Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 6008))

Abstract

Quantifier scope ambiguities may engender several logical readings of a NL sentence. For instance, sentence (1) yields six possible readings, depending on the scoping of its three quantifiers: ( ∀ 5 ∃ ), ( ∀ ∃ 5), ( ∃ ∀ 5), ( ∃ 5 ∀ ), (5 ∀ ∃ ), and (5 ∃ ∀ ).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Beghelli, F., Ben-Shalom, D., Szabolski, A.: Variation, Distributivity, and the Illusion of Branching. In: Szabolcsi, A. (ed.) Ways of Scope Taking, pp. 29–69. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bos, J.: Computational Semantics in Discourse: Underspecification, Resolution, and Inference. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13, 139–157 (2004)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Chaves, R.P.: Non-Redundant Scope Disambiguation in Underspecified Semantics. In: Proc. of the 8th ESSLLI Student Session, Vienna, pp. 47–58 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Copestake, A., Flickinger, D., Sag, I.A.: Minimal Recursion Semantics. An introduction. Research on Language and Computation 3(2) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ebert, C.: Formal Investigations of Underspecified Representations. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, King’s College London (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Egg, M., Koller, A., Niehren, J.: The Constraint Language for Lambda Structures. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10, 457–485 (2001)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Hobbs, J.R., Shieber, S.: An Algorithm for Generating Quantifier Scoping. Computational Linguistics 13, 47–63 (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Joshi, A.K., Kallmeyer, L.: Factoring Predicate Argument and Scope Semantics. Research on Language and Computation 1, 3–58 (2003)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Joshi, A.K., Kallmeyer, L., Romero, M.: Flexible Composition in LTAG: Quantifier Scope and Inverse Linking. In: Musken, R., Bunt, H. (eds.) Computing Meaning, vol. 3. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Koller, A., Thater, S.: Towards a redundancy elimination algorithm for underspecified descriptions. In: Proc. of the 5th Int. Workshop on Inference in Computational Semantics (ICoS-5), Buxton, England (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Larson, R.K.: Quantifying into NP. University of Wisconsin (1985) (manuscript)

    Google Scholar 

  12. May, R., Bale, A.: Inverse Linking. In: Everaert, M., van Riemsdijk, H. (eds.) The Blackwell Companion to Syntax, vol. II. Malden (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Park, J.: Quantifier Scope and Constituency. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the ACL, pp. 205–212 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Reyle, U.: Dealing with ambiguities by Underspecification: Construction, Representation and Deduction. Journal of Semantics 13, 123–179 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Reyle, U.: Co-Indexing Labelled DRSs to Represent and Reason with Ambiguities. In: Peters, S., van Deemter, K. (eds.) Semantic Ambiguity and Underspecification, Stanford, pp. 239–268 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Robaldo, L.: Dependency Tree Semantics. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Turin University, Italy (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Robaldo, L., Di Carlo, J.: Disambiguating quantifier scope in DTS. In: Proc. of 8th International Workshop on Computational Semantics (IWCS-8), Tilburg, The Netherlands 2009 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ross, J.R.: Constraints on Variables in Syntax. Ph.D thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1967)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Vestre, E.J.: An algorithm for generating non-redundant quantifier scopings. In: Proc. of the 5th conference on European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Berlin, Germany, pp. 251–256 (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Willis, A.: NP Coordination in Underspecified Scope Representations. In: Proc. of the 7th Workshop on Computational Semantics (IWCS-7), Tilburg, pp. 235–246 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Willis, A.: An Efficient Treatment of Quantification in Underspecified Semantic Representations. Ph.D thesis, University of York (2000)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Robaldo, L., Di Carlo, J. (2010). Flexible Disambiguation in DTS. In: Gelbukh, A. (eds) Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing. CICLing 2010. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 6008. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12116-6_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12116-6_21

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-12115-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-12116-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics