Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar 8. Aspects of Interpretation

1. Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar8. Aspects of Interpretation Lin, Yu-Chun

2. Outline • Refine Quantifier Storage • Quantificational Content / Nuclear Content • Semantics Principle • Content Principle • QIP • Score Principle • Scope problems • Modifiers revisited • Adjective modifier • Contextual Information • Background condition • Contextual Indices • Analytic Alternatives

3. Review • Semantics Principle • In a headed phrase, the CONTENT value is token-identical to that of the adjunct daughter if the DTRS value is of sort head-adj-struc, and with that of the head daughter otherwise. • Quantifier Inheritance Principle • The QUANTIFIER-STORE (QSTORE) value of a phrasal node is the union of the QSTORE values of the daughters less those quantifiers that are retrieved at that node • Contradiction in some cases • the CONTENT value of the S is no longer identical to that of its head daughter—the VP know a poem.

5. CONTENT Reconstruction • Restructuring the feature-structure representation of (possibly quantified) psoas. • Replace the old sorts psoa and qpsoa with a new sort psoa of possibly quantified psoa. • The key difference is that in the new representation, quantificational information—QUANTIFIERS (QUANTS)—is segregated from the non-quantificational core, called the NUCLEUS

6. CONTENT Reconstruction (cont.) • QUANTS • A list of quantifiers (in order of scope); • NUCLEUS • A new sort called quantifier-free psoa (qfpsoa).

7. CONTENT Reconstruction (cont.) • The CONTENT of I know a poem • Tag[4] indicates the quantifier shown in (8)

8. CONTENT Reconstruction (cont.) • RESTRICTION value of a quantifier's restricted index is a set of possibly quantified psoas, each of which may itself be quantified • a poem that is liked by every person or every teacher who many students like.

9. Quantifier scope • Constrain the relation between QSTORE and QUANTS • Guarantee that quantifiers are assigned a scope (i.e. appear within the QUANTS value) precisely where they are 'removed from storage.'

11. Semantic Principles • Content Principle • Quantifier Inheritance Principle (QIP) • Scope Principle • (p322) • “Semantic head” of a head phrase • the adjunct daughter in a head-adjunct structure • the head daughter otherwise

12. Content Principle • In a headed phrase, • Case 1 • If the semantic head's CONTENT value is of sort psoa then its NUCLEUS is token-identical to the NUCLEUS of the mother • Case 2 • otherwise, the CONTENT of the semantic head is token-identical to the CONTENT of the mother

13. Quantifier Inheritance Principle • In a headed phrase, the RETRIEVED value is a list whose set of elements forms a subset of the union of the QSTOREs of the daughters, and is nonempty only if the CONTENT of the semantic head is of sort psoa; and the QSTORE value is the relative complement of the RETRIEVED value.

14. Scope Principle • In a headed phrase whose semantic head is of sort psoa, the QUANTS value is the concatenation of the RETRIEVED value with the QUANTS value of the semantic head.

15. Semantics Principle (final) • In a headed phrase: • a. the RETRIEVED value is a list whose set of elements forms a subset of the union of the QSTOREs of the daughters; and the QSTORE value is the relative complement of that set; and • b. • (Case 1) if the semantic head's CONTENT value is of sort psoa, then the NUCLEUS value is identical with that of the semantic head, and the QUANTS value is the concatenation of the RETRIEVED value and the semantic head's QUANTS value • (Case 2) otherwise the RETRIEVED value is empty and the CONTENT value is token-identical to that of the semantic head.

16. Semantics Principle (cont.) • Every student knows some poem.

18. Semantics Principle (cont.) • Problems (scope) : • One of heri students approached [each teacher]i. • The picture of himselfi, in his office delighted [each dictator]i. • [Each man]i talked to a friend of hisi. • When the pronoun whose index is ontained within an existential quantifier is anaphoric to (coindexed with) a universal quantifier, the universal quantifier must have wide scope.

19. Quantifier Scope Problem • Quantifier Binding Condition • Given a quantifier contained within a CONTENT value, every occurrence within that CONTENT value of the quantifier's index must be captured by that quantifier. • P327

20. Quantifier Scope Problem (cont.) • Numerous factors appear to affect the determination of quantifier scope include • lexical differences • In many contexts, each has a stronger tendency to take wide scope than every does • length of NP • long indefinite NPs may tend to take wide scope • linear order • at the same level of embedding, earlier quantifiers tend to take scope over those that follow • depth of embedding • less embedded quantifiers tend to take scope over more deeply embedded ones • scope islands • complex NPs may constitute environments that delimit scope possibilities • Not yet a complete treatment of quantifier scope in English.

21. Modifiers revisited • Adjectival modifiers that include lexical entries • Combine with nominal N' constituents to form n's whose index's restriction set includes one psoa stemming from the adjective stemming from the N"s head noun.

22. Adjectival modifiers • 2 ways of interpretation adjectives like red, • Modeled by imposing restrictions on the anchor of a parameter. • We may assume that the relation red has an additional role-let us call it STANBARD-whose value is some contextually determined property that provides the standard.

23. Adjectival modifiers • Example for comparison • The Linguistics Department has an important volleyball game coming up against the Philosophy Department. I see the Phils have recruited Julius to play with them, which means we are in real trouble unless we can find a good linguist to add to our team in time for the game.

24. Adjectival modifiers • alleged • alleged X need not be X.

25. Contextual Information • attribute CONTEXT • Ch1. sec 3

26. CONTEXT | BACKGROUND • BACKGROUND • Value a set of psoas corresponding to what are best thought of as the appropriateness conditions associai with an utterance of a given type of phrase

27. CONTEXT | BACKGROUND (cont.) • Principle Contextual Consistency • The CONTEXT | BACKGROUND value of a given phrase is the union of the CONTEXT | BACKGROUND values of the daughters.

28. Principle Contextual Consistency • Incorrect • The 'plugs‘ • the connective //(... then)) • Verbs of saying or prepositional attitude • (say or believe). • Thus in the following sets of examples, the (a) and (b) sentences differ in that only the former have as a presupposition the proposition expressed by the (c) sentence: • Pat regrets that Terry is dead. • If Terry is dead, then Pat regrets that Terry is dead. • Terry is dead. • Pat regrets that Terry is dead. • Kim fears that Pat regrets that Terry is dead. • Terry is dead

29. Principle Contextual Consistency • More problems: • The presupposition of the most deeply embedded clause is not simply plugged: • Kim fears that Pat will stop protecting Sandy. • Pat is protecting Sandy. • Kim believes that Pat is protecting Sandy • (a) is not without presupposition; rather, it presupposes (c), where the presupposition of the most deeply embedded clause of (a) must be the set of the fearer's (Kim's) beliefs.

30. Contextual Indeces • C-INDICES • Any occurrence of the word / (or me, my, or myself) within a given utterance makes reference to the same individual—the speaker of that utterance • incorrect

31. Contextual Indeces (cont.) • Problems • A: Well, do you think they're gonna……B: Fire me = [B]?A: Well, do you think they're gonna.B: Fire you = [A]? • That is larger than that or that. • For this detail, I will need the assistance of you1, you2, you3, and you4. • It seems to be louder now... than it is now…

32. Contextual Indeces (cont.) • Let each part of an utterance (at least each lexeme) has its own C-INDICES • Identify the C-INDICES value of all daughters in a given phrase.

33. Analytic Alternatives • Relations and Qfpsoas • RELATION • well-formed • not well-formed

34. Analytic Alternatives (cont.) • Relations and Qfpsoas • Problems: A technical difficulty: no natural way to reflect that fact that what roles appear in a qfpsoa depend on that qfpsoa’s relation. • Solution: eliminate the attribute RELATION, let atomic sorts become subsorts of the sort qfpsoa.

35. Analytic Alternatives (cont.) • Relations and Qfpsoas

36. Analytic Alternatives (cont.) • Propositions and Types • Richard Cooper (1990, chap. 7) • It is straightforward to modify the lexical entries of verbs in such a way that general principles of HPSG theory, cause sentences to have propositions (in the situation-theoretic sense) as their CONTENT value, rather than psoas. • P339

37. Analytic Alternatives (cont.) • Roles and Subcategorization • A way of classifying the GIVEE, DONATEE, HANDEE roles (and their like) as different realizations of a more general (or superordinate) role called GOAL. • p342