Functional constraints in knowledge-based natural language understanding

Authors:
Lars Ahrenberg
Affiliations:
Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
Venue:
COLING '88 Proceedings of the 12th conference on Computational linguistics - Volume 1
Year:
1988

Citing 6
Cited 3

Semantic interpretation and the resolution of ambiguity

Semantic interpretation and the resolution of ambiguity
Parsing into Discourse Object Descriptions

EACL '87 Proceedings of the third conference on European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics
Integrating semantics and flexible syntax by exploiting isomorphism between grammatical and semantical relations

EACL '87 Proceedings of the third conference on European chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics
Semantic interpretation using KL-ONE

ACL '84 Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 22nd annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
Problems in logical form

ACL '81 Proceedings of the 19th annual meeting on Association for Computational Linguistics
Another stride towards knowledge-based machine translation

COLING '86 Proceedings of the 11th coference on Computational linguistics

A model for habitable and efficient dialogue management for natural language interaction

Natural Language Engineering
A novel analysis of temporal frame-adverbials

COLING '88 Proceedings of the 12th conference on Computational linguistics - Volume 2
Dialogue actions for natural language interfaces

IJCAI'95 Proceedings of the 14th international joint conference on Artificial intelligence - Volume 2

Quantified Score

Hi-index	0.00

Visualization

Abstract

Many knowledge-based systems of semantic interpretation rely explicitly or implicitly on an assumption of structural isomorphy between syntactic and semantic objects, handling exceptions by ad hoc measures. In this paper I argue that constraint equations of the kind used in the LFG- (or PATR-) fomalisms provide a more general, and yet restricted formalism in which not only isomorphic correspondences are expressible, but also many cases of non-isomorphic correspondences. I illustrate with treatments of idioms, speech act interpretation and discourse pragmatics.