1. A Fully Lexicalized Grammar (for French) based on Meaning-Text Theory Sylvain Kahane Lattice, Université Paris 7 Mexico, February 19-24, 2001

2. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 20012 Contents 1. Syntactic Module Elementary Structures, Word Order 2. Extraction Nuclei and Bubbles

3. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 20013 1. Syntactic Module

4. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 20014 Meaning-Text Theory n Zolkovskij & Mel'cuk 1965, Mel'cuk 1988, Kahane & Mel'cuk 1999 n Syntactic module = correspondence between syntactic and morphological representations –Syntactic representation = dependency tree (Tesnière 1959) –Morphological representation = string of (morphological representations of) words

5. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 20015 Fully Lexicalized Grammars n Categorial Grammars (Adjuckiewicz 1935, Bar-Hillel 1953, Steedman 1985 …) n LTAG (Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar) (Joshi 1987, Abeillé 1991, XTAG Group 1995 …) n Lexicalized Dependency Grammars (Hays 1960, Gaifman 1965, Lombardo 1992, Sleator & Temperley 1993, Nasr 1995 …)

6. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 20016 Fully Lexicalized Grammars (2) n The grammar has the form of a lexicon: each lexical unit is associated with a set of elementary structures (ESs) ES = possible syntactic environment n A fully lexicalized grammar = –"lexicon" ({ lexical unit }  { ES }) –operations of combination (how to combine the ESs) –well-formedness of resulting structures

7. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 20017 Our Grammar n Elementary structure = dependency tree –node's label: word + category –dependency's label: syntactic relation –full node = anchor –empty node = requirement eats (V) (N) subjectobject modif adv (N) (V) beans (N) red (Adj) often (Adv)

8. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 20018 Our grammar n Operation of combination = merging of nodes (and unification of the labels) A' A n Well-formed resulting structure = dependency tree with only full nodes +  A A'

9. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 20019 Derivation eats (V) (N) subjectobject (N) Peter (N) (N) mod red (Adj) (N) beans (V) often (Adv) adv

10. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200110 Word order n Order rules just indicate how a node is positioned towards its governor n Weight =distance between a node and its governor eats (V) (N) -10 subjectobject +10 modif -5 adv -5 (N) (V) red (Adj) often (Adv)

11. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200111 Linearization n Order rules + projectivity (V) eats (N) -10 subjectobject +10 (N) Peter (N) beans (Adv) often -5 adv (V) (Adj) red -5 modif (N)

12. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200112 Projectivity n Lecerf 1961, Iordanskaja 1963, Gladkij 1966 n An ordered dependency tree is projective iff: –No dependencies cross each other –No dependency covers the root * * Projectivity  local order rules ( such as weights )

13. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200113 Quasi-dependency n A quasi-dependency allows us to satisfy a requirement without creating a real dependency –A quasi-dependency can unify with a dependency and the result is a quasi- dependency –Quasi-dependencies do not intervene in the tree hierarchy and the word order

14. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200114 Quasi-dependency and adjectives beans (N) modif (N) red (Adj) n Attributive adjective modif (N) red (Adj)

15. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200115 n Predicative adjective be (V) (Adj) subjectpred (N) modif (N) red (Adj) Quasi-dependency and adjectives

16. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200116 n Predicative adjective modif (Adj) (N) modif red be (V) (Adj) subjectpred (N) Quasi-dependency and adjectives

17. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200117 n Predicative adjective be (V) (Adj) subjectpred (N) modif (Adj) (N) modif red n The same ES can be used for attributive and predicative adjective Quasi-dependency and adjectives

18. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200118 Part 2: Extraction Nuclei and bubbles

19. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200119 Extraction (Ross 1967, Chomsky 1970) n Relativization la fille à qui je pense que tu dois le dire the girl to whom I think that you must say it n Interrogation (direct or indirect) je me demande à qui tu penses que je dois le dire I wonder to whom you think that I must say it n Clefting and semi-clefting c'est à Marie que je pense que tu dois le dire it is to Marie that I think that you must say it n Topicalization à Marie, je pense que tu peux le dire to Marie, I think that you can say it

20. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200120 Problems of description n Non projectivity la dame sur le mari de laquelle je pense que tu peux compter the woman on the husband of whom I think that you can rely ‘the woman whose husband I think you can rely on’ n Island constraints (Ross 1967) * the book that I want to go to sleep without reading ›‹ ‹››› › ‹ › ‹ › ‹

21. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200121 Nucleus n Some groups of words, which we will call nuclei, can behave like a single word from the viewpoint of various phenomena including extraction n We consider two types of nuclei: –verbal nucleus (equivalent to a verb) –nominal nucleus (equivalent to a noun)

22. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200122 Verbal nucleus n A verbal nucleus is a string of verbs or equivalent forms (copula+adjective, light verb+predicative noun…): un livre que Pierrelit a commencé à lire a envie de lire a l'air de trouver facile à lire, pense que Zoé devrait lire… a book that Pierreis reading began to read feels like reading looks to find easy to read thinks that Zoé should read…

23. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200123 Nominal nucleus n A nominal nucleus is a string of nouns including prepositions and determiners: une damesur laquelle tu comptes sur le mari de laquelle tu comptes… a woman on whom you rely on the husband of whom you rely on whose husband you rely

24. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200124 Verbal nucleus and other phenomena n Extraction la fille à qui j'ai l'intention de parler the girl to whom I intend to talk n Coordination Pierre a l'intention de parler à Marie et Jean à Zoé Pierre intends to talk to Marie and Jean to Zoé n Negation Pierre n'a l'intention de parler à personne Pierre doesn't intend to talk to anybody

25. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200125 Variation between languages In English, contrary to French, a preposition can end a verbal nucleus (preposition stranding): the girl you are talking to *la fille que tu parles à

26. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200126 Description of relativization n What positions can be relativized? Only a node depending on the main verb! n But –verb = verbal nucleus –dependent of the verb = nominal nucleus

27. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200127 Description of relativization n the wh-word must belong to a nominal nucleus governed by a verbal nucleus, itself governed by the antecedent of the relative n the nominal nucleus must be positioned at the beginning of the relative clause.

28. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200128 ›‹ la dame sur le mari de laquelle je pense que tu peux compter ‹››› › ‹ › ‹ › ‹ the woman on the husband of whom I think that you can rely Nuclei and bubbles

29. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200129 › ‹ la dame sur le mari de laquelle je pense que tu peux compter ‹››› › ‹ › ‹ › ‹ the woman on the husband of whom I think that you can rely Nuclei and bubbles

30. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200130 Bubble Trees n Tesnière 1959, Gladkij 1968, Kahane 1997 n Bubble trees are trees: –whose nodes can be filled by bubbles; –Bubbles can contain others nodes or have their own dependents

31. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200131 Syntactic position of wh-words n A relative wh-word plays two parts: –a pronominal part (it fills a position in the relative clause) –a subordinating part (it allows a clause to modify a noun) n Consequently, a wh-word is split into two semi-nodes

32. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200132 subordinating part of the wh-word pense ‘think’ que ‘that’ sujet objet  conj je ‘I’ peux ‘can’ sujetinf compter ‘rely’ tu ‘you’ sujet le ‘the’ sur ‘on’ de ‘of’ mari ‘husband’ laquelle ‘whom’ c-nomdét prép dame ‘woman’ la ‘the’ dét conj rel laquelle ‘whom’ prép obl la dame sur le mari de laquelle je pense que tu peux compter the woman on the husband of whom I think that you can rely pronominal part of the wh-word antecedent noun verbal nucleus nominal nucleus quasi-dependency

33. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200133 Why a quasi-dependency between the two nuclei? n Because the nominal nucleus occupies a non-canonical linear position n The position of the nominal nucleus is given by the subordinating part of the wh-word ‹ › › ‹ › › › ‹ › ‹ la dame sur le mari de laquelle je pense que tu peux compter ‹ › ›

34. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200134 Elementary structures of wh-words n Fully lexicalized grammar: the whole linguistic information is attached to elementary structures n We must attach to an elementary structure: –The power of the relative clause to modify a noun (the antecedent) –The building of the verbal and nominal nuclei –The linear position of the nominal nucleus

35. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200135 positioning of the wh-word (and the nominal nucleus) at the beginning of the relative Elementary structures of wh-words rel +10 conj +10 (N) (V) V N lequel positioning of the relative after the antecedent noun pronominal part of the wh-word in the nominal nucleus subordinating part of the wh-word main verb of the relative in the verbal nucleus antecedent noun

36. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200136 Elementary structures of wh-words qui prép (V) (N) (P) V N qui rel +10 conj +10 que (N) V (V) rel +10 conj +10 qui can be used only after a preposition lequel/laquelle/lesquels can be used in all syntactic positions que is a complementizer (no nominal nucleus) rel +10 conj +10 (N) (V) V N lequel

37. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200137 Operations of combination with bubbles + A' B' r A merging What happens for the dependent?

38. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200138 Operations of combination with bubbles n First case: Positioning by default  A' B' r + A' B' r A A

39. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200139 Operations of combination with bubbles n Second case: Propagation of the membership The dependency must be labelled i (for intranuclear dependency)  A' B' r + A' B' r A A i

40. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200140 Operations of combination with bubbles n Third case: Promotion to the nucleus The dependency must be labelled e (for extranuclear dependency) + A' B' r A e  A' B' r A

41. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200141 Intra- and extranuclear dependencies V = verbal nucleus N = nominal nucleus penser sujetobjet prép (N) (V) de conj (V) que ‘think that’ c-nom mari compter sujetobjet (N) conj (N) sur ‘rely on’‘husband of’ i V e V i N

42. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200142 A last derivation › › ‹ › ‹ ‹ la dame sur le mari de laquelle je pense que tu peux compter ‹ › › ‹ › › › the woman on the husband of whom I think that you can rely ‹ ›

43. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200143 Comparison with HPSG n Our different rules of combination can be compared to the different schemata of HPSG Rule of promotion to a nucleus = Schema of introduction of a non-local feature + A' B' r A e  A' B' r A

44. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200144 Comparison with HPSG n Our different rules of combination can be compared to the different schemata of HPSG Rule of propagation of the membership = Schema of propagation of a non-local feature  A' B' r + A' B' r A A i

45. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200145 Comparison with HPSG n Two main differences: –We do not propagate the content of the nominal nucleus (= extracted phrase), but the membership of the verbal nucleus  the extr. phrase does not climb up the whole verbal string and cross over all the nodes –We have explicited some syntactic units, the nuclei, which play a central part in the extraction (and other phenomena such as coordination or negation)

46. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200146 Comparison with other fully lexicalized grammars (TAG, CG …) n Richer structures (quasi-dep, nucleus …) and richer operations of combination –The linguistic information (who combines with who and how) can be better shared out between the elementary structures –The combinatorial explosion of the number of elementary structures can be avoided n Such a fully lexicalized grammar can be obtained from a modular grammar written in the same formalism (see my Friday's conf about MTT)

47. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200147 Conclusion n Our analysis of the extraction is based on the linguistic concept of nucleus. n This linguistic concept is encoded by the bubbles, which are not simply superimposed to the dependency tree but are integrated to the structure, the bubble trees n And the syntactic properties of the extractions are encoded by the geometric properties of the structures and operations of combination

48. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200148 Conclusion n Phrase structure trees (or standard dependency trees) are too poor to encode linguistic concepts such as the nucleus as primitive concepts n Movements or non-local features solve the problem but they do not give an explicit encoding of nuclei

49. Sylvain Kahane, Mexico, February 200149 See you again Friday Introduction to the Meaning-Text Theory Comparison with generative approaches and HPSG Procedures of analysis and synthesis Link between modular and fully lexicalized grammars