Unification example: a grammar Rule {Satz} S -> NP VP (PP): = =. ;Kongruenz zwischen Subjekt und finitem Verb Rule{NP} NP -> Name / Pron / Det (AP) N (PP):

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

CTL 142 rakentava ja karsiva jäsennys. Rakentava jäsennys (CFG) VP timeflies NP S S => NP. VP NP => time VP => flies inkluusio

Advertisements

 adj (adjectif)  adv (adverbe)  det (déterminant)  nom  prep (préposition)  pron (pronom)  verbe.

 Christel Kemke 2007/08 COMP 4060 Natural Language Processing Feature Structures and Unification.

Feature Structures and Parsing Unification Grammars Algorithms for NLP 18 November 2014.

Lexical Functional Grammar : Grammar Formalisms Spring Term 2004.

1 Unification Grammars Allen ’ s Chapter 4 J&M ’ s Chapter 11.

Lexical Functional Grammar History: –Joan Bresnan (linguist, MIT and Stanford) –Ron Kaplan (computational psycholinguist, Xerox PARC) –Around 1978.

BİL711 Natural Language Processing1 Problems with CFGs We know that CFGs cannot handle certain things which are available in natural languages. In particular,

1 Natural Language Processing Lecture 7 Unification Grammars Reading: James Allen NLU (Chapter 4)

Specifiers! The notion of subject. Specifier = Subject u By creating DP, we got rid of our only example of a specifier. u So do we need the notion specifier?

Syntax and Context-Free Grammars Julia Hirschberg CS 4705 Slides with contributions from Owen Rambow, Kathy McKeown, Dan Jurafsky and James Martin.

Chapter 4 Syntax.

Sub-constituents of NP in English September 12, 2007.

Introduction to LFG Kersti Börjars & Nigel Vincent {k.borjars, University of Manchester Winter school in LFG July University.

Grammar Engineering: Set-valued Attributes Various Kinds of Constraints Case Restrictions on Arguments Miriam Butt (University of Konstanz) and Martin.

X-bar Construction XP  (Spec) X’ (X’  X’ YP) adjunct rule X’  X (ZP) complement.

Grammatical Relations and Lexical Functional Grammar Grammar Formalisms Spring Term 2004.

Constituent and Dependency Trees notes for CSCI-GA.2590 Prof. Grishman.

LFG Slides based on slides by: Kersti Börjars & Nigel Vincent {k.borjars, University of Manchester Winter school in LFG July

Syntax 2nd class Chapter 4.

1 Features and Augmented Grammars Allen ’ s Chapter 4 J&M ’ s Chapter 11.

Natural Language Processing - Feature Structures - Feature Structures and Unification.

1 Pertemuan 23 Syntatic Processing Matakuliah: T0264/Intelijensia Semu Tahun: 2005 Versi: 1/0.

1 Pertemuan 22 Natural Language Processing Syntactic Processing Matakuliah: T0264/Intelijensia Semu Tahun: Juli 2006 Versi: 2/2.

Syllabus Text Books Classes Reading Material Assignments Grades Links Forum Text Books עיבוד שפות טבעיות - שיעור עשר Chart Parsing (cont) Features.

What is Syntax?  The rules that govern the structure of utterances; also called grammar  The basic organization of sentences is around syntax  build.

Syntax Phrase and Clause in Present-Day English. The X’ phrase system Any X phrase in PDE consists of: – an optional specifier – X’ (X-bar) which is the.

Matakuliah: G0922/Introduction to Linguistics Tahun: 2008 Session 11 Syntax 2.

 Christel Kemke 2007/08 COMP 4060 Natural Language Processing Feature Structures and Unification.

Introduction to Syntax, with Part-of-Speech Tagging Owen Rambow September 17 & 19.

 Christel Kemke 2007/08 COMP 4060 Natural Language Processing Grammar Sentence Constructs.

Unification-based algorithms We have seen that treating features, such as person-number agreement, as part of the category of a phrase results in a large.

Context Free Grammar S -> NP VP NP -> det (adj) N

CS 4705 Lecture 11 Feature Structures and Unification Parsing.

Features and Unification Read J & M Chapter 11.. Solving the Agreement Problem Number agreement: S  NP VP * Mary walk. [NP NUMBER] [VP NUMBER] NP  det.

Context-Free Parsing Part 2 Features and Unification.

Constituency Tests Phrase Structure Rules

Syntax Class # 4 Chapter 4. Transformational Rules Will you talk to Peter? Should I stay? Do you like apples? What will you talk about? What do you want?

Feature structures and unification Attributes and values.

Chapter 16: Features and Unification Heshaam Faili University of Tehran.

Linguistics 187/287 Week 2 Engineering and Linguistic Generalizations.

PHRASE STRUCTURE GRAMMARS RTNs ATNs Augmented phrase structure rules / trees.

Grammar Engineering: What is it good for? Miriam Butt (University of Konstanz) and Martin Forst (NetBase Solutions) Colombo 2014.

Today Phrase structure rules, trees Constituents Recursion Conjunction

Rule Learning - Overview Goal: Syntactic Transfer Rules 1) Flat Seed Generation: produce rules from word- aligned sentence pairs, abstracted only to POS.

2007CLINT-LIN-FEATSTR1 Computational Linguistics for Linguists Feature Structures.

Grammar Engineering: Coordination and Macros METARULEMACRO Interfacing finite-state morphology Miriam Butt (University of Konstanz) and Martin Forst (NetBase.

Indirect Object. D.O. I.O. S.C. SUB J PRED action linking.

Parsing with Context-Free Grammars for ASR Julia Hirschberg CS 4706 Slides with contributions from Owen Rambow, Kathy McKeown, Dan Jurafsky and James Martin.

The man bites the dog man bites the dog bites the dog the dog dog Parse Tree NP A N the man bites the dog V N NP S VP A 1. Sentence  noun-phrase verb-phrase.

NLP. Introduction to NLP Motivation –A lot of the work is repeated –Caching intermediate results improves the complexity Dynamic programming –Building.

Section 11.3 Features structures in the Grammar ─ Jin Wang.

October 25, : Grammars and Lexicons Lori Levin.

1 Syntax 2. 2 Now let’s change the NP rule again Such that we have – S  NP VP – VP  V NP – NP  (DET) (ADJ) N Now you can diagram this sentence – The.

LING 6520: Comparative Topics in Linguistics (from a computational perspective) Martha Palmer Jan 15,

11 Project, Part 3. Outline Basics of supervised learning using Naïve Bayes (using a simpler example) Features for the project 2.

1 Natural Language Processing Lecture 6 Features and Augmented Grammars Reading: James Allen NLU (Chapter 4)

◦ Process of describing the structure of phrases and sentences Chapter 8 - Phrases and sentences: grammar1.

Syntax 3rd class Chapter 4. Syntactic Categories 1. That glass suddenly broke. 2. A jogger ran toward the end of the lane. 3. These dead trees might block.

Linguistics 187 Week 3 Coordination and Functional Uncertainty.

Lexical-Functional Grammar A Formal System for Grammatical Representation Kaplan and Bresnan, 1982 Erin Fitzgerald NLP Reading Group October 18, 2006.

Chapter 11: Parsing with Unification Grammars Heshaam Faili University of Tehran.

Lecture – VIII Monojit Choudhury RS, CSE, IIT Kharagpur

CKY Parser 0Book 1 the 2 flight 3 through 4 Houston5 6/19/2018

Lexical Functional Grammar

Probabilistic CKY Parser

Dependency Parsing & Feature-based Parsing

CKY Parser 0Book 1 the 2 flight 3 through 4 Houston5 11/16/2018

BBI 3212 ENGLISH SYNTAX AND MORPHOLOGY

CPSC 503 Computational Linguistics

Presentation transcript:

Unification example: a grammar Rule {Satz} S -> NP VP (PP): = =. ;Kongruenz zwischen Subjekt und finitem Verb Rule{NP} NP -> Name / Pron / Det (AP) N (PP): = =. ; Spezifikator-Kopf-Kongruenz Rule{VP intransitiv} VP -> V: = = i. Rule{VP transitiv} VP -> V NP: = = t =. 1/3 psg2.grm + psg2.lex

Rule{VP transitiv mit PP} VP -> V NP PP: = = tp = =. Rule{VP ditransitiv} VP -> V NP_1 NP_2: = = t2 = =. Rule{VP mit PP} VP -> V PP: = = p =. Rule{VP mit Vc} VP -> V {NP / AP / PP}: = = c = =. Rule{AP} AP -> (Adv) A: = =. Rule{PP} PP -> P NP: = =. 2/3 Unification example: a grammar

Parameter: Attribute order is cat subcat lex subj pred spec adj head adj2 obj2 obj pobj predcomp. Let V be[cat: V]. Let Vi be V[subcat: i]. Let Vt be V[subcat: t]. Let Vtp be V[subcat: tp]. Let Vt2 be V[subcat: t2]. Let Vp be V[subcat: p]. Let Vc be V[subcat: c]. Let N be[num: !sg pers: 3]. Let sg be[num: sg]. Let pl be[num: pl]. Let Det be[num: !sg]. Let sg/pl be{[sg] [pl]}. Let 1sg besg [pers: 1]. Let 2sg besg [pers: 2]. Let 3sg besg [pers: 3]. Let 1pl bepl [pers: 1]. Let 2pl bepl [pers: 2]. Let 3pl bepl [pers: 3]. Let 2sg/pl be{[2sg] [pl]}. ;are, were Let 1sg/2sg/pl be{[1sg] [2sg] [pl]}. ;Präsens regelmäßig: sing Let 1sg/3sg be{[1sg] [3sg]}. ;was Let 2per be sg/pl [pers: 2] ;you 3/3 Unification example: a grammar

Unification example S: [ cat: S subj: [ cat: NP spec: [ cat: Det lex: the num: pl ] head: [ cat: N lex: girls num: pl pers: 3 ] ] pred: [ cat: VP head: [ cat: V subcat:t2 lex: gave num: pl pers: 3 ] obj2: [ cat: NP spec: [ cat: Det lex: the num: sg ] head: [ cat: N lex: boy num: sg pers: 3 ] adj2: [ cat: PP head: [ cat: P lex: in ] obj: [ cat: NP spec: [ cat: Det lex: the num: sg ] head: [ cat: N lex: village num: sg pers: 3 ] ] ] ] obj: [ cat: NP spec: [ cat: Det lex: a num: sg ] head: [ cat: N lex: present num: sg pers: 3 ] ] ] ]