Upload
coral-floyd
View
234
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
References
Chierchia, G. & McConnell-Ginet S. (2000) (2nd ed.). Meaning and Grammar. An Introduction to Semantics. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press Grice, P. H. (1989). Studies in the Way of Words. Harv. Univ. Press Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive Meanings. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press Meyer-Fujara, J. & Rieser, H. (2003). A General Framework for Metonymy Resolution. Report of SFB 360, Univ. Bielefeld, to appearMeyer-Fujara, J. & Rieser, H. (1999). Zur Semantik von Repräsentationsrelationen II. Report 1999/01 of SFB 360, Univ. BielefeldRieser, H. & Meyer-Fujara, J. (eds.) (2000). BI-Metonymy 6th to 8th of October, 2000, Proceedings, Report 2000/01 of SFB 360, Univ. Bielefeld Rieser, H. & Meyer-Fujara, J. (1997). Zur Semantik von Repräsentationsrelationen I. Report 1997/07 of SFB 360, Univ. Bielefeld SFB 360 (eds.): o. J., Wir bauen jetzt also ein Flugzeug. Konstruieren im Dialog. Arbeitsmaterialien Interaktion sprachlicher und visueller Informationsverarbeitung.
SFB 360, Univ. Bielefeld
Contact
.ppt-File downloadable from www.sfb360.uni-bielefeld.de and www.user.fh-stralsund.de/~jmeyer
Op
Case 1: Violation of quality maxim
= airplane’
Op() = u C (depicts(u,C) x (xC airplane’(x)))
Case 2: Violation of relevance maxim
This is not a motorbike said of an airplane model
= xi (motorbike(xi) y (xi=y) this’)
Op() = xi (C (depicts(xi,C)
x (xC motorbike(x))) this’=xi)
this’
Pred2: y (=(y,xi))
VP: y (=(y,xi))
Vcop: =
=
NP: xi
S’: y (=(y,xi)) this’
xi
NP: this’
Det: this’
Op
NPi: S’ xi (C (depicts(xi,C) x (xC airplane’(x))) S’)
an’
N: u C (depicts(u,C) x (xC airplane’(x)))
u C (depicts(u,C) x (xC airplane’(x)))airplane’
Det:PS’xi (P(xi) S’)
S: xi (C (depicts(xi,C) x (xC airplane’(x))) this’ = xi)
Result of Op-application to lf-structure
Reconstructed lf-expression
With = s airplane’(s)
Op[N s airplane’(s)] = [N Op(s airplane’(s))] = [N Op(airplane’)]
= [N x C (depicts(x,C) y (yC airplane’(y)))]
or, e.g.
= [N x u (noise_of(x,u) airplane’(u))]
For = xi (airplane’(xi) y (=(y,xi)) this’), a possible result of applying Op is
Op() = xi (C (depicts(xi,C) x (xC airplane’(x))) y (=(y,xi)) this’)
⑩ Updating information state with formula Op() derived by default and constructing M’ by persistently extending M, especially V
Determining the scope of metonymy by reconstructing false lf-expression via Op
Intuition: Op() yields readings of which cannot be derived lexically.
For a tree T, Op(T) is defined recursively as the tree that results applying Op to the daughters of T’s root.
For every one-place predicate , Op() is either or an expression which contains and is applicable to an argument, such as a one-place -expression.
Op(x P) = x Op(P)
Etc.
⑧ Conversational Implicature (Grice) by Default
Cooperativity Assumption
Two Cases:
Violation of quality maxim Utterance under lf is false.Scope of metonymy: subutterance with lf
M,w,i,c,g avail(c) =
Op()M’,w,i,c,g avail(c)
Default: Meaning of subutterance is Op()M’,w,i,c,g
Meaning of utterance is Op()M’,w,i,c,g
by recursiveness of Op
Violation of relevance maxim, similarly
Metonymical interpretation of false lf-expression
by default =
Interpretation of reconstructed lf-expression in model M’:
Case 1: Violation of quality maxim
Op()M’,w,i,c,g = 1
Case 2: Violation of relevance maxim
Op()M’,w,i,c,g = 1 and non-trivially so
Reconstructed lf-expression
Intensional Semantics
Mapping of LF into lf (intensional predicate calculus, IPC) yields expression
Uses possible worlds, time instants, contexts and modal bases
Grammar: Syntax (GB-version)
• Context-free base
• Raising rules
[S X NP Y ] [S NPi [S X ei Y ] ], where NP = [Det Nom] and X and Y cover the rest of the sentence
[S NP INFL X ] [S INFL [S NP X] ]
generate LF
Scope of fragment:
This is an airplane.Peter believes/knows that this is an airplane.The airplane is left to the car and/or the car is right to
the airplane.Max gives that airplane to Peter.
Interpretation in model M (cf )
M,w,i,c,g = 0 (quality maxim violated)
M,w,i,c,g = 1 trivially (relevance maximviolated)
Models M used: Kaplan models
characterized by(1) a set of worlds W, and a set of instants I, giving the
set of circumstances W I = {<w, i> | wW, iI },
(2) a context c specifying (i) sp(c), the speaker in c(ii) ind-ob(c), the indicated objects in c, (iii) avail(c), the set of accessible objects in c (iv) mdb(c), the modal base in c
(3) a valuation function V for IPC(4) a variable assignment function g
DataCorpus of task-oriented dialogues(construction dialogues from SFB 360)
Case of violated quality maxim
Interpretation in model M:
as
=
Real-world airplanes
avail(c)
xi (airplane’(xi) y (=(y,xi)) this’)M,w,i,c,g = 0
Case of violated quality maxim
Interpretation in model M’:
V is extended to include, e.g., depict, noise_of
depict
Real-world airplanes
avail(c)
xi (C (depicts(xi,C) x (xC airplane’(x))) this’ = xi) M,w,i,c,g = 1
Baufix toy airplane used in construction dialogues
Example sentence
This is an airplane.
this’
Pred2: y (=(y,xi))
VP: y (=(y,xi))
Vcop: =
=
NP: xi
S’: y (=(y,xi)) this’
Det:P S’xi (P(xi) S’)
xi
NP: this’
Det: this’
S’: x (airplane’(xi) y (=(y,xi)) this’)
NPi: S’ xi (airplane’(xi) S’)
an’
N: z airplane’(z)
airplane’
= xi (airplane’(xi) y (=(y,xi)) this’)
lf-Structure of This is an airplane
Kaplan model M
W = {w1, w2}, I = {i1},
W I = {<w1, i1>, <w2, i1>}
U = {airplane-model1, airplane1, airplane2,
, {airplane1, airplane2}}
ind-obj(c) = airplane-model1
avail(c) = {airplane-model1}
mdb(c) = {<w1, i1>}
V(airplane’)(c)(<w,i>) = {airplane1, airplane2} for all <w,i> W I
g(x1) = airplane1, g(C) = , etc.
this
Pred
is
NPNPi
an airplane
Nom
S
VP
Vcop
ei
NP
S
LF-Structure of This is an airplane
Det
Semantics-Pragmatics-Interface for Metonymy Resolution
Josef Meyer-Fujara (FH Stralsund), Hannes Rieser (Uni Bielefeld)