[Corpora-List] ad-hoc generalization and meaning

[Rob Freeman]

On 9/12/07, John F. Sowa <sowa at bestweb.net> wrote:
>
> Rob,
>
> > What problems caused Montague grammar to be rejected?
>
> It is just too rigid in both syntax and semantics.
>
> As I said in my previous notes, even the best parsers
> in existence today can only generate completely correct
> parses for about half the sentences of a well edited
> document in a genre for which the parser has been well
> tested and trained.
>
> Of those 50% of sentences that can be parsed correctly,
> Montague semantics is lucky to get a very tiny percentage
> of them correctly mapped to a logical formula.


Why is the mapping difficult? Isn't there a one-to-one mapping between a
parse its corresponding logical formula? Otherwise how would the syntax code
meaning?

-Rob
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/corpora/attachments/20070912/2e7f1f6a/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora