Abstract
Compositionality is often considered a fundamental principle of semantics for natural language. Yet only fairly recently has there been something of a theory of compositionality which allows to prove actual results. Basically, the lack of progress has been due to an improper understanding of what syntactic and semantic structures actually are. Many linguistic theories in one way or another confuse them by importing semantic notions into syntax or—conversely—adding syntactic detail to semantic structures. In this paper I shall outline a theory of semantic and syntactic structures and show how it avoids the problems that beset the previous theories. A particular benefit of this approach is that it allows to show results on sentential structure.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bhatt R., Joshi A. (2004). Semilinearity is a syntactic invariant. A reply to Kracht and Michaelis 1997. Linguistic Inquiy 35, 683–692
Calcagno M. (1995). A Sign–based extension to the Lambek calculus for discontinuous constituents. Bulletin of the IGPL 3, 555–578
de Groote, P. (2001). Towards abstract categorial grammars. In Association for Computational Linguistics, 39th Annual Meeting and 10th Conference of the European Chapter. Toulouse, pp. 148–155.
Fine K. (2000). Neutral relations. The Philosophical Review 109, 1–33
Fine K. (2003). The role of variables. Journal of Philosophy 50, 605–631
Geach P. (1957). Mental Acts. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
Groenink, A. V. (1997). Surface without structure. Word order and tractability issues in natural language analysis. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Utrecht.
Harris Z.S. (1979). Mathematical structures of language. Huntington, New York, Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company
Hausser R.R. (1984). Surface compositional grammar. München, Wilhelm Finck Verlag
Heim I., Kratzer A. (1998). Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers
Hodges W. (2001). Formal features of compositionality. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10, 7–28
Hoffman, B. (1995). The computational analysis of the syntax and semantics of “Free” Word Order in Turkish. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
Janssen T. (1997). Compositionality. In: van Benthem J., ter Meulen A. (eds). Handbook of logic and language. Amsterdam, Elsevier, pp. 417–473
Joshi A., Levy L.S., Takahashi M. (1975). Tree adjunct grammars. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 10, 136–163
Kallmeyer L., Joshi A. (2003). Factoring predicate argument and scope semantics: Underspecified semantics with LTAG. Research in Language and Computation 1, 3–58
Kamp H., Reyle U. (1993). From discourse to logic. Introduction to modeltheoretic semantics of natural language, formal language and discourse representation. Dordrecht, Kluwer
Kayne, R. S. (1994). The Antisymmetry of Syntax, No. 25 in Linguistic Inquiry Monographs. MIT Press.
Kracht, M. (1999). Agreement morphology, argument structure and syntax. Manuscript.
Kracht, M. (2001). Strict compositionality and literal movement grammars. In M. Moortgat (Ed.), Logical aspects of computational linguistics ’98 (pp. 126–142).
Kracht, M. (2003a). Features in phonological theory. In B. Löwe, W. Malzkorn, & T. Räsch (Eds.), Foundations of the formal sciences II, Applications of mathematical logic in philosophy and linguistics (pp. 123–149). Papers of a Conference held in Bonn, November 11–13, 2000. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Kracht M. (2003b). The mathematics of language. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter
Kracht M. (2007a). The emergence of syntactic structure. Linguistics and Philosophy 30, 47–95
Kracht, M. (2007b). Is Adjunction Compositional?. to appear.
Langacker R.W. (1987). Foundations of cognitive grammar, Vol. 1. Stanford, Stanford University Press
Leo, J. (2006). Modeling relations. manuscript, Utrecht University.
Levin, B., Rappaport Hovav, M. (2005). Argument realization, Research Surveys in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press.
Marcus S. (1967). Algebraic linguistics; analytical models. New York and London, Academic Press
Michaelis, J. (2001). On formal properties of minimalist grammars. Ph.D. Thesis, Universität Potsdam.
Michaelis J., Kracht M. (1997). Semilinearity as a Syntactic Invariant. In: Retoré C. (ed). Logical aspects of computational linguistics (LACL ’96). Heidelberg, Springer, pp. 329–345
Muskens, R. (2001). Lambda grammars and the syntax–semantics interface. In R. van Rooy, & M. Stokhof (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirteenth Amsterdam Colloquium. pp. 150–155.
Partee B., ter Meulen A., Wall R. (1990). Mathematical methods in linguistics. Dordrecht, Kluwer
Pollard, C. J. (1984). Generalized phrase structure grammar, head grammars and natural language. Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University.
Stabler E.P. (1997). Derivational minimalism. In: Retoré C. (ed). Logical aspects of computational linguistics (LACL ’96). Heidelberg, Springer, pp. 68–95
Steedman M. (2000). The syntactic process. Cambridge (Mass.), MIT Press
Talmy L. (2000). Toward a cognitive semantics, Vol. 1 & 2. Cambridge (Massachussetts), MIT Press
Vermeulen K.F.M. (1995). Merging without mystery or: Variables in dynamic semantics. Journal of Philosophical Logic 24, 405–450
Vijay-Shanker, K., Weir, D. J., & Joshi, A. (1987). Characterizing structural descriptions produced by various grammar formalisms. In Proceedings of the 25th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL ’87), Stanford, CA. pp. 104–111.
Westerståhl D. (1998). On mathematical proofs of the vacuity of compositionality. Linguistics and Philosophy 21, 635–643
Williamson T. (1985). Converse relations. The Philosophical Review 94, 249–262
Zadrozny W. (1994). From Compositional Semantics to Systematic Semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 17, 329–342
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Kracht, M. Compositionality: The Very Idea. Res on Lang and Comput 5, 287–308 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11168-007-9031-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11168-007-9031-5