Anaphoric Binding: an integrated overview
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2103.06924v1
- Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2021 19:48:36 GMT
- Title: Anaphoric Binding: an integrated overview
- Authors: Ant\'onio Branco
- Abstract summary: Different anaphors may have different sets of admissible antecedents.
These constraints stem from what appears as quite cogent generalisations.
This kind of anaphoric binding constraints appears as a most significant subset of natural language knowledge.
- Score: 0.0
- License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
- Abstract: The interpretation of anaphors depends on their antecedents as the semantic
value that an anaphor eventually conveys is co-specified by the value of its
antecedent. Interestingly, when occurring in a given syntactic position,
different anaphors may have different sets of admissible antecedents. Such
differences are the basis for the categorization of anaphoric expressions
according to their anaphoric capacity, being important to determine what are
the sets of admissible antecedents and how to represent and process this
anaphoric capacity for each type of anaphor.
From an empirical perspective, these constraints stem from what appears as
quite cogent generalisations and exhibit a universal character, given their
cross linguistic validity. From a conceptual point of view, in turn, the
relations among binding constraints involve non-trivial cross symmetry, which
lends them a modular nature and provides further strength to the plausibility
of their universal character. This kind of anaphoric binding constraints
appears thus as a most significant subset of natural language knowledge,
usually referred to as binding theory.
This paper provides an integrated overview of these constraints holding on
the pairing of nominal anaphors with their admissible antecedents that are
based on grammatical relations and structure. Along with the increasing
interest on neuro-symbolic approaches to natural language, this paper seeks to
contribute to revive the interest on this most intriguing research topic.
Related papers
- Investigating Idiomaticity in Word Representations [9.208145117062339]
We focus on noun compounds of varying levels of idiomaticity in two languages (English and Portuguese)
We present a dataset of minimal pairs containing human idiomaticity judgments for each noun compound at both type and token levels.
We define a set of fine-grained metrics of Affinity and Scaled Similarity to determine how sensitive the models are to perturbations that may lead to changes in idiomaticity.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-11-04T21:05:01Z) - A Complexity-Based Theory of Compositionality [53.025566128892066]
In AI, compositional representations can enable a powerful form of out-of-distribution generalization.
Here, we propose a formal definition of compositionality that accounts for and extends our intuitions about compositionality.
The definition is conceptually simple, quantitative, grounded in algorithmic information theory, and applicable to any representation.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-10-18T18:37:27Z) - A Semantic Approach to Decidability in Epistemic Planning (Extended
Version) [72.77805489645604]
We use a novel semantic approach to achieve decidability.
Specifically, we augment the logic of knowledge S5$_n$ and with an interaction axiom called (knowledge) commutativity.
We prove that our framework admits a finitary non-fixpoint characterization of common knowledge, which is of independent interest.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-07-28T11:26:26Z) - Natural Language Decompositions of Implicit Content Enable Better Text
Representations [56.85319224208865]
We introduce a method for the analysis of text that takes implicitly communicated content explicitly into account.
We use a large language model to produce sets of propositions that are inferentially related to the text that has been observed.
Our results suggest that modeling the meanings behind observed language, rather than the literal text alone, is a valuable direction for NLP.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-05-23T23:45:20Z) - Admissibility in Strength-based Argumentation: Complexity and Algorithms
(Extended Version with Proofs) [1.5828697880068698]
We study the adaptation of admissibility-based semantics to Strength-based Argumentation Frameworks (StrAFs)
Especially, we show that the strong admissibility defined in the literature does not satisfy a desirable property, namely Dung's fundamental lemma.
We propose a translation in pseudo-Boolean constraints for computing (strong and weak) extensions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-07-05T18:42:04Z) - Does BERT really agree ? Fine-grained Analysis of Lexical Dependence on
a Syntactic Task [70.29624135819884]
We study the extent to which BERT is able to perform lexically-independent subject-verb number agreement (NA) on targeted syntactic templates.
Our results on nonce sentences suggest that the model generalizes well for simple templates, but fails to perform lexically-independent syntactic generalization when as little as one attractor is present.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-04-14T11:33:15Z) - A Latent-Variable Model for Intrinsic Probing [93.62808331764072]
We propose a novel latent-variable formulation for constructing intrinsic probes.
We find empirical evidence that pre-trained representations develop a cross-lingually entangled notion of morphosyntax.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-01-20T15:01:12Z) - Lexically-constrained Text Generation through Commonsense Knowledge
Extraction and Injection [62.071938098215085]
We focus on the Commongen benchmark, wherein the aim is to generate a plausible sentence for a given set of input concepts.
We propose strategies for enhancing the semantic correctness of the generated text.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-12-19T23:23:40Z) - Constraint Monotonicity, Epistemic Splitting and Foundedness Could in
General Be Too Strong in Answer Set Programming [32.60523531309687]
We consider the notions of subjective constraint monotonicity, epistemic splitting, and foundedness as main criteria respectively intuitions to compare different answer set semantics.
In this note, we demonstrate on some examples that they may be too strong in general and may exclude some desired answer sets respectively world views.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-10-01T04:03:11Z) - Synonymy = Translational Equivalence [6.198307677263333]
Synonymy and translational equivalence are the relations of sameness of meaning within and across languages.
This paper proposes a unifying treatment of these two relations, which is validated by experiments on existing resources.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-04-28T23:15:02Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.