Advertisement

Handling Verb Phrase Anaphora with Dependent Types and Events

  • Daniyar ItegulovEmail author
  • Ekaterina Lebedeva
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10944)

Abstract

This paper studies how dependent typed events can be used to treat verb phrase anaphora. We introduce a framework that extends Dependent Type Semantics (DTS) with a new atomic type for neo-Davidsonian events and an extended @-operator that can return new events that share properties of events referenced by verb phrase anaphora.

The proposed framework, along with illustrative examples of its use, are presented after a brief overview of the necessary background and of the major challenges posed by verb phrase anaphora.

References

  1. 1.
    Bekki, D.: Representing anaphora with dependent types. In: Asher, N., Soloviev, S. (eds.) LACL 2014. LNCS, vol. 8535, pp. 14–29. Springer, Heidelberg (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-43742-1_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dalrymple, M., Shieber, S.M., Pereira, F.C.N.: Ellipsis and higher-order unification. Linguist. Philos. 14(4), 399–452 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Davidson, D.: The logical form of action sentences. In: Rescher, N. (ed.) The Logic of Decision and Action. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh (1967)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dummett, M.: What is a theory of meaning? (II). In: Evans, G., McDowell, J. (eds.) Truth and Meaning: Essays in Semantics. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1976)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dummett, M.A.E.: What is a theory of meaning? In: Guttenplan, S. (ed.) Mind and Language. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1975)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Luo, Z., Soloviev, S.: Dependent event types. In: Kennedy, J., de Queiroz, R.J.G.B. (eds.) WoLLIC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10388, pp. 216–228. Springer, Heidelberg (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-55386-2_15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Martin-Löf, P., Sambin, G.: Intuitionistic Type Theory. Studies in Proof Theory. Bibliopolis, Berkeley (1984)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Montague, R.: Formal Philosophy; Selected Papers of Richard Montague. Yale University Press, New Haven (1974)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Parsons, T.: Events in the Semantics of English: A Study in Subatomic Semantics. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Prawitz, D.: Intuitionistic logic: a philosophical challenge. In: Von Wright, G.H. (ed.) Logic and Philosophy/Logique et Philosophie, vol. 5, pp. 1–10. Springer, Dordrecht (1980).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8820-0_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Prüst, H., Scha, R., van den Berg, M.: Discourse grammar and verb phrase anaphora. Linguist. Philos. 17(3), 261–327 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ranta, A.: Type-Theoretical Grammar. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sundholm, G.: Proof theory and meaning. In: Gabbay, D., Guenthner, F. (eds.) Handbook of Philosophical Logic: Volume III: Alternatives in Classical Logic. SYLI, vol. 166, pp. 471–506. Springer, Dordrecht (1986).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5203-4_8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Taylor, B.: Modes of occurence, verbs, adverbs and events. Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l’Etranger 176(3), 406–407 (1986)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Verkuyl, H.J.: On the Compositional Nature of the Aspects. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht (1972)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Australian National UniversityCanberraAustralia
  2. 2.ITMO UniversitySt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations