An Event Semantics with Continuations for Incremental Interpretation

This paper presents a method to construct event semantic representations incrementally from left to right. The proposed theory focusses on the interaction between events and other scope taking expressions, in particular quantificational DPs and adverbials that are sensitive to aspect. Psycholinguistic experiments have revealed that semantic mismatches can be detected as early as their lexical triggers are encountered, without waiting for a complete semantic or syntactic representation. Our theory thus provides for “incomplete” representations that nonetheless allow for an immediate explanation of such mismatches, right at the point where left to right parsing detects the offending triggers. Viewed from a broader perspective, our framework can be seen as a logical background for theories of semantic parsing in general. In contrast to existing implementations of incremental interpretation, we only employ a single compositional processing rule, namely functional composition of only one logical type of expressions. On the other hand, for this (otherwise unmatched) uniformity to work, we rely on advanced semantic techniques like continuations, dynamic binding, and unrestricted β-reduction (cf. Barker 2002, Gronendijk & Stokhof 1991, Klein & Sternefeld 2013, respectively). In the context of adverbials, these methods can be shown to interact in a non-trivial way with the mereology of events as proposed in Krifka (1992).

[1]  Lucas Champollion,et al.  The interaction of compositional semantics and event semantics , 2015 .

[2]  H. Grice Logic and conversation , 1975 .

[3]  G. Altmann,et al.  The real-time mediation of visual attention by language and world knowledge: Linking anticipatory (and other) eye movements to linguistic processing , 2007 .

[4]  Maryellen C. MacDonald,et al.  Constraint Satisfaction Accounts of Lexical and Sentence Comprehension , 2006 .

[5]  Adrian Brasoveanu,et al.  Incremental and predictive interpretation : Experimental evidence and possible accounts , 2015 .

[6]  Emmon Bach,et al.  The algebra of events , 1986, The Language of Time - A Reader.

[7]  M. Tanenhaus,et al.  Modeling the Influence of Thematic Fit (and Other Constraints) in On-line Sentence Comprehension , 1998 .

[8]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Subject Terms: Linguistics Language Eyes & eyesight Cognition & reasoning , 1995 .

[9]  D. Sperber,et al.  Relevance: Communication and Cognition , 1989 .

[10]  Matthew R. Bennett A response to Karttunen on questions , 1977 .

[11]  Vera Demberg,et al.  The semantic augmentation of a psycholinguistically-motivated syntactic formalism , 2013, CMCL.

[12]  Chris Barker,et al.  Continuations and Natural Language , 2014, Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics.

[13]  C. Barker Continuations and the Nature of Quantification , 2002 .

[14]  Anna Szabolcsi,et al.  Quantification and ACD: What is the Evidence from Real-Time Processing Evidence for? A Response to Hackl et al. (2012) , 2014, J. Semant..

[15]  Colin M. Brown,et al.  Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: evidence from ERPs and reading times. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[16]  Laura Kallmeyer,et al.  Flexible Composition In Ltag: Quantifier Scope and Inverse Linking , 2008 .

[17]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Sentence processing: A tutorial review. , 1987 .

[18]  Daiko Takahashi,et al.  Determiner Raising and Scope Shift , 2002, Linguistic Inquiry.

[19]  Mark Steedman,et al.  The syntactic process , 2004, Language, speech, and communication.

[20]  Adrian Brasoveanu,et al.  At-issue Proposals and Appositive Impositions in Discourse , 2015, J. Semant..

[21]  Wolfgang Klein,et al.  Time in language , 1994 .

[22]  Godehard Link The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice‐theoretical Approach , 2008 .

[23]  Irene Heim,et al.  Semantics in generative grammar , 1998 .

[24]  Natalie M. Klein,et al.  “Some,” and possibly all, scalar inferences are not delayed: Evidence for immediate pragmatic enrichment , 2010, Cognition.

[25]  Zeno Vendler,et al.  Verbs and Times , 1957, The Language of Time - A Reader.

[26]  Oliver Bott,et al.  The Processing Domain of Scope Interaction , 2015, J. Semant..

[27]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  Nominal Reference, Temporal Constitution and Quantification in Event Semantics , 1989 .

[28]  Yuki Kamide,et al.  Anticipatory Processes in Sentence Processing , 2008, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[29]  D. Sperber,et al.  Relevance: Communication and Cognition , 1997 .

[30]  Bonnie L. Webber,et al.  Tense as Discourse Anaphor , 1988, CL.

[31]  L. Osterhout,et al.  The independence of combinatory semantic processing: Evidence from event-related potentials , 2005 .

[32]  Katherine A. DeLong,et al.  Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.

[33]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  Thematic Relations as Links between Nominal Reference and Temporal Constitution , 1992 .

[34]  C. F. M. Vermeulen Incremental Semantics for Propositional Texts , 1994, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..

[35]  Jorie Koster-Hale,et al.  Quantification and ACD: Evidence from Real-Time Sentence Processing , 2012, J. Semant..

[36]  Yoad Winter,et al.  Event Semantics and Abstract Categorial Grammar , 2011, MOL.

[37]  C. Barker,et al.  Donkey anaphora is in-scope binding , 2008 .

[38]  Philippe de Groote,et al.  Towards a Montagovian Account of Dynamics , 2006 .

[39]  Hana Filip,et al.  Telicity as a Semantic Parameter , 2006 .

[40]  Oliver Bott,et al.  Cross-Linguistic Variation in the Processing of Aspect , 2014 .

[41]  Terence Parsons,et al.  Events in the Semantics of English: A Study in Subatomic Semantics , 1990 .

[42]  W. Kintsch The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: a construction-integration model. , 1988, Psychological review.

[43]  Wolfgang Sternefeld,et al.  Introduction to semantics : an essential guide to the composition of meaning , 2013 .

[44]  Hana Filip Northwestern The Quantization Puzzle , 2001 .

[45]  Susan Rothstein,et al.  INCREMENTAL HOMOGENEITY IN THE SEMANTICS OF ASPECTUAL FOR-PHRASES , 2008 .

[46]  M. Krifka The Origins of Telicity , 1998 .

[47]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Interaction with context during human sentence processing , 1988, Cognition.

[48]  Masaya Yoshida,et al.  Incremental Processing of Coreference and Binding in Japanese , 2009 .

[49]  David R. Dowty Type Raising, Functional Composition, and Non-Constituent Conjunction , 1988 .

[50]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  On the process of comparing sentences against pictures , 1972 .

[51]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  Dynamic predicate logic , 1991 .

[52]  Mark Steedman,et al.  On not being led up the garden path : The use of context by the psychological syntax processor , 1985 .

[53]  Oliver Bott,et al.  The cross-linguistic processing of aspect – an eyetracking study on the time course of aspectual interpretation in Russian and German , 2015 .

[54]  L. Faust,et al.  Aspect An Introduction To The Study Of Verbal Aspect And Related Problems , 2016 .

[55]  Oliver Bott,et al.  The Processing of Events , 2010 .

[56]  Robert F. Port,et al.  Dynamics of Language , 2009, Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science.

[57]  Frank Keller,et al.  Incremental, Predictive Parsing with Psycholinguistically Motivated Tree-Adjoining Grammar , 2013, CL.

[58]  G. Altmann,et al.  Incremental interpretation at verbs: restricting the domain of subsequent reference , 1999, Cognition.

[59]  David I. Beaver,et al.  On the logic of verbal modification , 2007 .

[60]  Barbara H. Partee,et al.  Toward the Logic of Tense and Aspect in English , 2008 .

[61]  Lutz Marten,et al.  The Dynamics of Language , 2005 .

[62]  Philippe Schlenker,et al.  Be Articulate: A pragmatic theory of presupposition projection , 2008 .

[63]  B. Partee Some Structural Analogies between Tenses and Pronouns in English , 1973 .

[64]  Heather J. Ferguson,et al.  Investigating the timecourse of accessing conversational implicatures during incremental sentence interpretation , 2013 .

[65]  Matthew W. Crocker,et al.  The influence of the immediate visual context on incremental thematic role-assignment: evidence from eye-movements in depicted events , 2005, Cognition.

[66]  Lucas Champollion Parts of a Whole: Distributivity as a Bridge between Aspect and Measurement , 2017 .

[67]  Giosuè Baggio,et al.  Processing Temporal Constraints: An ERP Study. , 2008 .

[68]  Regine Eckardt A Logic for Easy Linking Semantics , 2009, Amsterdam Colloquium on Logic, Language and Meaning.