Advertisement

XMG 2: Describing Description Languages

  • Simon Petitjean
  • Denys Duchier
  • Yannick ParmentierEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10054)

Abstract

This paper introduces XMG 2, a modular and extensible tool for various linguistic description tasks. Based on the notion of meta-compilation (that is, compilation of compilers), XMG 2 reuses the main concepts underlying XMG, namely logic programming and constraint satisfaction, to generate on-demand XMG-like compilers by assembling elementary units called bricks. This brick-based definition of compilers permits users to design description languages in a highly flexible way. In particular, it makes it possible to support several levels of linguistic description (e.g. syntax, morphology) within a single description language. XMG 2 aims to offer means for users to easily define description languages that fit as much as possible the linguistic intuition.

Keywords

Formal grammar Meta-grammar Compilation Logic programming 

References

  1. 1.
    Abeillé, A., Candito, M., Kinyon, A.: FTAG: current status and parsing scheme. In: Proceedings of Vextal-1999, Venice, Italy (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ben Khelil, C., Duchier, D., Parmentier, Y., Zribi, C., Ben Fraj, F.: ArabTAG: from a handcrafted to a semi-automatically generated TAG. In: Proceedings of 12th International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammars and Related Formalisms (TAG+12), Düsseldorf, Germany, pp. 18–26. (2016). http://aclweb.org/anthology/W16-3302
  3. 3.
    Cazzola, W.: Domain-specific languages in few steps. In: Gschwind, T., Paoli, F., Gruhn, V., Book, M. (eds.) SC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7306, pp. 162–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-30564-1_11 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clément, L., Kinyon, A.: Generating parallel multilingual LFG-TAG grammars from a MetaGrammar. In: Proceedings of 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Sapporo, Japan, pp. 184–191 (2003). http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/1075096.1075120
  5. 5.
    Copestake, A., Sanfilippo, A., Briscoe, T., de Paiva, V.: The ACQUILEX LKB: an introduction. In: Briscoe, T., de Paiva, V., Copestake, A. (eds.) Inheritance, Defaults, and the Lexicon, pp. 148–163. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Crabbé, B., Duchier, D., Gardent, C., Le Roux, J., Parmentier, Y.: XMG: eXtensible MetaGrammar. Comput. Linguist. 39(3), 1–66 (2013). http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/COLI_a_00144 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Duchier, D., Magnana Ekoukou, B., Parmentier, Y., Petitjean, S., Schang, E.: Describing morphologically-rich languages using Metagrammars: a look at verbs in Ikota. In: Workshop on “Language Technology for Normalisation of Less-resourced Languages”, pp. 55–60. LREC, Istanbul (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Duchier, D., Niehren, J.: Dominance constraints with set operators. In: Lloyd, J., et al. (eds.) CL 2000. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 1861, pp. 326–341. Springer, Heidelberg (2000). doi: 10.1007/3-540-44957-4_22 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ekman, T., Hedin, G.: The JastAdd system modular extensible compiler construction. Sci. Comput. Program. 69(13), 14–26 (2007). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.scico.2007.02.003 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Evans, R., Gazdar, G.: DATR: a language for lexical knowledge representation. Comput. Linguist. 22(2), 167–216 (1996). http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/J/J96/J96-2002.pdf Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gardent, C.: Integrating a unification-based semantics in a large scale lexicalised tree adjoining grammar for French. In: Proceedings of 22nd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Coling 2008), Manchester, UK, pp. 249–256 (2008). http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/C08-1032
  12. 12.
    Gardent, C., Kallmeyer, L.: Semantic construction in FTAG. In: EACL 2003, 10th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 123–130. Budapest, Hungary (2003). http://dx.doi.org/10.3115/1067807.1067825
  13. 13.
    Henriques, P.R., Pereira, M.J.V., Mernik, M., Lenic, M., Gray, J., Wu, H.: Automatic generation of language-based tools using the LISA system. IEE Proc. Softw. 152(2), 54–69 (2005). http://dx.doi.org/10.1049/ip-sen:20041317 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Holzbaur, C.: Metastructures vs. attributed variables in the context of extensible unification. In: Bruynooghe, M., Wirsing, M. (eds.) PLILP 1992. LNCS, vol. 631, pp. 260–268. Springer, Heidelberg (1992). doi: 10.1007/3-540-55844-6_141 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lichte, T., Petitjean, S.: Implementing semantic frames as typed feature structures with XMG. J. Lang. Model. 3(1), 185–228 (2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.15398/jlm.v3i1.96 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ohori, A.: A polymorphic record calculus and its compilation. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 17(6), 844–895 (1995). http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/218570.218572 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pereira, F., Warren, D.: Definite clause grammars for language analysis – a survey of the formalism and a comparison to augmented transition networks. Artif. Intell. 13, 231–278 (1980). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0004-3702(80)90003-X MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ranta, A.: Modular grammar engineering in GF. Res. Lang. Comput. 5(2), 133–158 (2007). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11168-007-9030-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sag, I., Wasow, T.: Syntactic Theory. A Formal Introduction. CSLI Publications, Stanford (1999)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schang, E., Duchier, D., Magnana Ekoukou, B., Parmentier, Y., Petitjean, S.: Describing São tomense using a tree-adjoining meta-grammar. In: 11th International Workshop on Tree Adjoining Grammars and Related Formalisms (TAG+11), Paris, France, pp. 82–89 (2012). http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W12-4610
  21. 21.
    Shieber, S.M.: The design of a computer language for linguistic information. In: 10th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING) and 22nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pp. 362–366 (1984). http://aclweb.org/anthology/P84-1075
  22. 22.
    Van Roy, P.: Extended DCG notation: a tool for applicative programming in prolog. Technical report UCB/CSD 90/583, UC Berkeley (1990). http://www2.eecs.berkeley.edu/Pubs/TechRpts/1990/5471.html
  23. 23.
    Villemonte De La Clergerie, É.: Building factorized TAGs with meta-grammars. In: The 10th International Conference on Tree Adjoining Grammars and Related Formalisms - TAG+10, pp. 111–118. New Haven (2010). http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/W10-4414
  24. 24.
    Xia, F.: Automatic grammar generation from two different perspectives. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania (2001)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    XTAG Research Group: A lexicalized tree adjoining grammar for English. Technical report IRCS-01-03, IRCS, University of Pennsylvania (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simon Petitjean
    • 1
  • Denys Duchier
    • 2
  • Yannick Parmentier
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Heinrich-Heine-Universität DüsseldorfDüsseldorfGermany
  2. 2.LIFO – Université d’OrléansOrléansFrance

Personalised recommendations