Advertisement

Extended Prolog and its application to an integrated parser for text understanding

  • Kuniaki Uehara
  • Takashi Kakiuchi
  • Osamu Mikami
  • Jun'ichi Toyoda
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 221)

Abstract

This paper presents an extended Prolog and its application to an integrated parser for text understanding. The word ‘integrated’ includes some meanings. First, syntactic, semantic, and contextual analyses occur as an integral part of the parsing process. Second, three distinct metaphors available in the field of computational linguistics, such as procedure oriented, declaration oriented, and actor oriented metaphors are incorporated into a single grammar formalism. Third, two major discourse analyses, expectation-driven and explanation-driven approaches are unified into a single module. The language Prolog discussed here is extended by allowing the inclusion of both ‘equality assertions’ for defining a new data type and computational entities ‘actors’ for performing computation via ‘message passing’.

Keywords

Logic Programming Relative Clause Lexical Item Phrase Structure Tree Grammar Rule 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bresnan J (ed) (1982) The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
  2. Hewitt C (1977) Viewing Control Structures as Patterns of Passing Messages. Artif. Intell. 8: 323–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Kahn MK (1982) Intermission — Actors in Prolog. In: Clark KL, Tärnlund SA (eds) Logic Programming. Academic Press, New York, 213–228Google Scholar
  4. Kornfeld WA (1983) Equality for Prolog. Proc. of the 8th IJCAI, 514–519Google Scholar
  5. Pereira FCN, Warren DHD (1980) Definite Clause Grammar for Language Analysis — A Survey of the Formalism and a Comparison with Augmented Transition Networks. Artif. Intell. 13: 231–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Phillips B (1983) An Object-Oriented Parser for Text Understanding. Proc. of the 8th IJCAI, 690–692Google Scholar
  7. Reyle U, Frey W (1983) A Prolog Implementation of Lexical Functional Grammar. Proc. of the 8th IJCAI, 693–695Google Scholar
  8. Small S (1981) Viewing Word Expert Parsing as Linguistic Theory. Proc. of the 7th IJCAI, 70–76Google Scholar
  9. Uehara K, Ochitani R, Kakusho O, Toyoda J (1984) A Bottom-up Parser Based on Predicate Logic — A Survey of the Formalism and Its Implementation Technique. Proc. of the 1984 International Symposium on Logic Programming, 220–227Google Scholar
  10. Uehara K, Ochitani R, Mikami O, Toyoda J (1985) An Integrated Parser for Text Understanding: Viewing Parsing as Passing Messages among Actors. In: Dahl V, Saint-Dizier P (eds) Natural Language Understanding and Logic Programming. North-Holland, New York, 79–95Google Scholar
  11. Winograd T (1972) Understanding Natural Language. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Woods WA (1970) Transition Network Grammar for Natural Language Analysis. Comm. of the ACM 13: 591–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kuniaki Uehara
    • 1
  • Takashi Kakiuchi
    • 1
  • Osamu Mikami
    • 1
  • Jun'ichi Toyoda
    • 1
  1. 1.The Institute of Scientific and Industrial ResearchOsaka UniversityIbaraki, OsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations