Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 20, Issue 6, pp 575–606

Ambiguity Under Changing Contexts

  • Tim Fernando
Article

Abstract

Notions of disambiguation supporting a compositional interpretation ofambiguous expressions and reflecting intuitions about how sentences combinein discourse are investigated. Expressions are analyzed both inductively bybreaking them apart, and co-inductively by embedding them within largercontexts.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aczel, Peter: 1988, Non-Well-Founded Sets, CSLI Lecture Notes Number 14, Stanford.Google Scholar
  2. Asher, Nicholas: 1993, Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  3. Barwise, Jon: 1987, ‘Noun Phrases, Generalized Quantifiers and Anaphora’, in E. Engdahl and P. Gärdenfors (eds.), Generalized Quantifiers, Studies in Language and Philosophy, Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  4. Deemter, Kees van: 1996, ‘Towards a Logic of Ambiguous Expressions’, in K. van Deemter and S. Peters (eds.), Semantic Ambiguity and Underspecification, CSLI Lecture Notes Number 55, Stanford.Google Scholar
  5. Fernando, Tim: 1995, ‘Are Context Change Potentials Functions?’, in H. Kamp and B. Partee (eds.) Context dependence in Linguistic Meaning, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
  6. Fernando, Tim: 1995, ‘A Logical Connective for Ambiguity Requiring Disambiguation’, in J. Groenendijk (ed.), Ellipsis, Underspecification, Events and More in Dynamic Semantics, Dyana deliverable R2.2.B.Google Scholar
  7. Fernando, Tim: 1996, ‘Non-Monotonic Consequences of Preferential Contextual Disambiguation’, in Proc. Tenth Amsterdam Colloquium, ILLC, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  8. Fernando, Tim: 1996, ‘Analyzing Ambiguity Denotationally, Operationally and Logically’, Manuscript.Google Scholar
  9. Groenendijk, J. and M. Stokhof: 1991, ‘Dynamic Predicate Logic’, Linguistics and Philosophy 14.Google Scholar
  10. Heim, Irene: 1982, The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases, Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.Google Scholar
  11. Hopcroft, J. E. and J. D. Ullman: 1979, Introduction to Automata Theory, Language and Computation, Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  12. Kamp, H. and U. Reyle 1993, From Discourse to Logic, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  13. Kraus, S., D. Lehmann, and M. Magidor: 1990, ‘Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Preferential Models and Cumulative Logics’, Artificial Intelligence 44.Google Scholar
  14. Poesio, Massimo: 1996, ‘Semantic Ambiguity and Perceived Ambiguity’, in K. van Deemter and S. Peters (eds.), Semantic Ambiguity and Underspecification, CSLI Lecture Notes Number 55, Stanford.Google Scholar
  15. Reyle, Uwe: 1993, ‘Dealing with Ambiguities by Underspecification: Construction, Representation and Deduction’, Journal of Semantics 10(2).Google Scholar
  16. Reyle, Uwe: 1995, ‘On Reasoning with Ambiguity’, in Proc. of the 7th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Dublin.Google Scholar
  17. Zadrozny, Wlodek: 1994, ‘From Compositional to Systematic Semantics’, Linguistics and Philosophy 17(4).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tim Fernando
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für maschinelle SprachverarbeitungUniversität StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations