Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Resource-Sensitivity, Binding and Anaphora pp 123–157Cite as

Binding across Boundaries

  • Chapter

  • 134 Accesses

Part of the book series: Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy ((SLAP,volume 80))

Abstract

The meaning of an utterance is normally contextual in that a speaker may present parts of it as relying on the preceding discourse context. Linguistically, there are various ways in which this reference to a larger context can manifest itself: For example, information structure, contextual reference, or entailments arising from aspectual structure. How (and whether) we can embed the meaning into the larger context then influences the coherence and actual interpretation of the uttered meaning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Areces, Carlos, Blackburn, Patrick, and Marx, Maarten (1999). A road-map on complexity for hybrid logics. In Flum, J. and Rodríguez-Artalejo, M., editors, Computer Science Logic, number 1683 in Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 307–321. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldridge, Jason and Kruijff, Geert-Jan M. (2002). Coupling CCG with hybrid logic dependency semantics. In Proceedings of ACL ‘02, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, Patrick (1993). Modal logic and attribute value structures. In de Rijke, Maarten, editor, Diamonds and Defaults, Synthese Language Library, pages 19–65. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, Dordrecht.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, Patrick (1994). Tense, temporal reference and tense logic. Journal of Semantics, 11:83–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, Patrick (2000). Representation, reasoning, and relational structures: a hybrid logic manifesto. Journal of the Interest Group in Pure Logic, 8(3):339–365.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blackburn, Patrick, Gardent, Claire, and de Rijke, Maarten (1993). Back and forth through time and events. In Proceedings of the 9th Amsterdam Colloquium, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, Bob (1997). Type-Logical Semantics. The MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Copestake, Ann, Flickinger, Dan, and Sag, Ivan A. (1999). Minimal recursion semantics: an introduction. Unpublished Manuscript. CSLI/Stanford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, Richard and van Genabith, Josef (1998). Context change, underspeci-fication, and the structure of glue language derivations. In Dalrymple, Mary, editor, Semantics and Syntax in Lexical Functional Grammar, pages 117–189. The MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dekker, Paul and Hendriks, Herman (1994). Files in focus. In Engdahl, Elisabet, editor, Integrating Information Structure into Constraint-based and Categorial Approaches, DYANA-2 Deliverable R1.3.B., pages 41–79. Institute for Logic, Language and Computation (ILLC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowty, David R. (1979). Word Meaning and Montague Grammar: The Semantics of Verbs and Times in Generative Semantics and in Montague’ s PTQ. Number 7 in Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, Dordrecht, Boston, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowty, David R. (1989). On the semantic content of the notion “thematic role”. In Chierchia, Giennaro, Partee, Barbara H., and Turner, Raymond, editors, Properties, Types, and Meaning: Volume II, Semantic Issues, volume 39 of Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, pages 69–129. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, Dordrecht, Boston, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engdahl, Elisabeth and Vallduví, Enric (1994). Information packaging and grammar architecture: A constraint-based approach. In Engdahl, Elisabet, editor, Integrating Information Structure into Constraint-based and Categorial Approaches, DYANA-2 Deliverable R1.3.B., pages 41–79. Institute for Logic, Language and Computation (ILLC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajičová, Eva, Partee, Barbara H., and Sgall, Petr (1998). Topic-Focus Articulation, Tripartite Structures, and Semantic Context. Studies in Language and Philosophy. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, Dordrecht, Boston, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajičová, Eva (1993). Issues of sentence structure and discourse patterns, volume 2 of Theoretical and Computational Linguistics. Charles University Press, Prague, Czech Republic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heim, Irene R. (1982). The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. Phd thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hendriks, Herman (1999). Contour and structure. A categorial account of alignment. In Bouma, Gosse, Hinrichs, Erhard, Kruijff, Geert-Jan M., and Oehrle, Richard T., editors, Constraints and Resources in Natural Language Syntax and Semantics, pages 155–174. CSLI Press, Stanford CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hepple, Mark (1990). The Grammar and Processing of Order and Dependency: A Categorial Approach. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, Beryl (1995a). Computational Analysis of the Syntax and Interpretation of “Free” Word-Order in Turkish. PhD thesis, IRCS report 95–17, University of Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, Beryl (1995b). Integrating “free” word order syntax and information structure. In Proceedings EACL’95, Dublin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jäger, Gerhard (2001). Anaphora and quantification in categorial grammar. In Moortgat, Michael, editor, Logical Aspects of Computational Linguistics, number 2014 in Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, pages 70–89. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jakobson, Roman (1990). On Language. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA. Edited by Linda R. Waugh and Monique Monville-Burston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Koktová, Eva (1995). Wh-extraction and the topic-focus articulation of the sentence. In Partee, Barbara H. and Sgall, Petr, editors, Discourse and Meaning: Papers in Honor of Eva Hajičová, pages 255–271. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruijff, Geert-Jan M. (2001). A Categorial-Modal Logical Architecture of In-formativity: Dependency Grammar Logic & Information Structure. PhD thesis, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruijff, Geert-Jan M. (2002). Formulating a category of informativity. In Hasselgard, Hilde, Johansson, Stig, Behrens, Bergljot, and Fabricius-Hansen, Cathrine, editors, Information Structure in a Cross-Linguistic Perspective, pages 129–145. Rodopi, Amsterdam, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruijff, Geert-Jan M. and Duchier, Denys (2002). Information structure in topological dependency grammar. In Proceedings EACL’03.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruijff-Korbayová, Ivana (1998). The Dynamic Potential of Topic and Focus: A Praguian Approach to Discourse Representation Theory. PhD dissertation, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kruijff-Korbayová, Ivana and Kruijff, Geert-Jan M. (1997). Topic-focus articulation in SDRT. In Proceedings of the Eleventh Amsterdam Colloquium.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuschert, Susanne (1996). Higher order dynamics: Relating operational and denotational semantics for λ-drt. Claus-report 72, Computational Linguistics, University of the Saarland, Saarbrücken, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moens, Marc and Steedman, Mark (1988). Temporal ontology and temporal reference. Journal of Computational Linguistics, 14:15–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moortgat, Michael (1988). Categorial Investigations: Logical and Linguistic Aspects of the Lambek Calculus. Foris, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moortgat, Michael (1997). Categorial type logics. In van Benthem, Johan and ter Meulen, Alice, editors, Handbook of Logic and Language. Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam New York etc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrill, Glyn V. (1990). Intensionality and binding. Linguistics and Philosophy, 13:699–726.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrill, Glyn V. (1994). Type Logical Grammar: Categorial Logic of Signs. Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, Dordrecht, Boston, London.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Morrill, Glyn V. (1997). Geometry of language. Report de Recerca/Research Report LSI-97-45-R, Departament de Llenguatges i Sistemes Informàtics, Universitat de Politècnica de Catalunya.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muskens, Reinhard, van Benthem, Johan, and Visser, Albert (1996). Dynamics. In van Benthem, Johan and ter Meulen, Alice, editors, Handbook of Logic and Language. Elsevier Science B.V., Amsterdam New York etc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oehrle, Richard T. (1994). Term-labelled categorial type systems. Linguistics & Philosophy, 17(6):633–678.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oehrle, Richard T. (1999). Binding as term rewriting. In Bouma, Gosse, Hin-richs, Erhard, Kruijff, Geert-Jan M., and Oehrle, Richard T., editors, Constraints and Resources in Natural Language Syntax and Semantics, pages 221–241. CSLI Press, Stanford CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peregrin, Jaroslav (1995). Topic and focus in a formal framework. In Partee, Barbara H. and Sgall, Petr, editors, Discourse and Meaning: Papers in Honor of Eva Hajičová. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peregrin, Jaroslav (1999). Pragmatization of semantics. In Turner, Ken, editor, Semantics/Pragmatics Interface from Different Points of View, pages 419–442. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peregrin, Jaroslav and Sgall, Petr (1986). An attempt at a framework for semantic interpretation of natural linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics, 13:37–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petkevič, Vladimír (in prep.). Underlying Structure of Sentence Based on Dependency. Charles University, Prague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sgall, Petr, Hajičová, Eva, and Panevová, Jarmila (1986). The Meaning of the Sentence in Its Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Boston, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, Mark (1996). Surface Structure and Interpretation. The MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, Mark (2000a). Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic Inquiry, 31(4):649–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, Mark (2000b). The productions of time. Draft 4.0.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, Mark (2000c). The Syntactic Process. The MIT Press, Cambridge Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steele, Susan (1978). Word order variation: A typological study. In Greenberg, Joseph H., editor, Universals of Language. Volume 4: Syntax, pages 585–624. Stanford University Press, Stanford, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallduví, Enric (1990). The Informational Component. PhD thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vallduví, Enric (1994). The dynamics of information packaging. In Engdahl, Elisabet, editor, Integrating Information Structure into Constraint-based and Categorial Approaches, DYANA-2 Deliverable R1.3.B. Institute for Logic, Language and Computation (ILLC), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Benthem, Johan F.A.K. (1996). Content versus wrapping: An essay in semantic complexity. In Marx, Maarten, Pólos, László, and Masuch, Michael, editors, Arrow Logic and Multi-Modal Logic, Studies in Logic, Language and Information, pages 203–220. CSLI Publications, Stanford CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Benthem, Johan (1996). Exploring Logical Dynamics. CSLI Publications & FoLLi, Stanford CA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Eijck, Jan and Kamp, Hans (1997). Representing discourse in context. In Van Benthem, Johan and Ter Meulen, Alice, editors, Handbook of Logic and Language. Elsevier, Amsterdam, etc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vendler, Zeno (1967). Linguistics in Philosophy. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeevat, Henk (1988). Combining categorial grammar and unification. In Reyle, Uwe and Rohrer, Christian, editors, Natural Language Parsing and Linguistic Theories, pages 202–229. D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Boston, London.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Saarland University, Germany

    Geert-Jan M. Kruijff

Authors
  1. Geert-Jan M. Kruijff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. COLI, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Geert-Jan M. Kruijff  & Richard T. Oehrle  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Kruijff, GJ.M. (2003). Binding across Boundaries. In: Kruijff, GJ.M., Oehrle, R.T. (eds) Resource-Sensitivity, Binding and Anaphora. Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy, vol 80. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0037-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0037-6_5

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-1692-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0037-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation