Grammars

, Volume 5, Issue 3, pp 177–221 | Cite as

Formalizing Mirror Theory

  • Gregory M. Kobele
Article

Abstract

Mirror theory is a theory of (morpho-) syntax introduced in (Brody, 1997). Here I present a formalization of the theory, and study some of its language theoretic properties.

feature movement mildly context sensitive mirror theory morpho-syntax 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abels, K. Move?. ms. University of Connecticut, Storrs, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, M. The mirror principle and morphosyntactic explanation, Linguistic Inquiry, 16: 373–416, 1985.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, M. Incorporation: a Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Cambridge,MA: MIT Press, 1988.Google Scholar
  4. Brody, M. 1997, Mirror theory. ms. University College London.Google Scholar
  5. Brody, M. On the status of representations and derivations. ms. University College London, 2000.Google Scholar
  6. Chomsky, N. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  7. Gerdemann, D. Parsing as tree traversal. In: Proceedings of COLING 94, vol. I. pp. 396–400, 1994.Google Scholar
  8. Hale, J. and E.P. Stabler. Notes on unique readability. ms. UCLA, 2001.Google Scholar
  9. Harkema, H. A characterization of minimalist grammars. In P. de Groote, G. Morrill and C. Retoré (editors), Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics (LACL 2001), vol. 2099 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2001.Google Scholar
  10. Joshi, A. How much context-sensitivity is necessary for characterizing structural descriptions. In D. Dowty, L. Karttunen and A. Zwicky, (editors), Natural Language Processing: Theoretical, Computational and Psychological Perspectives, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 206–250, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. Keenan, E.L. and E.P. Stabler. forthcoming, Bare Grammar. Stanford University, CSLI Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Kobele, G.M., T. Collier, C. Taylor, and E.P. Stabler. Learning mirror theory. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammars and Related Formalisms (TAG+6), Venezia, 2002.Google Scholar
  13. Kobele, G.M. and J. Kandybowicz. A normal form theorem for minimalist grammars. ms. UCLA, 2001.Google Scholar
  14. Michaelis, J. Derivational minimalism is mildly context-sensitive. In M. Moortgat, (editor), Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics, (LACL '98), vol. 2014 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Berlin, 1998.Google Scholar
  15. Michaelis, J. Transforming linear context-free rewriting systems into minimalist grammars. In P. de Groote, G. Morrill and C. Retoré (editors), Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics (LACL 2001), vol. 2099 of Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Springer, Berlin, 2001.Google Scholar
  16. Michaelis, J. Notes on the complexity of complex heads in a minimalist grammar. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammars and Related Formalisms(TAG+6), Venezia, 2002.Google Scholar
  17. Michaelis, J. and M. Kracht. Semilinearity as a syntactic invariant. In C. Retoré (editor), Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1328, Springer, New York, pp. 37–40, 1997.Google Scholar
  18. Pesetsky, D. Phrasal Movement and its Kin. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press, 2000.Google Scholar
  19. Seki, H., T. Matsumura, M. Fujii and T. Kasami. On multiple context-free grammars, Theoretical Computer Science 88: 191–229, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. Stabler, E.P. The finite connectivity of linguistic structure. In C. Clifton, L. Frazier and K. Rayner (editors), Perspectives on Sentence Processing. Lawrence Erlbaum, New York, pp. 303–336, 1994.Google Scholar
  21. Stabler, E.P. Derivational minimalism. In C. Retoré (editor), Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science 1328, Springer, New York, pp. 68–95, 1997.Google Scholar
  22. Stabler, E.P. Recognizing head movement. In P. de Groote, G. Morrill and C. Retoré (editors), Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2099. Springer, New York, pp. 254–260, 2001.Google Scholar
  23. Stabler, E.P. and E.L. Keenan: Structural similarity. In A. Nijholt, G. Scollo, T. Rus, and D. Heylen (editors), Algebraic Methods in Language Processing, AMiLP 2000. University of Iowa. Revised version forthcoming in Theoretical Computer Science, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gregory M. Kobele
    • 1
  1. 1.UCLALos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations