Categorial Grammars. Categorial Grammar (as used for example by Steedman, 1987) are \u27lexicalized\u27 according to our definition since each basic category has a lexical item associated with it

Tree-Adjoining Grammars and Lexicalized Grammars

In this paper, we will describe a tree generating system called tree-adjoining grammar(TAG)and state some of the recent results about TAGs. The work on TAGS is motivated by linguistic considerations. However, a number of formal results have been established for TAGs, which we believe, would be of interest to researchers in tree grammars and tree automata. After giving a short introduction to TAG, we briefly state these results concerning both the properties of the string sets and tree sets (Section 2). We will also describe the notion of lexicalization of grammars (Section 3) and investigate the relationship of lexicalization to context-free grammars (CFGs) and TAGS (Section 4)

Using Lexicalized Tags for Machine Translation

Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar (LTAG) is an attractive formalism for linguistic description mainly because of its extended domain of locality and its factoring recursion out from the domain of local dependencies (Joshi, 1984, Kroch and Joshi, 1985, Abeillé, 1988). LTAG\u27s extended domain of locality enables one to localize syntactic dependencies (such as filler-gap), as well as semantic dependencies (such as predicate-arguments). The aim of this paper is to show that these properties combined with the lexicalized property of LTAG are especially attractive for machine translation. The transfer between two languages, such as French and English, can be done by putting directly into correspondence large elementary universe without going through some interlingual representation and without major changes to the source and target grammars. The underlying formalism from the transfer is synchronous Tree Adjoining Grammars (Sheiber and Schabes [1990]). Transfer rules are stated as correspondences between nodes of trees of large domain of locality which are associated with words. We can thus define lexical transfer rules that avoid the defects of a mere word-to-word approach but still benefit from the simplicity and elegance of a lexical approach. We rely on the French and English LTAG grammars (Abeillé [1988], Abeillé [1990(b)], Abeillé et al. [1990], Abeillé and Schabes [1989, 1990]) that have been designed over the past two years jointly at University of Pennsylvania and University of Paris 7-Jussieu