Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Order-Independence and Underspecification.Reinhard Muskens - 2004 - In Hans Kamp & Barbara Hall Partee (eds.), Context-Dependence in the Analysis of Linguistic Meaning. Elsevier. pp. 11--239.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Construction by Description in Discourse Representation.Noor van Leusen & Reinhard Muskens - 2003 - In Jaroslav Peregrin (ed.), Meaning: The Dynamic Turn. Elsevier. pp. 33-65.
    This paper uses classical logic for a simultaneous description of the syntax and semantics of a fragment of English and it is argued that such an approach to natural language allows procedural aspects of linguistic theory to get a purely declarative formulation. In particular, it will be shown how certain construction rules in Discourse Representation Theory, such as the rule that indefinites create new discourse referents and definites pick up an existing referent, can be formulated declaratively if logic is used (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Categorial Grammar and Lexical-Functional Grammar.Reinhard Muskens - 2001 - In Miriam Butt & Tracey Holloway King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG01 Conference, University of Hong Kong. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. pp. 259-279.
    This paper introduces λ-grammar, a form of categorial grammar that has much in common with LFG. Like other forms of categorial grammar, λ-grammars are multi-dimensional and their components are combined in a strictly parallel fashion. Grammatical representations are combined with the help of linear combinators, closed pure λ-terms in which each abstractor binds exactly one variable. Mathematically this is equivalent to employing linear logic, in use in LFG for semantic composition, but the method seems more practicable.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations  
  • Finite-State Descriptions for Temporal Semantics.Tim Fernando - manuscript
    Finite-state descriptions for temporal semantics are outlined through which to distinguish soft inferences reflecting manners of conceptualization from more robust semantic entailments defined over models. Just what descriptions are built (before being interpreted model-theoretically) and how they are grounded in models of reality explain (upon examination) why some inferences are soft.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark