Inclusion and Exclusion in Natural Language
- 422 Downloads
We present a formal system for reasoning about inclusion and exclusion in natural language, following work by MacCartney and Manning. In particular, we show that an extension of the Monotonicity Calculus, augmented by six new type markings, is sufficient to derive novel inferences beyond monotonicity reasoning, and moreover gives rise to an interesting logic of its own. We prove soundness of the resulting calculus and discuss further logical and linguistic issues, including a new connection to the classes of weak, strong, and superstrong negative polarity items.
KeywordsSurface reasoning Logic and grammar Exclusion relations Polarity
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.van Benthem J.: Language in Action. North Holland, Amsterdam (1991)Google Scholar
- 4.van Benthem, J., Natural logic: a view from the 1980’s, in M. K. Chakraborty et al. (eds.), Logic, Navya-Nyāya and Applications, College Publications, London, 2008.Google Scholar
- 5.Giannakidou, A., Negative and positive polarity items, in C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, and P. Portner (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Mouton de Gruyter, 2011.Google Scholar
- 7.Ladusaw, W., Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Texas Austin, 1979.Google Scholar
- 8.MacCartney, B., Natural Language Inference, Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University, 2009.Google Scholar
- 9.MacCartney, B., and C. D. Manning, Modeling semantic containment and exclusion in natural language inference, The 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Coling-08), Manchester, 2008.Google Scholar
- 10.MacCartney, B., and C. D. Manning, An extended model of natural logic, Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Computational Semantics, 2009.Google Scholar
- 11.Moss, L. S., Logics for Natural Language Inference, ESSLLI 2010 Course Notes.Google Scholar
- 12.Moss, L. S., The Soundness of Internalized Polarity Marking, Studia Logica 100(4):683–704, 2012. (this issue)Google Scholar
- 13.Sánchez, V., Studies on Natural Logic and Categorial Grammar, Ph.D. Dissertation, Universiteit van Amsterdam, 1991.Google Scholar
- 16.Zwarts, F., Three types of polarity, in F. Hamm and E. Hinrichs (eds.), Plurality and Quantification, Kluwer, 1998.Google Scholar