Research on Language and Computation

, Volume 6, Issue 1, pp 53–77

Is Adjunction Compositional?



This paper shows that there is no compositional TAG for boolean expressions. This indicates that adjunction cannot carry the weight of constructing the semantics compositionally, in contrast to approaches based on discontinuity instead (like Linear Context Free Rewrite Systems). Although the proof is based on the assumption that the semantic functions are partial it seems highly unlikely that allowing partial semantic functions will help.


Compositionality Adjunction TAG 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Calcagno M. (1995). A sign-based extension to the Lambek calculus for discontinuous constituents. Bulletin of the IGPL 3: 555–578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Frank A., van Genabith J. (2001). LL-based semantics for LTAG – and what it teaches us about LFG and LTAG. In: Butt M., King T.H. (eds) Proceedings of the LFG’01 Conference. University of Hong Kong. CSLI Online PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  3. Gardent, C., & Kallmeyer, L. (2003). Semantic construction in feature-based TAG. In Proceedings of the 10th Meeting of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Budapest.Google Scholar
  4. Gardent, C., & Parmentier, Y. (2005). Large scale semantic construction for tree adjoining grammar. In Proceedings of Logical Aspects in Computational Linguistics. Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Kallmeyer L., Joshi A. (2003). Factoring predicate argument and scope semantics: Underspecified semantics with LTAG. Research in Language and Computation 1: 3–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Kracht, M. (2003). The mathematics of language. Number 63 in Studies in Generative Grammar. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin.Google Scholar
  7. Kracht M. (2006). Partial algebras, meaning categories and algebraization. Theoretical Computer Science 354: 131–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kracht, M. (2007). Lectures on interpreted languages and compositionality. Manuscript, UCLA.Google Scholar
  9. Martín-Vide C., Păun G. (1998). Structured contextual grammars. Grammars 1: 33–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsUCLALos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations