Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 17, Issue 6, pp 561–605 | Cite as

Dynamic dependency grammar

  • David Milward


Artificial Intelligence Computational Linguistic Dynamic Dependency Dependency Grammar 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abbott, B.: 1976, ‘RNR as a Test for Constituenthood’,Linguistic Inquiry 7, 639–642.Google Scholar
  2. Ades, A. and M. Steedman: 1982, ‘On the Order of Words’,Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 517–558.Google Scholar
  3. Aho, A. V., J. E. Hopcroft, and J. D. Ullman: 1983,Data Structures and Algorithms, Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  4. Aho, A. V. and J. D. Ullman: 1972,The Theory of Parsing, Translation and Compiling, Volume 1: Parsing, Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey.Google Scholar
  5. Arbib, M. A.: 1969,Theories of Abstract Automata, Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey.Google Scholar
  6. Bar-Hillel, Y.: 1953, ‘A Quasi-Arithmetical Notation for Syntatic Description’,Language 29, 47–58.Google Scholar
  7. Bar-Hillel, Y.: 1964,Language and Information: Selected Essays on Their Theory and Application, Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  8. Barry, G. and M. Pickering: 1993, ‘Dependency Categorial Grammar and Coordination’,Linguistics 31(5), 855–902.Google Scholar
  9. van Benthem, J.: 1991,Language in Action: Categories, Lambdas and Dynamic Logic, North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  10. Dowty, D. R., R. F. Wall, and S. Peters: 1981,Introduction to Montague Semantics. D. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  11. Earley, J.: 1970, ‘An Efficient Context-free Parsing Algorithm’,ACM Communications 13(2), 94–102.Google Scholar
  12. Gaifman, H.: 1965, ‘Dependency Systems and Phrase Structure Systems’,Information and Control 8, 304–337.Google Scholar
  13. Gazdar, G.: 1981, ‘Unbounded Dependencies and Coordinate Structure’,Linguistic Inquiry 12, 155–184.Google Scholar
  14. Hays, D. G.: 1964, ‘Dependency Theory: A Formalism and Some Observations’,Language 40, 511–525.Google Scholar
  15. Hausser, R.: 1989,Computation of Language: An Essay on Syntax, Semantics and Pragmatics in Natural Man-Machine Communication, Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  16. Henderson, J.: 1990,Structure Unification Grammar: A Unifying Framework for Investigating Natural Language, Technical Report MS-CIS-90-94, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  17. Hoare, C. A. R.: 1969, ‘An Axiomatic Basis for Computer Programming’,Communications of the ACM 12, 576–583.Google Scholar
  18. Hudson, R. A.: 1990,English Word Grammar, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  19. Joshi, A. K.: 1987, ‘An Introduction to Tree Adjoining Grammars’, in Manaster-Ramer (ed.),Mathematics of Language, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  20. Johnson, M.: 1991, ‘The Computational Complexity of GLR Parsing’, in M. Tomita (ed.),Generalized LR Parsing, Kluwer.Google Scholar
  21. Just, M. and P. Carpenter: 1980, ‘A Theory of Reading, from Eye Fixations to Comprehension’,Psychological Review 87, 329–354.Google Scholar
  22. Kipps, J.R.: 1991, ‘GLR Parsing in Tiem O(n3)’, in M. Tomita (ed.),Generalized LR Parsing, Kluwer.Google Scholar
  23. Kempen, G.: 1992, ‘The Syntax of Coordination, Conjunction Reduction, and Gapping: A Psycholinguistic Approach’, unpublished abstract, University of Leiden.Google Scholar
  24. Lambek, J.: 1958, ‘The Mathematics of Sentence Structure’,American Mathematical Monthly 65, 154–169.Google Scholar
  25. Langendoen, D. T.: 1975, ‘Finite State Parsing of Phrase Structure Languages and the Status of Readjustment Rules in Grammar’,Linguistic Inguiry 6, 533–554.Google Scholar
  26. van der Linden, E.: 1993,A Categorial, Computational Theory of Idioms, PhD Thesis, Utrecht University.Google Scholar
  27. Marcus, M., D. Hindle, and M. Fleck: 1983, ‘D-Theory: Talking about Talking about Trees’, inProceedings of the 21st ACL, Cambridge, Mass. 129–136.Google Scholar
  28. Marslen-Wilson, W.: 1973, ‘Linguistic Structure and Speech Shadowing at Very Short Latencies’,Nature 244, 522–523.Google Scholar
  29. Mel'čuk, I. A.: 1988,Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice, State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
  30. Milward, D.: 1991,Axiomatic Grammar, Non-Constituent Coordination, and Incremental Interpretation, PhD thesis, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
  31. Milward, D.: 1992, ‘Dynamics, Dependency Grammar and Incremental Interpretation’, inProceedings of COLING 92, Nantes, vol. 4, 1095–1099.Google Scholar
  32. Milward, D.: 1994, ‘Non-Constituent Coordination: Theory and Practice’, inProceedings of COLING 94, Kyoto, Japan, 935–941.Google Scholar
  33. Milward, D. and R. Cooper: 1994, ‘Incremental Interpretation: Applications, Theory and Relationship to Dynamic Semantics’, inProceedings of COLING 94, Kyoto, Japan, 748–754.Google Scholar
  34. Moortgat, M.: 1988,Categorial Investigations: Logical and Linguistic Aspects of the Lambek Calculus, Foris, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  35. Morrill, G.: 1990, ‘Grammar and Logical Types’, in G. Barry and G. Morrill (eds.),Studies in Categorial Grammar, Edinburgh Working Papers in Cognitive Science, 5.Google Scholar
  36. van Oirsouw, R. R.: 1987,The Syntax of Coordination. Croom-Helm.Google Scholar
  37. Pickering, M.: 1991,Processing Dependencies, PhD Thesis, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  38. Pollard, C., and I. A. Sag: 1993,Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, University of Chicago Press and CSLI Publications, Chicago.Google Scholar
  39. Pulman, S. G.: 1985, ‘A Parser that Doesn't’, inProceedings of the 2nd European ACL, Geneva, 128–135.Google Scholar
  40. Pulman, S. G.: 1986, ‘Grammars, Parsers, and Memory Limitations’,Language and Cognitive Processes 1(3), 197–225.Google Scholar
  41. Sag, I. A., G. Gazdar, T. Wasow, and S. Weisler: 1985, ‘Coordination and How to Distinguish Categories’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 3, 117–171.Google Scholar
  42. Shieber, S. M. and M. Johnson: 1993, ‘Variations on Incremental Interpretation’,Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 22(2), 287–318.Google Scholar
  43. Stabler, E. P.: 1991, ‘Avoid the Pedestrian's Paradox’, in R. C. Berwick et al. (eds.),Principle-Based Parsing: Computation and Psycholinguistics, 199–237, Kluwer, Netherlands.Google Scholar
  44. Steedman, M.: 1985, ‘Dependency and Coordination in the Grammar of Dutch and English’,Language 61(3), 523–568.Google Scholar
  45. Steedman, M.: 1988, ‘Combinators and Grammars’, in Oehrle et al. (eds.),Categorial Grammars and Natural Language Structures, 417–442.Google Scholar
  46. Tanenhaus, M. K., S. Garnsey, and J. Boland: 1990, ‘Combinatory Lexical Information and Language Comprehension’, in G. T. M. Altmann (ed.),Cognitive Models of Speech Processing: Psycholinguistic and Computational Perspectives, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  47. Thompson, H., M. Dixon, and J. Lamping: 1991, ‘Compose-Reduce Parsing’, inProceedings of the 29th ACL, 87–97.Google Scholar
  48. Tomita, M.: 1985,Efficient Parsing for Natural Language, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, Ma.Google Scholar
  49. Woods, W.: 1973, ‘An Experimental Parsing System for Transition Network Grammars’, in R. Rustin (ed.),Natural Language Processing, Algorithmics Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Milward
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Cognitive ScienceUniversity of EdinburghEdinburghScotland

Personalised recommendations