Tree Adjoining Grammars in Noncommutative Linear Logic

This paper presents a logical formalization of Tree-Adjoining Grammar (TAG). TAG deals with lexicalized trees and two operations are available: substitution and adjunction. Adjunction is generally presented as an insertion of a tree inside another, surrounding the subtree at the adjunction node. This seems to be contradictory with standard logical ability. We prove that some logic, namely a fragment of non-commutative intuitionistic linear logic (N-ILL), can serve this purpose. Briefly speaking, linear logic is a logic considering facts as resources. NILL can then be considered either as an extension of Lambek calculus, or as a restriction of linear logic. We model the TAG formalism in four steps: trees (initial or derived) and the way they are constituted, the operations (substitution and adjunction), and the elementary trees, i.e. the grammar. The sequent calculus is a restriction of the standard sequent calculus for N-ILL. Trees (initial or derived) are then obtained as the closure of the calculus under two rules that mimic the grammatical ones. We then prove the equivalence between the language generated by a TAG grammar and the closure under substitution and adjunction of its logical representation. Besides this nice property, we relate parse trees to logical proofs, and to their geometric representation: proofnets. We briefly present them and give examples of parse trees as proofnets. This process can be interpreted as an assembling of blocks (proofnets corresponding to elementary trees of the grammar).

[1]  V. Michele Abrusci Noncommutative proof nets , 1995 .

[2]  K. Vijay-Shanker,et al.  Using Descriptions of Trees in a Tree Adjoining Grammar , 1992, Comput. Linguistics.

[3]  M. Nivat Fiftieth volume of theoretical computer science , 1988 .

[4]  Seth Kulick,et al.  Partial Proof Trees, Resource Sensitive Logics, and Syntactic Constraints , 1996, LACL.

[5]  Aravind K. Joshi,et al.  Tree-Adjoining Grammars , 1997, Handbook of Formal Languages.

[6]  J. Lambek The Mathematics of Sentence Structure , 1958 .

[7]  Patrick Lincoln,et al.  Linear logic , 1992, SIGA.

[8]  Aravind K. Joshi,et al.  Tree Adjunct Grammars , 1975, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[9]  V. Michele Abrusci Non-commutative intuitionistic linear logic , 1990, Math. Log. Q..

[10]  K. Vijay-Shankar,et al.  SOME COMPUTATIONAL PROPERTIES OF TREE ADJOINING GRAMMERS , 1985, ACL 1985.

[11]  Aravind K. Joshi,et al.  Some Computational Properties of Tree Adjoining Grammars , 1985, Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.

[12]  V. Michele Abrusci Phase Semantics and Sequent Calculus for Pure Noncommutative Classical Linear Propositional Logic , 1991, J. Symb. Log..

[13]  Anthony S. Kroch,et al.  The Linguistic Relevance of Tree Adjoining Grammar , 1985 .

[14]  Anne Abeillé,et al.  A Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar for English , 1990 .

[15]  Göran Sundholm,et al.  Systems of Deduction , 1983 .

[16]  David J. Weir,et al.  Parsing Some Constrained Grammar Formalisms , 1993, Comput. Linguistics.