Quantifiers in Frame Semantics

  • Laura Kallmeyer
  • Frank Richter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8612)


We present a Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar with lexical meaning specifications in Frame Semantics for the analysis of complex situations. Frame Semantics is extended by a notion of quantifier frames, which provide the basis for a translation function from frames to underspecified type-logical representations. An analysis of repetitive and restitutive readings of achievements with the adverb again demonstrates the interaction of all components of the new semantic architecture.


frame semantics quantifier scope event semantics Tree Adjoining Grammar underspecification syntax-semantics interface 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Gamerschlag, T., Gerland, D., Osswald, R., Petersen, W. (eds.): Frames and Concept Types. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, vol. 94. Springer (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fillmore, C.J., Johnson, C.R., Petruck, M.R.: Background to FrameNet. International Journal of Lexicography 16(3), 235–250 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Barsalou, L.W.: Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields. In: Lehrer, A., Kittay, E.F. (eds.) Frames, Fields, and Contrasts. New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization, pp. 21–74. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale (1992)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Löbner, S.: Evidence for frames from human language. In: [1], pp. 23–67Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Osswald, R., Van Valin, R.D.: FrameNet, frame structure, and the syntax-semantics interface. In: [1], pp. 125–156Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dowty, D.R.: Word Meaning and Montague Grammar. D. Reidel Publishing Company (1979)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kallmeyer, L., Osswald, R.: Syntax-driven semantic frame composition in Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammars. Journal of Language Modelling 1(2), 267–330 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joshi, A.K., Schabes, Y.: Tree-Adjoning Grammars. In: Rozenberg, G., Salomaa, A. (eds.) Handbook of Formal Languages, pp. 69–123. Springer, Berlin (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Abeillé, A., Rambow, O.: Tree Adjoining Grammar: An Overview. In: Abeillé, A., Rambow, O. (eds.) Tree Adjoining Grammars: Formalisms, Linguistic Analysis and Processing, pp. 1–68. CSLI (2000)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vijay-Shanker, K., Joshi, A.K.: Feature structures based tree adjoining grammar. In: Proceedings of COLING, Budapest, pp. 714–719 (1988)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gardent, C., Kallmeyer, L.: Semantic Construction in FTAG. In: Proceedings of EACL 2003, Budapest, pp. 123–130 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kallmeyer, L., Joshi, A.K.: Factoring Predicate Argument and Scope Semantics: Underspecified Semantics with LTAG. Research on Language and Computation 1(1-2), 3–58 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kallmeyer, L., Romero, M.: Scope and situation binding in LTAG using semantic unification. Research on Language and Computation 6(1), 3–52 (2008)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hegner, S.J.: Properties of Horn clauses in feature-structure logic. In: Rupp, C.J., Rosner, M.A., Johnson, R.L. (eds.) Constraints, Language and Computation, pp. 111–147. Academic Press, San Diego (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carpenter, B.: The Logic of Typed Feature Structures. Cambridge University Press (1992)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Valin, Jr., D.: Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge University Press (2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bos, J.: Predicate logic unplugged. In: Dekker, P., Stokhof, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the 10th Amsterdam Colloquium, pp. 133–142 (1995)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Reyle, U.: Dealing with ambiguities by underspecification: Construction, representation and deduction. Journal of Semantics 10, 123–179 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Egg, M., Koller, A., Niehren, J.: The Constraint Language for Lambda Structures. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 10(4), 457–485 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Copestake, A., Flickinger, D., Pollard, C., Sag, I.A.: Minimal Recursion Semantics: An introduction. Research on Language and Computation 3, 281–332 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Althaus, E., Duchier, D., Koller, A., Mehlhorn, K., Niehren, J., Thiel, S.: An efficient graph algorithm for dominance constraints. Journal of Algorithms 48(1), 194–219 (2003)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Koller, A., Niehren, J., Treinen, R.: Dominance Constraints: Algorithms and Complexity. In: Moortgat, M. (ed.) LACL 1998. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2014, pp. 106–125. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Heim, I., Kratzer, A.: Semantics in Generative Grammar. Blackwell (1998)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Barker, C.: Continuations and the Nature of Quantification. Natural Language Semantics 10, 167–210 (2002)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sauerland, U.: DP is not a scope island. Linguistic Inquiry 36, 303–314 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Joshi, A.K., Kallmeyer, L., Romero, M.: Flexible Composition in LTAG: Quantifier Scope and Inverse Linking. In: Muskens, R., Bunt, H. (eds.) Computing Meaning Volume 3. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, vol. 83, pp. 233–256. Springer (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Copestake, A., Flickinger, D., Pollard, C., Sag, I.A.: Minimal Recursion Semantics: An introduction. Research on Language and Computation 3, 281–332 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Beck, S.: There and back again: A semantic analysis. Journal of Semantics 22, 3–51 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Van Valin, Jr., D., LaPolla, R.: Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge University Press (1997)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    von Stechow, A.: The different readings of wieder “again”: A structural account. Journal of Semantics 13, 87–138 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Egg, M.: Mismatches at the syntax-semantics interface. In: Müller, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar, Center for Computational Linguistics, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Stanford, CA, pp. 119–139. CSLI Publications (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fabricius-Hansen, C.: Wieder ein wieder? Zur Semantik von wieder. In: Bäuerle, R., Schwarze, C., von Stechow, A. (eds.) Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language, pp. 97–120. Walter de Gruyter (1983)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laura Kallmeyer
    • 1
  • Frank Richter
    • 2
  1. 1.Abteilung für Computerlinguistik, Institut für Sprache und InformationHeinrich-Heine-Universität DüsseldorfDüsseldorfGermany
  2. 2.Institut für England- und Amerikastudien, Abteilung LinguistikGoethe Universität Frankfurt a.M.Frankfurt am MainGermany

Personalised recommendations