Deductive systems and grammars: proofs as grammatical structures

During the last fifteen years, much of the research of proof theoretical grammars has been focused on their weak generative capacity. This research culminated in Pentus’ theorem, which showed that Lambek grammars generate precisely the context-free languages. However, during the same period of time, research on other grammar formalisms has stressed the importance of “strong generative capacity,” i.e. the derivation or phrase structure trees that grammars assign to strings. The first topic of this thesis is the strong generative capacity of Lambek grammars. The proof theoretic perspective on grammars allows us to consider different notions of what “structure assigned by a Lambek grammar to a string” is taken to mean. For example, we can take any proof tree that establishes that a grammar generates a certain string or only those that are in some normal form. It can be shown that the formal properties of these notions of structure differ. The main result of this part of the thesis is that, although Lambek grammars generate context-free string languages, their derivation trees are more complex than those of context-free grammars. The latter were characterized by Thatcher as coinciding with the local tree languages, while the derivation trees of Lambek grammars include tree languages which are not regular. Even non-associative Lambek grammars, which recently have become more popular variants of categorial grammar, can be used to generate non-local tree languages. However, their normal form tree languages are always regular. Finally, categorial grammars lacking introduction rules have local derivation trees. Thus, there is a genuine hierarchy of proof theoretical grammars with respect to strong generative capacity. Additionally, we consider the semantic aspect of the proof theoretic approach to language, which is given by the correspondence between proof theory and type

[1]  Isabelle Tellier,et al.  A Polynomial Algorithm for the Membership Problem with Categorial Grammars , 1996, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[2]  C. R. MANNf THE CONNECTION BETWEEN EQUIVALENCE OF PROOFS AND CARTESIAN CLOSED CATEGORIES , 1974 .

[3]  James Rogers,et al.  A descriptive approach to language-theoretic complexity , 1998 .

[4]  Walter J. Savitch,et al.  The Formal Complexity of Natural Language , 1987 .

[5]  Wojciech Zielonka,et al.  A simple and general method of solving the finite axiomatizability problems for Lambek's syntactic calculi , 1989, Stud Logica.

[6]  J. Lambek,et al.  Introduction to higher order categorical logic , 1986 .

[7]  Sachio Hirokawa,et al.  The Number of Proofs for a BCK-Formula , 1993, J. Symb. Log..

[8]  Joel M. Cohen The Equivalence of Two Concepts of Categorical Grammar , 1967, Inf. Control..

[9]  Lev Gordeev,et al.  Basic proof theory , 1998 .

[10]  S. Ariel,et al.  Introduction to Theoretical Linguistics. , 1968 .

[11]  M. E. Szabo Algebra of proofs , 1978 .

[12]  Joachim Lambek,et al.  On the Calculus of Syntactic Types , 1961 .

[13]  Gerald Gazdar,et al.  Applicability of Indexed Grammars to Natural Languages , 1988 .

[14]  S. Jaśkowski Über Tautologien, in Welchen Keine Variable Mehr Als Zweimal Vorkommt , 1963 .

[15]  Mark Steedman Tutorial overviewCategorial grammar , 1993 .

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

[17]  Jeffrey D. Ullman,et al.  Introduction to Automata Theory, Languages and Computation , 1979 .

[18]  Mati Pentus Product-Free Lambek Calculus and Context-Free Grammars , 1997, J. Symb. Log..

[19]  C. Raymond Perrault On the Mathematical Properties of Linguistic Theories , 1983, ACL.

[20]  Edward P. Stabler,et al.  Derivational Minimalism , 1996, LACL.

[21]  Dexter Kozen,et al.  Automata and Computability , 1997, Undergraduate Texts in Computer Science.

[22]  Glyn Morrill,et al.  Type Logical Grammar: Categorial Logic of Signs , 1994 .

[23]  H. Wansing Substructural logics , 1996 .

[24]  Frank Pfenning,et al.  Natural Deduction for Intuitionistic Non-communicative Linear Logic , 1999, TLCA.

[25]  J. Roger Hindley,et al.  BCK and BCI Logics, Condensed Detachment and the 2-Property , 1993, Notre Dame J. Formal Log..

[26]  Wojciech Buszkowski,et al.  Generative capacity of nonassociative Lambek calculus , 1986 .

[27]  Irène Guessarian,et al.  On Pushdown Tree Automata , 1981, CAAP.

[28]  Alain Lecomte Categorial Minimalism , 1998, LACL.

[29]  Sachio Hirokawa,et al.  Principal Type-Schemes of BCI-Lambda-Terms , 1991, TACS.

[30]  Makoto Kanazawa The Lambek calculus enriched with additional connectives , 1992, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[31]  H.L.W. Hendriks,et al.  Studied flexibility : categories and types in syntax and semantics , 1993 .

[32]  W. Buszkowski Generative Power of Categorial Grammars , 1988 .

[33]  Makoto Kanazawa Learnable Classes of Categorial Grammars , 1998 .

[34]  Heinrich Wansing,et al.  The Logic of Information Structures , 1993, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[35]  Bob Carpenter,et al.  The Turing Completeness of Multimodal Categorial Grammars , 1999 .

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

[37]  Emmon W. Bach,et al.  Categorial Grammars and Natural Language Structures , 1988 .

[38]  Dirk Roorda,et al.  Resource Logics : Proof-Theoretical Investigations , 1991 .

[39]  David R. Dowty,et al.  Introduction to Montague semantics , 1980 .

[40]  Gerald Gazdar,et al.  Phrase Structure Grammar , 1982 .

[41]  A. G. Oettinger,et al.  Language and information , 1968 .

[42]  James W. Thatcher,et al.  Characterizing Derivation Trees of Context-Free Grammars through a Generalization of Finite Automata Theory , 1967, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[43]  Nissim Francez,et al.  Basic simple type theory , 1998 .

[44]  J. P. Thorne Language in Action , 1968, Nature.

[45]  Garrel Pottinger,et al.  Normalization as a homomorphic image of cut-elimination , 1977 .

[46]  Michael Moortgat,et al.  Categorial Type Logics , 1997, Handbook of Logic and Language.

[47]  Ferenc Gécseg,et al.  Tree Languages , 1997, Handbook of Formal Languages.

[48]  Dirk Roorda Proof Nets for Lambek Calculus , 1992, J. Log. Comput..

[49]  Gerhard Jäger,et al.  On the Generative Capacity of Multi-modal Categorial Grammars , 1998 .

[50]  J. Roger Hindley,et al.  Principal type-schemes and condensed detachment , 1990, Journal of Symbolic Logic.

[51]  Wojciech Buszkowski Gaifman's theorem on categorial grammars revisited , 1988, Stud Logica.

[52]  Daniel J. Bronstein What is Logical Syntax , 1936 .

[53]  J. Girard,et al.  Proofs and types , 1989 .

[54]  Max I. Kanovich,et al.  The Complexity of Horn Fragments of Linear Logic , 1994, Ann. Pure Appl. Log..

[55]  Mark Johnson,et al.  A Resource Sensitive Interpretation of Lexical Functional Grammar , 1999, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[56]  Joachim Lambek What is a deductive system , 1994 .