×

Multimodal linguistic inference. (English) Zbl 0919.03023

The paper studies simple and mixed Lambek systems. Simple Lambek systems are formulated in the language of Lambek Calculus, i.e. with the binary connectives \(\bullet, /, \backslash\). These systems are called monomodal because they can be interpreted in Kripke-type models with a single ternary accessibilty relation (“Došen’s semantics”). Mixed (or multimodal) systems may have several connectives of Lambek type: \(\bullet_i, /_i, \backslash_i\). Systems having Lambek connectives and a standard (unary) modal operator are also considered in the paper. The topics discussed are correspondence (both for axioms and structural rules), proof search and cut elimination, and linguistic motivations.

MSC:

03B65 Logic of natural languages
03B45 Modal logic (including the logic of norms)

Software:

Lolli
PDFBibTeX XMLCite
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Abrusci, M., Casadio, C. and Moortgat, M., eds., 1994, Linear Logic and Lambek Calculus. Proceedings 1 st Rome Workshop, June 1993. OTS/DYANA, Utrecht, Amsterdam.
[2] Andreoli, J.-M., 1992, ?Logic programming with focusing proofs in linear logic,? Journal of Logic and Computation 2(3). · Zbl 0764.03020
[3] Barry, G. and Morrill, G., eds., 1990 Studies in Categorial Grammar. CCS, Edinburgh.
[4] Benthem, J. van, 1983 ?The semantics of variety in categorial grammar?, Report 83-29, Math Dept. Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. · Zbl 0695.03015
[5] Benthem, J. van, 1991, Language in Action. Categories, Lambdas, and Dynamic Logic. Studies in Logic, Amsterdam: North-Holland. · Zbl 0717.03001
[6] Benthem, J. van, 1984, ?Correspondence theory,? pp. 167-247 in Handbook of Philosophical Logic. Vol II, Gabbay and Guenthner, eds., Dordrecht.
[7] Belnap, N.D., 1982, ?Display Logic,? Journal of Philosophical Logic 11, 375-417. · Zbl 0509.03008
[8] Blyth, T.S. and Janowitz, M.F., 1972, Residuation Theory, New York.
[9] Bucalo, A., 1994, ?Modalities in Linear Logic weaker than the exponential ?of course?: algebraic and relational semantics,? Journal of Logic, Language and Information 3(3), 211-232. · Zbl 0809.03010 · doi:10.1007/BF01053246
[10] Buszkowski, W., 1988, ?Generative power of categorial grammars,? in Categorial Grammars and Natural Language Structures, Oehrle, Bach and Wheeler, eds., Dordrecht. · Zbl 0664.03025
[11] Do?en, K., 1992, ?A brief survey of frames for the Lambek calculus,? Zeitschr. f. math. Logik und Grundlagen d. mathematik 38, 179-187. · Zbl 0793.03025 · doi:10.1002/malq.19920380113
[12] Do?en, K., 1988, 1989, ?Sequent systems and groupoid models,? Studia Logica 47, 353-385, 48, 41-65. · Zbl 0671.03018 · doi:10.1007/BF00671566
[13] Dunn, J.M., 1991, ?Gaggle theory: an abstraction of Galois connections and residuation, with applications to negation, implication, and various logical operators,? in Logics in AI, JELIA Proceedings, Van Eijck (ed.), Berlin: Springer-Verlag. · Zbl 0814.03044
[14] Dunn, M., 1993, ?Partial Gaggles Applied to Logics with Restricted Structural Rules,? in Substructural Logics, Do?en and Schröder-Heister, eds., Oxford.
[15] Fuchs, L., 1963, Partially-Ordered Algebraic Systems, New York. · Zbl 0137.02001
[16] Gabbay, D., 1991, Labelled Deductive Systems. Draft. Oxford University Press (to appear).
[17] Gabbay, D., 1993, ?A general theory of structured consequence relations,? in Substructural Logics, Do?en and Schröder-Heister, eds., Oxford.
[18] girard, J.-Y., 1993, ?On the unity of logic,? Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 59, 201-217. · Zbl 0781.03044 · doi:10.1016/0168-0072(93)90093-S
[19] Girard, J.-Y., 1994, ?Light linear logic: extended abstract,? Ms LMD, Marseille.
[20] Hendriks, P., 1995a, ?Comparatives in Categorial Grammar,? Ph.D. Thesis, Groningen.
[21] Hendriks, P., 1995b, ?Ellipsis and multimodal categorial type logic,? in Proceedings Formal Grammar Conference, Morrill, ed., Barcelona.
[22] Hepple, M., 1990, ?The grammar and processing of order and dependency: a categorial approach,? Ph.D. Dissertation, Edinburgh.
[23] Hepple, M., 1994, ?Labelled deduction and discontinuous constituency,? in Linear Logic and Lambek Calculus, Proceedings 1st Rome Workshop, June 1993, Abrusci, Casadio and Moortgat, eds., OTS/DYANA, Utrecht, Amsterdam.
[24] Hodas, J.S. and Miller, D., 1994, ?Logic Programming in a fragment of intuitionistic linear logic,? Information and Computation 110(2), 327-365. · Zbl 0807.68016 · doi:10.1006/inco.1994.1036
[25] Kandulski, W., 1988, ?The non-associative Lambek calculus,? in Categorial Grammar, Buszkowski, Marciszewski and van Benthem, eds., Amsterdam. · Zbl 0693.03014
[26] König, E., 1991, ?Parsing as natural deduction,? Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the ACL, Vancouver.
[27] Kraak, E., 1995a, ?French clitics. A categorial perspective,? MA Thesis, Utrecht.
[28] Kraak, E., 1995b, ?Controlling resource management: French clitics,? Esprit BRA Dyana-2 Deliverable R1.3.C, in Leiss, ed.
[29] Kracht, M., 1993, ?Power and weakness of modal display calculus,? Ms Mathematisches Institut, Freie Universität Berlin. · Zbl 0864.03014
[30] Kurtonina, N., 1995, ?Frames and labels. A modal analysis of categorial inference,? Ph.D. Dissertation, OTS Utrecht, ILLC Amsterdam. · Zbl 0826.03004
[31] Kurtonina, N. and Moortgat, M., 1995, ?Structural control,? Logic, Structures and Syntax, in Blackburn and de Rijke, eds., Dordrecht: Kluwer (to appear).
[32] Lambek, J., 1958, ?The mathematics of sentence structure?, American Mathematical Monthly 65, 154-170. · Zbl 0080.00702 · doi:10.2307/2310058
[33] Lambek, J., 1988, ?Categorial and categorical grammar,? Categorial Grammars and Natural Language Structures, in Oehrle, Bach and Wheeler, eds., Dordrecht.
[34] Lincoln, P., Mitchell, J., Scedrov, P. and Shankar, N., 1992, ?Decision problems for propositional linear logic,? Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 56, 239-311. · Zbl 0768.03003 · doi:10.1016/0168-0072(92)90075-B
[35] Moortgat, M. and Morrill, G., 1991, ?Heads and phrases. Type calculus for dependency and constituent structure,? Ms OTS Utrecht.
[36] Moortgat, M. and Oehrle, R., 1993, Logical Parameters and Linguistic Variation. Lecture Notes on Categorial Grammar. 5th European Summer School in Logic, Language and Information. Lisbon.
[37] Moortgat, M. and Oehrle, R.T., 1994, ?Adjacency, dependency and order,? pp. 447-466 in Proceedings 9th Amsterdam Colloquium.
[38] Morrill, G., 1990, ?Intensionality and boundedness,? L&P 13, 699-726.
[39] Morrill, G., 1992, ?Categorial formalisation of relativisation: pied-piping, islands and extraction sites,? Report LSI-92-23-R, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya.
[40] Morrill, G., 1994, ?Structural facilitation and structural inhibition,? in Linear Logic and Lambek Calculus, Proceedings 1 st Rome Workshop, June 1993, Abrusci, Casadio and Moortgat, eds., OTS/DYANA, Utrecht, Amsterdam.
[41] Morrill, G., 1994, Type Logical Grammar, Dordrecht: Kluwer. · Zbl 0848.03007
[42] Routley, R. and Meyer, R.K., 1972-73, ?The semantics of entailment I,? pp. 199-243 in Truth, Syntax, Modality, H. Leblanc, ed., Amsterdam: North-Holland.
[43] Steedman, M., 1993, ?Categorial grammar. Tutorial overview,? Lingua 90, 221-258. · doi:10.1016/0024-3841(93)90024-Q
[44] Szabolcsi, A., 1987, ?Bound variables in syntax: are there any?? pp. 294-318 in Semantics and Contextual Expressions, Bartsch, van Benthem and van, Emde Boas, eds., Dordrecht: Foris.
[45] Venema, Y., 1993, ?Meeting strength in substructural logics,? UU Logic Preprint. To appear in Studia Logica.
[46] Versmissen, K., 1995, ?Word order domains in categorial grammar,? in Proceedings Formal Grammar Conference, Morrill, ed., Barcelona.
[47] Wallen, L.A., 1990, Automated Deduction in Nonclassical Logics, Cambridge, London: MIT Press. · Zbl 0782.03003
[48] Wansing, H., 1992, ?Sequent calculi for normal modal propositional logics,? ILLC Report LP-92-12, Amsterdam.
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.