Axiomatizing Dependen y Parsing
12
pages
English
Documents
Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne En savoir plus
Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement
Découvre YouScribe en t'inscrivant gratuitement
12
pages
English
Documents
Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne En savoir plus
- tion
- pro
- grammati al
- programming
- frameworks based
- constraint programming
- tive tool
- onstraint propagation
- synta ti
Axiomatizing
Dep
endency
adv
sho
hniques.
P
are
arsing
general
Using
axiomatize
Set
Constrain
e
ts
sp
Den
1991;
ys
w
hier
in
Programming
far
Systems
applications
Lab
Univ
ho
ersit
so
y
dep
of
infor-
the
y
Saarland,
mo
Saarbr
t
of
uc
v
k
than
en
and
W
er
e
e
prop
tree
ose
pap
a
t
new
e-
form
treatmen
ulation
pro
of
Kaplan,
dep
endency
grammar
w
and
the
dev
elop
endency
a
framew
onding
axiom-
feature
atization
t
of
rather
syn
(CL)
and
w
ell-formedness
vides
with
and
a
particular,
natural
esp
reading
e
as
an
a
Garden
w
t
solv
minimal
t
prop
pro-
to
gram.
are
W
help
e
t
demonstrate
the
expressivit
e
y
biguit
and
In
eectiv
t-based
eness
of
and
set
that
ts,
h
and
extan
describ
the
e
build
a
smaller
treatmen
t
a
of
to
am
biguit
our
y
of
with
based
wide
ed
applicabil-
on
it
tation
y
pro
.
junctiv
F
urther,
in
w
hnology
e
pro
atten
vide
a
unit
deserv
t
rel-
program-
gone
ming
ren
programming
t
da
of
expressivit
dep
than
enden
assumed.
t
as
that
elegan
is
eec-
b
ol
oth
CL.
simple
pa-
and
hier
1999),
t
ed
and
additionally
pro-
dom-
vides
and
the
dels
b
W
enets
here
of
their
In
e
w
to
Our
with
state-of-the-art
h
an
w
as
of
implemen
ell-formedness
ted
naturally
in
program.
Oz
ing,
and
elop
yields
of
parsers
with
with
y
v
w
ery
a
go
t
o
den
d
ell
p
D
1990;
for
th,
our
supp
ren
of
tly
Our
middle
in
scale
to
grammars.
parsing
Constrain
e
t
e
prop-
no
agation
parses
bination
b
as
e
in
observ
parsing.
ed
giv
to
w
b
pro
e
umerate
remark
W
ably
ose
eec-
(DG)
tiv
ork
e
notion
in
pruning
orks
the
on
yp
h
feature
space.
and
1
the
In
represen
tro
and
t
Mo
dern
dis-
linguistic
e
theories
t
h
as
hpsg
(P
ha
ol-
e
lard
ed
and
less
Sag,
tion
1987)
the
and
linguistics
lf
g
y
(Kaplan
they
and
e,
Bresnan,
their
1982)
ev
are
has
primarily
largely
Concur-
with
t
the
t
form
pro
ulation
to
of
y
general
greater
y
that
is
determine
monly
syn
In
set
w
ts
ell-formed
emerging
en
an
ti-
ecially
ties,
t
t
ypically
tiv
represen
to
ted
for
as
in
In
earlier
p
p
os-
(Duc
sibly
and
t
t,
yp
w
ed,
describ
feature
ho
they
While
serv
feature
to
tly
are
e
app
ealing
ts
for
nd
their
mo
p
of
erspicuit
descriptions.
y
e
and
ose
are
to
easily
w
supp
application
orted
parsing.
b
this
y
er,
languages
e
with
going
uni-
demonstrate
cation,
w,
they
the
ha
of
v
e
programming,
the
elegan
disadv
and
an
tage
that
syn
the
w
resulting
b
formalisms
an
are
t
hard
In
to
do-
parse
w
for
dev
b
a
oth
t
am
and
y
fairly
rea-
applicabilit
sons,
.
ev
particular,
en
e
b
vide
ecoming
in
of
the
en-
w
t
orst
(Maxw
and
(Kaplan
1989;
and
orre
Bresnan,
Eisele,
1982).
Gerdemann,
These
Grif-
dif-
1990)
culties
naturally
are
orts
magnied
e
in
seman
languages
(lifting
lik
e
mation).
Ger-
man
stands
where
sharp
free
trast
w
most
ord
t
order
and
W
discon
abandon
tin
generativ
uous
view;
e
ts
longer
partial
the
b
formal
of
t
ones,
and
is
handicap
parsing
e.g.
hart
hniques
Rather,
relying
e
on
e
surface
global
order.
ell-formedness
While
and
m
uc
en
h
its
dels.
h
e
w
ho
as
dep
dev
grammar
oted
as
to
framew
the
and
the
pilation
ofa
syn
w
builtin
hen
in
ell-formed
but
dep
us
endency
ery
tree
an
in
sort
a
feren
manner
that
alternativ
is
ming
particularly
ere
w
1
ell-suited
mir
to
t
e
t-based
pro
the
wn
w
e
w
prop
ose
etter
to
Oz
re-
and
gard
tence
dep
sen
endency
ear:
parsing
auf
as
ting,
a
h
nite
me
h"
tion
problem
e
that
the
merated
b
represen
e
the
form
1:
ulated
tree.
as
b
a
required
strain
ts
t
satisfaction
problem
ted
(CSP).
Sev
This
Oz
view
t
tak
optimization.
es
w
adv
suggests
an
exhibits
tage
vincing
of
he
the
v
zu
that
e
for
extrap
a
sen
sen
eter
tence
b
of
omise
length
b
n
,
e
there
y
are
the
nitely
\lesen."
man
readings.
y
p
readings
ossible
190ms
trees
t.
in
preferred
v
er
olving
is
just
er
n
In
no
des.
only
Out
b
of
propagation.
this
that
large
merate
n
failure
um
b
ork;
er,
el
w
as
e
e
m
e.g.
ust
en
is
those
h
that
a,
are
parsers
ted
W
describ
e
vide
do
not
sort
attempt
the
this
b
through
h
explorativ
him
e
follo
generation,
whic
but
same
rather
more
via
the
mo
diese
del
ein
elimination.
Kommissionn
What
Auk-
t
trates
programming
non-pro
af-
with
fords
bling
us
that
is
of
eectiv
das
e
mir
mo
erspro
del
lesen
elimination
ok
through
Peter
to
t
(1)
propagation.
\das
Maruy
\P
ama
e
(1990)
assigned
w
as
one
the
e
