A Fully Lexicalized Grammar for French Based on Meaning-Text Theory

  • Sylvain Kahane
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2004)


The paper presents a formal lexicalized dependency grammar based on Meaning-Text theory. This grammar associates semantic graphs with sentences. We propose a fragment of a grammar for French, including the description of ex- tractions. The main particularity of our grammar is it that it builds bubble trees as syntactic representations, that is, trees whose nodes can be filled by bubbles, which can contain others nodes. Our grammar needs more complex operations of combination of elementary structures than other lexicalized grammars, such as TAG or CG, but avoids the multiplication of elementary structures and provides linguistically well-motivated treatments.


Semantic Representation Relative Clause Lexical Unit Syntactic Representation Grammatical 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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abeillé Anne, Une grammaire lexicalisée d’Arbres Adjoints pour le français, Thèse de Doctorat, Univ. Paris 7 (1991).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Candito Marie-Hélèène & Kahane Sylvain, “Can the TAG Derivation Tree Represent a Semantic Graph ? An answer in the Light of Meaning-Text Theory”, TAG+4 Workshop, Philadelphie (1998) 21–24.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chomsky Noam, “On Wh-movement”, in P. Culicover et al. (eds), Formal Syntax, Dordrecht: Reidel (1977).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Courtin Jacques & Genthial Damien, “Parsing with Dependency Relations and Robust Parsing”, in Kahane S. & Polguère A. (eds), Workshop on dependency-based grammars, COLING-ACL’ 98, Montréal (1998) 95–101.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hudson Richard A., “Discontinuity”, in S. Kahane (ed.), Grammaires de dépendance, T.A.L., 41.1 (2000) 15–56.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jackendoff Ray S., X’ Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure, Linguistic Inquiry Monograph, MIT Press (1977).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Joshi Aravind K., “Introduction to Tree Adjoining Grammar”, in Manaster Ramer (ed.), The Mathematics of Language, Amsterdam: Benjamins (1987) 87–114.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kahane Sylvain, “Bubble Trees and Syntactic Representations”, in Becker T. & Krieger H.U. (eds), Proc. MOL’5, Saarbrücken: DFKI (1997) 70–76.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kahane Sylvain, “How to solve some failures of LTAG”, TAG+5 Workshop, Paris (2000) 123–2Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kahane Sylvain, Candito Marie-Hélène, de Kercadio Yannick, “An alternative description of extractions in TAG”, TAG+5 Workshop, Paris (2000) 115–22.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kahane Sylvain, Nasr A. & Rambow Owen, “Pseudo-Projectivity: a Polynomially Parsable Non-Projective Dependency Grammar”, COLING-ACL’98, Montréal (1998) 646–52.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kahane Sylvain & Mel’čuk Igor, “La synthèse des phrases à extraction en français contemporain. Du réseau sémantique à l’arbre syntaxique”, T.A.L, 40: 2 (1999) 25–85.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kayne Richard, French Syntax: the Transformational Cycle, Cambridge: MIT Press (1975).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lombardo Vincenzo & Lesmo Leonardo, “Formal Aspects and Parsing Issues of Dependency Theory”, COLING-ACL’98, Montréal (1998) 787–93.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mel’èuk Igor, “Ordre des mots en synthèse automatique des textes russes”, T.A. Information, 2 (1967) 65–84.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mel’čuk Igor, Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice, NY: SUNY Press (1988).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mel’čuk Igor, “Paraphrase et lexique: la Théorie Sens-Texte et le Dictionnaire Explicatif et Combinatoire”, in Mel’čuk et al., Dictionnaire Explicatif et Combinatoire, 3 (1992) 10–57.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mel’čuk Igor & Pertsov Nicolas, Surface syntax of English. A Formal Model within the Meaning-Text Framework, Amsterdam: Benjamins (1987).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nasr Alexis), “A Formalism and a Parser for Lexicalised Dependency Grammars”, 4 th Int. Workshop on Parsing Technologies, SUNY Press (1995).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nasr Alexis, Un modèle de reformulation automatique fondé sur la Théorie Sens-Texte. Application aux langues contrôlées, Thèse de Doctorat, Univ. Paris 7 (1996).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Polguère Alain, Structuration et mise en jeu procédurale d’un modèle linguistique déclaratif dans un cadre de génération de texte, Thèse de Doctorat, Univ. Montréal (1990).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ross John, Constraints on Variables in Syntax, PhD Thesis, MIT (1967); Infinite syntax !, Dordrecht: Reidel (1985).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tesnière Lucien, Eléments de syntaxe structurale, Paris: Kliencksieck (1959).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    XTAG Research Group, A Lexicalized TAG for English, Technical Report IRCS 95-03, Univ. of Pennsylvania (1995) updated version on the web.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sylvain Kahane
    • 1
  1. 1.CNRS & Lattice-TalanaUniversité Paris 7, UFRL, case 7003Paris Cedex 05France

Personalised recommendations