SDRT and Continuation Semantics

  • Nicholas Asher
  • Sylvain Pogodalla
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6797)

Abstract

Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (SDRT) [2,7] provides a dynamic semantics for discourse that exploits a rich notion of discourse structure. According to SDRT, a text is segmented into constituents related to each other by means of rhetorical relations; the resulting structure, known as a segmented discourse representation structure or SDRS has various semantic effects. This theory has shown how discourse structure makes contributions to the interpretation of a variety of linguistic phenomena, including tense, modality, presupposition, the interpretation of anaphoric pronouns and ellipsis. SDRT exploits dynamic semantics [20,14] to interpret SDRSs. We investigate here the advantages of integrating SDRT within continuation style semantics of the sort developed in [17].

Keywords

SDRT dynamic semantics continuation semantics 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Afantenos, S., Asher, N.: Testing SDRT’s right frontier. In: 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, COLING 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Asher, N.: Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, vol. 50. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1993)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Asher, N.: Troubles on the right frontier. In: Khnlein, P., Benz, A. (eds.) Constraints in Discourse (CID 2005). Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, vol. 172, pp. 29–52. John Benjamins Publishing Company, Amsterdam (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Asher, N., Fernando, T.: Effective labeling for disambiguation. In: Bunt, H. (ed.) Second International Workshop in Computational Linguistics, Tilburg, The Netherlands (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Asher, N., Hardt, D., Busquets, J.: Discourse parallelism, ellipsis, and ambiguity. Journal of Semantics 18(1), 1–25 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Asher, N., Lascarides, A.: The semantics and pragmatics of presupposition. Journal of Semantics 15(3), 239–299 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Asher, N., Lascarides, A.: Logics of Conversation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Asher, N., Pogodalla, S.: A montagovian treatment of modal subordination. In: Semantics and Linguistic Theory 20, SALT 20 (2010)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barker, C.: Continuations in natural language. In: 4th Continuations Workshop (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bernardi, R., Moortgat, M.: Continuation semantics for the Lambek-Grishin calculus. Information and Computation 208(5), 397–416 (2010); Special Issue: 14th Workshop on Logic, Language, Information and Computation (WoLLIC 2007)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brasoeavnu, A.: Structured anaphora to quantifier domains. Information and Computation (to appear)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dekker, P.: Scopes in discourse. Journal of Language and Computation 1, 7–32 (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fernando, T.: What is a DRS? Tech. Rep. R2.1.B, Dyana deliverable (1994); also in the Proceedings of a Workshop on Computational Semantics, Tilburg, The Netherlands (December 1994)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Groenendijk, J., Stokhof, M.: Dynamic predicate logic. Linguistics and Philosophy 14(1), 39–100 (1991)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Groenendijk, J., Stokhof, M.: Changing the context: Dynamics and discourse. In: Doron, E., et al. (eds.) 11th Annual Conference and of the Workshop on Discourse (IATL 3). The Israel Association for Theoretical Linguistics, Jerusalem (1996)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    de Groote, P.: Towards Abstract Categorial Grammars. In: 39th Annual Meeting and 10th Conference of the European Chapter (EACL), Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pp. 148–155 (2001)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    de Groote, P.: Towards a Montagovian account of dynamics. In: Semantics and Linguistic Theory 16, SALT 16 (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    de Groote, P., Lebedeva, E.: Presupposition accomodation as exception handling. In: 11th Annual SIGdial Meeting on Discourse and Dialogue, SIGDIAL 2010 (2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Janssen, T.: Foundations and Applications of Montague Grammar. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam (1983)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kamp, H.: A theory of truth and semantic representation. In: Groenendijk, J.A., Janssen, T., Stokhof, M. (eds.) Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Foris (1981)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kehler, A., Kerta, L., Rohde, H., Elman, J.: Coherence and coreference revisited. Journal of Semantics 25(1), 1–44 (2008); special Issue on Processing MeaningCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lascarides, A., Asher, N.: Temporal interpretation, discourse relations and commonsense entailment. Linguistics and Philosophy 16(5), 437–493 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moggi, E.: Notions of computation and monads. Information and Computation 93(1), 55–92 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pogodalla, S.: Exploring a type-theoretic approach to accessibility constraint modelling. Journées Sémantique et Modélisation, Toulouse (2008)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Romero, M., Hardt, D.: Ellipsis and the structure of discourse. Journal of Semantics 21(4), 375–414 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shan, C., Barker, C.: Explaining crossover and superiority as left-to-right evaluation. Linguistics and Philosophy 29(1), 91–134 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Vieu, L., Bras, M., Asher, N., Aurnague, M.: Locating adverbials in discourse. Journal of French Language Studies 15(2), 173–193 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicholas Asher
    • 1
  • Sylvain Pogodalla
    • 2
  1. 1.CNRSIRITFrance
  2. 2.LORIA/INRIA Nancy — Grand EstFrance

Personalised recommendations