The limits of unification

Authors:
Robert J. P. Ingria
Affiliations:
BBN Systems and Technologies Corporation, Cambridge, MA
Venue:
ACL '90 Proceedings of the 28th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
Year:
1990

Citing 6
Cited 7

Prolog and natural-language analysis

Prolog and natural-language analysis
The BBN Spoken Language System

HLT '89 Proceedings of the workshop on Speech and Natural Language
A Machine-Oriented Logic Based on the Resolution Principle

Journal of the ACM (JACM)
Features and values

ACL '84 Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 22nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
A logical semantics for feature structures

ACL '86 Proceedings of the 24th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
A unification method for disjunctive feature descriptions

ACL '87 Proceedings of the 25th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics

Review of "Head-driven phrase structure grammar" by Carl Pollard and Ivan A. Sag. Center for the Study of Learning and Information and The University of Chicago Press 1994.: and review of "German in head-driven phrase-structure grammar" by John Nerbonne, Klaus Netter, and Carl Pollard. Center for the Study of Learning and Information 1994.

Computational Linguistics
Features and agreement

ACL '95 Proceedings of the 33rd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
The first BUG report

COLING '92 Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational linguistics - Volume 3
The first BUG report

COLING '92 Proceedings of the 14th conference on Computational linguistics - Volume 3
High performance natural language processing on semantic network array processor

IJCAI'91 Proceedings of the 12th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2
Grammar Customization

Research on Language and Computation
Not as awful as it seems: explaining German case through computational experiments in fluid construction grammar

EACL '12 Proceedings of the 13th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Current complex-feature based grammars use a single procedure---unification---for a multitude of purposes, among them, enforcing formal agreement between purely syntactic features. This paper presents evidence from several natural languages that unification---variable-matching combined with variable substitution---is the wrong mechanism for effecting agreement. The view of grammar developed here is one in which unification is used for semantic interpretation, while purely formal agreement involves only a check for non-distinctness---i.e. variable-matching without variable substitution.