Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Higher Order Unification and the Interpretation of Focus

  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Higher order unification is a way of combining information (or equivalently, solving equations) expressed as terms of a typed higher order logic. A suitably restricted form of the notion has been used as a simple and perspicuous basis for the resolution of the meaning of elliptical expressions and for the interpretation of some non-compositional types of comparative construction also involving ellipsis. This paper explores another area of application for this concept in the interpretation of sentences containing intonationally marked ‘focus’, or various semantic constructs which are sensitive to focus.

Similarities and differences between this approach, and theories using ‘alternative semantics,’ ‘structured meanings’, or flexible categorial grammars, are described. The paper argues that the higher order unification approach offers descriptive advantages over these alternatives, as well as the practical advantage of being capable of fairly direct computational implementation.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alshawi, H. (ed.): 1992, The Core Language Engine, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alshawi, H. and R. Crouch: 1992, ‘Monotonic Semantic Interpretation’, Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting, Association for Computational Linguisties, pp. 32–39.

  • Alshawi, H. and S. G. Pulman: 1992, ‘Ellipsis, Comparatives and Generation’, in H. Alshawi (ed.), The Core Language Engine, MIT Press, Boston, pp. 251–275.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, D.: 1987, Interpreting Anaphors in Natural Language Texts, Ellis Horwood, Chichester.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N.: 1970, ‘Deep Structure, Surface Structure, and Semantic Interpretation’, in D. D. Steinberg and L. A. Jacobovits (eds.), Semantics: An Interdisciplinary Reader, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 183–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalrymple, M., S. Shieber, and F. Pereira: 1991, ‘Ellipsis and Higher Order Unification’, Linguistic and Philosophy 14, 399–452.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D.: 1967, ‘The Logical Form of Action Sentences’, in N. Rescher (ed.). The Logic of Decision and Action, University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, pp. 81–95.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delin, J.: 1989, ‘Accounting for Cleft Construction in Discourse: A Multi-Layered Approach’, Edinburgh University Human Communication Research Centre Research Paper HCRC/RP-5.

  • Dowek, G.: 1992, ‘Third Order Matching is Deeidable’, in Proceedings of the 7th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic and Computer Science, pp. 2–10.

  • Dretske, F.: 1979, ‘Refering to Events’, in P. French, T. Uehling, and H. Wettstein (eds.), Contemporary Perspectives in the Philosophy of Language, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1979, pp. 369–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardent, C. and M. Kohlhase: 1996, ‘Higher-Order Coloured Unification and Natural Language Semanties’, in Proceedings of 34th Annual Meeting, Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL: Santa Cruz, pp. 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gawron, J. M.: 1992, ‘Focus and Ellipsis in Comparatives and Superlatives: A Case Study’, in C. Barker and D. Dowty (eds.), Proceedings of the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, Working Papers in Linguistics No. 40, Ohio State University, pp. 79–98.

  • Gawron, J. M.: 1995, ‘Comparatives, Superlatives, and Resolution’, Linguistics and Philosophy 18, 333–380.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gazdar, G., E. Klein, G. Pullum, and I. Sag: 1985, Generalised Phrase Structure Grammar, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajicová, E. 1984, ‘Topic and Focus’, in P. Sgall (ed.), Contributions to Functional Syntax, Semantics, and Language Comprehension, Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, Prague, pp. 189–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, L. R.: 1969, ‘A Presuppositional Analysis of “Only” and “Even”’, in R. Binnick, A. Davidson, G. Green and J. Morgan (eds.), in The 5th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, pp. 98–107.

  • Huet, G.: 1975, ‘A Unification Algorithm for Typed λ-Calculus’, Theoretical Computer Science 1, 27–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, R.: 1972, Semantics Interpretation in Generative Grammar, MIT Press, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joshi, A.: 1990, ‘Phrase Structure and Intonational Phrases’, in G. Altmann (ed.), Cognitive Models of Speech Processing, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 457–482.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer, A.: 1991, ‘The Representation of Focus’, in A. von Stechow and D. Wunderlich (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, de Gruyther, Berlin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, M.: 1990, ‘Four Thousand Ships Passed Through the Lock’, Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 487–520.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, M.: 1991, ‘A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus Constructions’, Linguistische Berischte Sonderheft 4, 17–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, M.: 1992, ‘A Framework for Focus-Sensitive Quantification’, in C. Barker and D. Dowty (eds.), Proceedings of the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, Working Papers in Linguistics No. 40, Ohio State University, pp. 213–236.

  • Krifka, M.: 1993, ‘Focus and Presuppositions in Dynamic Interpretation’, Journal of Semantics 10, 269–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.: 1975, ‘Adverbs of Quantification’, in E. Keenan (ed.), Formal Semantics of Natural Language, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lyona, D. and Hirst, G.: 1990, ‘A Compositional Semantics for Focusing Subjuncts’, in Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 54–61.

  • Miller, D. A.: 1990, ‘A Logic Programming Language with lambda Abstraction, Function Variables and Simple Unification’, in P. Schroder-Heister (ed.), Extensions of Logic Programming, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag.

  • Miller, D. and G. Nadathur: 1986, ‘Some Uses of Higher Order Unification in Computational Linguistics’, in Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting, Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 247–255.

  • Partee, B.: 1991, ‘Topic, Focus, and Quantification’, in S. Moore and A. Z. Wyner (eds.), Proceedings of the 1st Semantics and Linguistic Theory Conference, Cornell University Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 159–187.

  • Prevost, S. and M. Steedman: 1993, ‘Generating Contextually Appropriate Intonation’, in Proceedings of the 6th Conference of the European Chapter of the ACL, Utrecht: ACL, pp. 332–340.

  • Prüst, H., 1992, ‘On Discourse Structure, VP Anaphora, and Gapping’, University of Amsterdam, Ph.D. Dissertation.

  • Pulman, S. G.: 1989, ‘Events and Verb Phrase Modifiers’, in J. Peckham (ed.), Recent Developments and Applications of Natural Language Processing, Kogan Page Ltd., London, and GP Publishing, Maryland, pp. 179–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulman, S. G.: 1991, ‘Comparatives and Ellipsis’, in Proceedings of the 5th European Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Berlin, 1991, pp 1–6.

  • Pulman, S. G.: 1993, ‘Higher Order Unification and the Semantics of Focus’, in The Third Nordic Conference on Text Comprehension in Man and Machine, April 1992, Linköping University, pp. 113–127.

  • Pulman, S. G.: 1994, ‘A Computational Theory of Context Dependence’, in H. Bunt, R. Muskens, and G. Rentier (eds.), Proceedings: International Workshop on Computational Semantics, Institute for Language Technology, Tilburg University, The Netherlands, pp. 161–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quirk, R., S. Greenhaum, G. Leech, and J. Svartvik: 1985, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, Longman Group Limited, Harlow.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, M.: 1993, ‘Abductive Equivalential Translation and its Application to Natural Language Database Inferencing’, Stockholm University, Ph.D. thesis, and SRI Cambridge Technical Report.

  • Rayner, M. and H. Alshawi: 1992, ‘Deriving Database Queries from Logical Forms by Abductive Definition Expansion’, in Proceedings 3rd Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing, Trento: ACL, pp. 1–8.

  • Rooth, M.: 1985, ‘Association with Focus’, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rooth, M.: 1992, ‘A Theory of Focus Interpretation’, Natural Language Semantics 1, 75–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schubert, L. and J. Pelletier: 1989, ‘Generally Speaking’, in G. Chierchia, B. Partee, and R. Turner (eds.), Properties, Types, and Meaning, II, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 193–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selkirk, E.: 1984, Phonology and Syntax, MIT Press, Boston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sgall, P.: 1984, ‘Syntax, Meaning, and Reference’, in A. Sgall (ed.), Contributions to Functional Syntax, Semantics, and Language Comprehension, Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences, Prague, pp 39–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sidner, C.: 1983, ‘Focussing in the Comprehension of Definite Anaphora’, in M. Brady and R. Berwick (eds.), Computational Models of Discourse, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachussetts, pp. 276–330.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, M.: 1987, ‘Combinatory Grammars and Parasitie Gaps’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5, 403–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, M.: 1990, ‘Structure and Intonation in Spoken Language Understanding’, in Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Pittsburgh: ACL, pp. 9–16.

  • Steedman, M.: 1991, ‘Structure and Intonation’, Language 68, 260–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, M.: 1993, ‘The Grammar of Intonation and Focus’, in Proceedings 9th Amsterdam Colloquium, University of Amsterdam ILLC, pp. 17–33.

  • Stump, G.: 1981, ‘The Interpretation of Frequency Adjectives’, Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 221–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Swart, H.: 1991, ‘Adverbs of Quantification: A Generalised Quantifier Approach’, University of Groningen, Ph.D. Thesis.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. SRI International, Cambridge Computer Science Research Centre, 23 Millers Yard Mill Lane, Cambridge, CB2 1RQ, United Kingdom

    Stephen G. Pulman

  2. University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory, New Museums Site, Cambridge, CB2 3QG, United Kingdom

    Stephen G. Pulman

Authors
  1. Stephen G. Pulman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pulman, S.G. Higher Order Unification and the Interpretation of Focus. Linguistics and Philosophy 20, 73–115 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005394619746

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005394619746

Keywords

Search

Navigation