Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Incremental parsing and ambiguous sentences - each incoming materials are attached immediately - a single analysis is pursed - given the uncertainty,

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Incremental parsing and ambiguous sentences - each incoming materials are attached immediately - a single analysis is pursed - given the uncertainty,"— Presentation transcript:

1

2 Incremental parsing and ambiguous sentences - each incoming materials are attached immediately - a single analysis is pursed - given the uncertainty, how do we decide which structure to choose? Minimal attachment strategy Late closure strategy

3 The Temporary ambiguity

4 Theteacher Temporary ambiguity

5 Theteachersent Temporary ambiguity

6 Theteachersentthe Temporary ambiguity

7 Theteachersenttheflowers Temporary ambiguity

8 Theteachersentthewas pleasedflowers Temporary ambiguity

9 S NP DetN The teachersent All right, I have a verb. That’s easy. Let’s attach that under the main VP. Temporary ambiguity

10 S NP DetN VP The teachersent V Good. Then, I have to wait for some nouns after the verb. Come on, show me an NP now. Temporary ambiguity

11 S NP DetN VP NP DetN The teacherthe flowerssent V A-ha. You know, I’m good. So now what, maybe the recipient of the flowers? That would be a PP (yeah, to NP). Temporary ambiguity

12 S NP DetN VP NP DetN The teacherthe flowerssent V was pleased What????? That’s not possible. I already have a VP. How can I have another VP here? Somebody help me! Temporary ambiguity

13 S NP DetN The teachersent Don’t panic. Let’s go back. Maybe I did something wrong right here. Temporary ambiguity

14 S NPVP NPS DetNCompS NPVP NP DetN The teacher i who i eiei wasthe flowerswas pleasedsent Because I remember that there is another possibility. Suppose I have this structure. Then, Temporary ambiguity

15 S NPVP NPS DetNCompS NPVP NP DetN The teacher i the flowerswas pleasedsent who was I know that who was can be dropped without causing any meaning difference. Let’s see what happens. Temporary ambiguity

16 S NPVP NP DetN VP NP DetN The teacherthe flowerswas pleasedsent Now, it looks good. But wait, who would have thought of this structure in the first place? I wouldn’t! Temporary ambiguity

17 Theteachergiventhewas pleasedflowers Unambiguous sentence

18 S NPVP NPS DetNCompS NPVP NP DetN The teacher i who i eiei wasthe flowerswas pleasedgiven From the outset, it is clear that this is the only possible structure. Unambiguous sentence

19 S NPVP NPS DetNCompS NPVP NP DetN The teacher i the flowerswas pleasedgiven who was Again, who was can be dropped without causing any meaning difference. Unambiguous sentence

20 S NPVP NP DetN VP NP DetN The teacherthe flowerswas pleasedgiven The difference is that “given” is not ambiguous. Unambiguous sentence

21 S NPVP DetNVNP NDet The cop saw the spy So far so good! Global ambiguity

22 S NPVP DetNVNP NDet The cop saw the spy PP NPP with the binoculars Global ambiguity Two possible attachment sites -> how do I decide?

23 S NPVP DetNVNP NDet The cop saw the spy PP NPP with the binoculars Global ambiguity VP attachment  Minimal attachment strategy

24 S NPVP DetN V NP NDet The cop saw the spy NPPP NPP with the binoculars Global ambiguity NP attachment  more syntactic nodes

25 last night AdvP Global ambiguity Again two possible attachment sites  which one do I like better? S NPVP DetNVS N The reporter said the plane NP crashed VP V

26 Global ambiguity Late closure strategy  attach the incoming materials under the node currently being built S NPVP DetNVS N The reporter said the plane NPVP crashed V last night AdvP

27 last night AdvP Global ambiguity The attachment to the higher VP is not preferred S NPVP DetNVS N The reporter said the plane NP crashed VP V

28 While

29 Mary

30 WhileMarywas mending

31 WhileMarywas mendingthe sock

32 WhileMarywas mendingthe sockfell

33 WhileMarywas mendingthe sockfelloff

34 WhileMarywas mendingthe sockfelloffher lap.

35 Kensatsukan-ga prosecutor-nom Japanes e

36 Kensatsukan-ga prosecutor-nom kousakuin-o operative-acc Japanes e

37 Kensatsukan-ga prosecutor-nom kousakuin-o operative-acc goumonshita tortured Japanes e

38 Kensatsukan-ga prosecutor-nom kousakuin-o operative-acc goumonshita tortured jaajarisuto-o journalist-acc Japanes e

39 Kensatsukan-ga prosecutor-nom kousakuin-o operative-acc goumonshita tortured jaajarisuto-o journalist-acc Kisoshita indicted The prosecutor indicted the journalist who tortured the operative. Japanes e

40 S NPVP NPV operative tortured Yeah, this should be it. prosecutor Japanes e

41 S NPVP RC operative tortured Although this is possible, it looks much more complicated… prosecutor S N NPVP NPV eiei Japanes e

42 S NPVP NPV operative torturedprosecutor Japanes e journalist Oops, my previous analysis should be revised to …

43 S NPVP RC V operative tortured this one, the more complicated one. Otherwise, “journalist” has no place to attach itself to. prosecutor S N NPVP NPV eiei journalist i indicted Japanes e


Download ppt "Incremental parsing and ambiguous sentences - each incoming materials are attached immediately - a single analysis is pursed - given the uncertainty,"

Similar presentations


Ads by Google