Journal of Logic, Language and Information

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 63–86 | Cite as

Ambiguous Discourse in a Compositional Context. An Operational Perspective

  • Tim Fernando


The processing of sequences of (English) sentences is analyzedcompositionally through transitions that merge sentences, rather thandecomposing them. Transitions that are in a precise senseinertial are related to disjunctive and non-deterministic approaches toambiguity. Modal interpretations are investigated, inducing variousequivalences on sequences.

ambiguity compositionality discourse 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Fernando, T., 1997, “Ambiguity under changing contexts,” Linguistics and Philosophy 20, 575–606.Google Scholar
  2. Fernando, T., 1999, “A modal logic for non-deterministic discourse processing,” Journal of Logic, Language and Information 8, 445–468. Corrigendum: the axiom scheme (ϕ ⊃ ψ) ≡ (ϕ > ψ ) in Section 6 (p. 465) should be weakened to (ϕ > ψ) ≡ (ϕ ≡ ψ).Google Scholar
  3. Groenendijk, J. and Stokhof, M., 1991, “Dynamic predicate logic,” Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 39–100.Google Scholar
  4. Hodges, W., 2001, “Formal features of compositionality,” Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 10, 7–28.Google Scholar
  5. Hopcroft, J.E. and Ullman, J.D., 1979, Introduction to Automata Theory, Language and Computation, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  6. Kamp, H. and Reyle, U., 1993, From Discourse to Logic, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  7. Kempson, R., Meyer-Viol, W., and Gabbay, D., 2001, Dynamic Syntax: The Flow of Language Understanding, Oxford: Blackwell, to be published.Google Scholar
  8. Klop, J.W., 1988, “Bisimulation semantics,” Lectures given at the REXWorkshop, Noordwijkerhout, May 1988.Google Scholar
  9. Marx, M. and Venema, Y., 1997, Multi-Dimensional Modal Logic, Applied Logic Series, Vol. 4, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  10. Park, D., 1981, “Concurrency and automata on infinite sequences,” pp. 167–183 in Proceedings 5 th GI Conference, P. Deussen, ed., Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 104, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  11. Plotkin, G.D., 1981, “A structural approach to operational semantics,” Technical Report DAIMI FN-19, Computer Science Department, Aarhus University.Google Scholar
  12. van Benthem, J., 1996, Exploring Logical Dynamics, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  13. van Deemter, K., 1996, “Towards a logic of ambiguous expressions,” pp. 203–238 in Semantic Ambiguity and Underspecification, K. van Deemter and S. Peters, eds., CSLI Lecture Notes, Vol. 55, Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  14. Visser, A. and Vermeulen, C.F.M., 1996, “Dynamic bracketing and discourse representation,” Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 37, 321–365.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tim Fernando
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer ScienceTrinity CollegeDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations