Abstract
Computational linguists require descriptively powerful, computationally effective formalisms for representing grammatical information or knowledge. A wide variety of formalisms have been employed in natural language processing systems over the past several decades, including simple phrase structure grammars, augmented transition networks, logic grammars and unification-based grammar formalisms. Until fairly recently however, comparatively little attention has been given to the issues which underly good grammar formalism design in computational linguistics.
This paper examines a number of fundamental issues in the design of formalisms for representing grammatical knowledge. We begin by examining the role of grammar formalisms in computational linguistics, and the trend towards declarative descriptions of grammar. Grammar formalism design is then considered with respect to choices of linguistic representation and grammar notation. The consequences of some specific design choices for the linguistic and computational utility of grammar formalisms are discussed.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aho A. V. (1968) ‘Indexed Grammars — An Extension of Context-free Grammars’, Journal of the ACM 15, 647–671.
Barton G. E., Berwick R. C. and Ristad E. S. (1987) Computational Complexity and Natural Languages, MIT Press: Cambridge, Mass.
Calder, J., Klein E. and Zeevat, H. (1988) ‘Unification Categorial Grammar: A Concise, Extendable Grammar for Natural Language Processing’, in Proceedings of COLING 88, 83–86.
Chomsky N. (1981) Lectures on Government and Binding, Foris, Dordrecht.
Culy C. (1985) ‘The Complexity of the Vocabulary of Bambara’, Linguistics and Philosophy 8, 345–351.
Earley J. (1970) ‘An Efficient Context-free Parsing Algorithm’, Communications of the ACM 14, 453–460.
Gazdar G. (1988) ‘Applicability of Indexed Grammars to Natural Languages’, in U.Reyle and C.Rohrer (eds.), Natural Language Parsing and Linguistic Theories, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 69–94.
Gazdar G., Klein E., Pullum G. K. and Sag I. A. (1985) Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Gunji T. (1987) Japanese Phrase Structure Grammar, Dordrecht, Reidel.
Hopcroft J. and Ullman J. (1979) Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages, and Computation, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
Huybregts R. (1985) ‘The Weak Inadequacy of Context-free Phrase Structure Grammar’, in G.deHaan, M.Trommelen and W.Zonnenveld (eds.), Van Periferie naar Kern, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 81–99.
Joshi A. K. (1985) ‘Tree Adjoining Grammars: How Much Context-sensitivity Is Required to Provide Reasonable Structural Descriptions?’, in D.Dowty, L.Karttunen and A.Zwicky (eds.), Natural Language Processing — Theoretical, Computational and Psychological Perspective, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 206–250.
Joshi A. K., Levy L. and Takahashi M. (1975) ‘Tree Adjunct Grammars’, Journal of the Computer and System Sciences 10(1), 136–163.
Kaplan R. M. (1987) ‘Three Seductions of Computational Psycholinguistics’, in P.Whitelock et al. (eds.), Linguistic Theory and Computer Applications, Academic Press, London, pp. 149–188.
Kaplan R. M. (1989) ‘The Formal Architecture of Lexical-Functional Grammar’, Information Science and Engineering 5, 305–322.
Kaplan R. M. and Bresnan J. (1982) ‘Lexical-Functional Grammar: A Formal System for Grammatical Representation’, in J.Bresnan (ed.), The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., pp. 173–281.
Kasami T. (1965) ‘An Efficient Recognition and Syntax Algorithm for Context-free Languages’, Scientific Report AFCRL-65–758, Air Force Cambridge Research Lab., Bedford: Mass.
Kay, M. (1979) ‘Functional Grammar’, in Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 142–158.
Kay M. (1985) ‘Parsing in Functional Unification Grammar’, in D.Dowty, L.Karttunen and A.Zwicky (eds.), Natural Language Parsing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 251–278.
Langaker R. W. (1969) ‘On Pronominalization and the Chain of Command’, in D.Reidel and S.Schane (eds.), Modern Studies in English, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 160–186.
Miller P. H. (1991) ‘Scandinavian Extraction Phenomena Revisited: Weak and Strong Generative Capacity’, Linguistics and Philosophy 14, 101–113.
Partee B. H., terMeulen A. and Wall R. E. (1990) ‘Mathematical Methods in Linguistics’, Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy 30, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.
Pereira F. C. N. and Warren D. (1980) ‘Definite Clause Grammars for Language Analysis — A Survey of the Formalism and a Comparison with Augmented Transition Networks’, Artificial Intelligence 13, 231–278. Reprinted in B. J. Grosz, K. Sparck Jones and B. L. Webber (eds.), (1986) Readings in Natural Language Processing, Morgan Kaufman, Los Altos, pp. 101–124.
Pollard, C. (1984) ‘Generalized Phrase Structure Grammars, Head Grammars, and Natural Language’, Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University.
Pollard C. and Sag I. A. (1987) Information-Based Syntax and Semantics: Volume 1 — Fundamentals. CSLI Lecture Notes No. 13., Chicago University Press, Chicago.
Pullum, G. K. (1982) ‘Free Word Order and Phrase Structure Rules’, in J. Pustejovsky and P. Sells (eds.), Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society, Graduate Linguistics Student Association, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, pp. 209–220.
Ristad E. S. (1990) ‘Computational Structure of GPSG Models’, Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 521–587.
Shieber, S. M. (1984) ‘The Design of a Computer Language for Linguistic Information’, in Proceedings of COLING 84, 363–366.
Shieber S. M. (1985) ‘Evidence Against the Context-freeness of Natural Language’, Linguistics and Philosophy 8, 333–343.
Shieber S. M. (1986) An Introduction to Unification-Based Approaches to Grammar, CSLI Lecture Notes No. 4., Chicago University Press, Chicago.
Shieber S. M. (1988) ‘Separating Linguistic Analyses from Linguistic Theories’, in U.Reyle and C.Rohrer (eds.), Natural Language Parsing and Linguistic Theories, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 33–68.
Shieber S. M., Uszkoreit H., Robinson J. and Tyson M. (1983) ‘The Formalism and Implementation of PATR II’, in B.Grosz and M.Stickel (eds.), Research on Interactive Acquisition and Use of Knowledge, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA.
Steedman M. J. (1985) ‘Dependency and Coordination in the Grammar of Dutch and English’, Language 61, 523–568.
Steedman, M. J. (1987) ‘Combinatory Grammars and Parasitic Gaps’, in N. J. Haddock, E. Klein, and G. Morrill (eds.), Categorial Grammar, Unification Grammar and Parsing, Edinburgh Working Papers in Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh, Vol. 1., pp. 30–70.
Thompson H. S. (1981) ‘Natural Language Processing: A Critical Analysis of the Structure of the Field, with some Implications for Parsing’, in K.Sparck-Jones and Y. A.Wilks (eds.), Automatic Natural Language Parsing, Ellis Horwood, Wiley, Chichester, New York, pp. 23–31.
Uszkoreit, H. (1986) ‘Categorial Unification Grammar’, in Proceedings of COLING 86, 187–194.
Vijay-Shanker, K. and Weir, D. J. (1989) ‘The Recognition of Combinatory Categorial Grammars, Linear Indexed Grammars and Tree Adjoining Grammars’, in International Workshop on Parsing Technologies, Pittsburgh, PA.
Vijay-Shanker, K. and Weir, D. J. (1990) ‘Polynomial Parsing of Combinatory Categorial Grammars’, in 28th meeting Assoc. Comput. Ling., Pittsburgh, PA.
Weir, D. J. (1988) ‘Characterizing Mildly Context-Sensitive Grammar Formalisms’, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pennsylvania: Philadephia PA.
Woods W. A. (1970) ‘Transition Network Grammars for Natural Language Analysis’, Communications of the ACM 13, 591–606. Reprinted in B. J. Grosz, K. Sparck-Jones and B. L. Webber (eds.), Readings in Natural Language Processing, Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos., pp. 71–88.
Younger D. H. (1967) ‘Recognition and Parsing of Context-free Languages in Time n 3’, Information and Control 10, 189–208.
Zeevat, H., Klein, E., and Calder, J. (1987) ‘Unification Categorial Grammar’, in N. Haddock, E. Klein and G. Morrill (eds.), Categorial Grammar, Unification Grammar and Parsing, Edinburgh Working Papers in Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh, Vol. 1., pp. 195–233.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Keller, B. Formalisms for grammatical knowledge representation. Artif Intell Rev 6, 365–381 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00123690
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00123690