Editor for this issue: <>
Here is the tutorial schedule for EACL-95. All tutorials will be held on Tues. March 28. EACL-95 7th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics March 27-31, 1995 University College Dublin Belfield, Dublin, Ireland Tutorials, Tues. 28 March ------------------------- 9:00 Registration 9:30-12:30 Martin Kay, Xerox PARC and Stanford "Theory and Implementation of Finite State Phonology, I" *** The FSP tutorial is organized so that those competent in FSP fundamentals may skip the morning session and therefore register only for the afternoon (as a single session). Registration for just the morning session would also be possible. *** 9:30-12:30 Alan Smeaton, Dublin City University "Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval" 2:00-5:00 Martin Kay, Xerox PARC and Stanford "Theory and Implementation of Finite State Phonology, II" 2:00-5:00 Shalom Lappin, School for Oriental and African Languages, University of London "Computational Approaches to Ellipsis Resolution" Registration information is available from the ftp file server: (ftp://ftp.cs.columbia.edu/acl-l/Eacl95/registration.txt.Z). $ ftp ftp.cs.columbia.edu Name (cs.columbia.edu:pereira): anonymous Password: yournameMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueaddress [not echoed] cd acl-l/Eacl95 ftp) get registration.txt.Z ftp) quit $ uncompress registration.txt.Z Abstracts for Tutorials: 1. Martin Kay "Theory and Implementation of Finite-State Phonology" ABSTRACT: This two-part tutorial presents a set of mathematical and computational tools for manipulating and reasoning about regular languages and regular relations and argues that they provide a solid basis for computational phonology. It shows in detail how this framework applies to ordered sets of context-sensitive rewriting rules and also to grammars in Koskenniemi's two-level formalism. This analysis provides a common representation of phonological constraints that supports efficient generation and recognition by a single interpreter. RECOMMENDED READING: Ronald M. Kaplan and Martin Kay "Regular Models of Phonological Rule Systems" Computaional Linguistics 20(3), 1994, 331-378. 2. Alan Smeaton, "Natural Language Processing and Information Retrieval" Abstract: The tutorial is aimed at an NLP audience who want to find about a possible application area for NLP resources and techniques ... information retrieval. What is information retrieval ... functionality, including document retrieval, filtering, and routing ... application areas, present and perceived. Conventional approaches to IR ... it is essential to see what other techniques have been used in IR to appreciate where NLP can/cannot be of use .... indexing techniques, boolean retrieval, vector space model, probabilistic modelling, term weighting and relevance feedback, query expansion, ranking. Storage structures ... this will be *very* short, just touching on the engineering problems of managing gigabytes of text. 3 sections cover the guts of the NLP-IR intersection and will be peppered with illustrative examples. - Lexical resources/morphology in indexing by word senses, base forms, grammatical categories, stemming. - Syntax in indexing and matching, phrase identification and extraction, phrase normalisation and matching - Semantics in indexing and matching ... KR formalisms, examples of systems/prototypes which use higher-order NLP Issues of scale ... examples and illustrations of NLP-based IR (IR using NLP tools, techniques or resources) working on large scale collections, examples from TREC. Research issues and trends ... this section will be a discussion, led by me, on what I perceive as the directions in which the IR-NLP intersection will head. 3. Shalom Lappin "Computational Approaches to Ellipsis" ABSTRACT: The sentences in 1 illustrate three types of incomplete structures. 1a. John read the paper before Bill did. b. Max gave flowers to Lucy, and chocolates too. c. No student arrived, except John. 1a is an instance of VP ellipsis, 1b is a case of "bare argument ellipsis", and 1c contains an exception phrase fragment. I will consider two possible approaches to developing a unified procedure for interpreting these distinct kinds of incomplete constituents. The first involves generating the semantic representation of an appropriate property or relation for the elided constituent fragment. The second attempts to reconstruct a syntactic representation of a VP or sentence containing the fragment. I will consider each approach in some detail, and argue that neither the semantic nor the syntactic view can handle all three types of incomplete constituent. I will provide motivation for the claim that VP ellipsis requires syntactic reconstruction, and that it is, in fact, a species of pseudo-gapping illustrated in 2. 2. John gave flowers to Lucy before he did chocolates to Rosa. On this view, reconstruction is a relation between an elided VP and an equivalence class of lexically anchored syntactic structures which correspond to an antecedent VP. All elements of the equivalence class exhibit the same syntactic structure, but variation among corresponding lexical anchors with respect to a restricted set of specified features is possible. The syntactic structure of a (perhaps partially) elided VP is reconstructed by identifying its elided head with the head of an antecedent VP, and then specifying a correspondence among the arguments and adjuncts of the antecedent head on one hand and those of the elided head on the other. I discuss the algorithm for VP ellipsis resolution presented in Lappin and McCord (1990) and extended in McCord et al. as an implementation of this analysis. I argue that, contrary to VP ellipsis, bare argument ellipsis must be resolved by means of a semantic procedure for predicate generation. I consider the higher-order unification analysis proposed in Dalrymple et al. (1991) as a possible account of this procedure. Finally, I present arguments for treating an exception phrase fragment not as an instance of ellipsis, but as a displaced NP modifier. NP storage (Cooper (1993), Pereira (1990), and Pereira and Pollock (1991)) provides a suitable device for expressing the connection between a displaced exception phrase and the NP which it modifies. The study of these three types of incomplete constituents indicates that the interpretation of ellipsis and constituent fragments is not a unified process. Each fragment type requires a different reconstruction procedure which operates at a distinct level of representation. BACKGROUND READING Dalrymple, M., S. Shieber, and F. Pereira (1991), "Ellipsis and Higher-Order Unification", Linguistics and Philosophy 14, pp. 399-452. Fiengo, R. and R. May (1994), Indices and Identity, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Haik, I. (1987), "Bound Variables that Need to Be", Linguistics and Philosophy 11, pp. 503-530. Hardt, D. (1993), Verb Phrase Ellipsis: Form, Meaning, and Processing, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. Lappin, S. (1993a), "The Syntactic Basis of Ellipsis Resolution" in S. Berman and A. Hestvik (eds.), Proceedings of the Stuttgart Ellipsis Workshop, Arbeitspapiere des Sonderforschungsbereichs 340, Bericht Nr. 29-1992, University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart. Lappin, S. (1993b), "Ellipsis Resolution at S-Structure" in Amy Schafer (ed.), Proceedings of NELS 23, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA., pp. 255-269. Lappin, S. and M. McCord (1990), "Anaphora Resolution in Slot Grammar", Computational Linguistics 16, pp. 197-212. Pereira, F. (1990), "Categorial Semantics and Scoping", Computational Linguistics 16, pp. 1-10. Reinhart, T. (1991), "Elliptic Conjunctions- Non-Quantificational QR" in A. Kasher (ed.), The Chomskyan Turn, Blackwell, Oxford, 360-384. Sag, I. (1976), Deletion and Logical Form, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA. Webber, B. (1979), A Formal Approach to Discourse Anaphora, Garland Publishing Co., New York. Williams, E. (1977), "Discourse and Logical Form", Linguistic Inquiry 8, pp. 101-139.