%0 Conference Paper %1 Dahl:EtAl:87 %A Dahl, Deborah A. %A Palmer, Martha S. %A Passonneau, Rebecca J. %B Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics %D 1987 %K 1987 acl compounds nominalisation %T Nominalizations in PUNDIT %U http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/P/P87/P87-1019.pdf %X This paper describes the treatment of nominalizations in the PUNDIT text processing system. A single semantic definition is used for both nominalizations and the verbs to which they are related, with the same semantic roles, decompositions, and selectional restrictions on the semantic roles. However, because syntactically nominalizations are noun phrases, the processing which produces the semantic representation is different in several respects from that used for clauses. (1) The rules relating the syntactic positions of the constituents to the roles that they can fill are different. (2) The fact that nominailzations are untensed while clauses normally are tensed means that an alternative treatment of time is required for nomlnalizations. (3) Because none of the arguments of a nominallzation is syntactically obllgatory, some differences in the control of the filling of roles are required, in particular, roles can be filled as part of reference resolution for the nominalization. The differences in processing are captured by allowing the semantic interpreter to operate in two different modes, one for clauses, and one for nominalizations. Because many nomlnalizations are noun-noun compounds, this approach also addresses this problem, by suggesting a way of dealing with one relatively tractable subset of noun-noun compounds.

@inproceedings{Dahl:EtAl:87, abstract = {This paper describes the treatment of nominalizations in the PUNDIT text processing system. A single semantic definition is used for both nominalizations and the verbs to which they are related, with the same semantic roles, decompositions, and selectional restrictions on the semantic roles. However, because syntactically nominalizations are noun phrases, the processing which produces the semantic representation is different in several respects from that used for clauses. (1) The rules relating the syntactic positions of the constituents to the roles that they can fill are different. (2) The fact that nominailzations are untensed while clauses normally are tensed means that an alternative treatment of time is required for nomlnalizations. (3) Because none of the arguments of a nominallzation is syntactically obllgatory, some differences in the control of the filling of roles are required, in particular, roles can be filled as part of reference resolution for the nominalization. The differences in processing are captured by allowing the semantic interpreter to operate in two different modes, one for clauses, and one for nominalizations. Because many nomlnalizations are noun-noun compounds, this approach also addresses this problem, by suggesting a way of dealing with one relatively tractable subset of noun-noun compounds.}, added-at = {2007-10-12T14:32:56.000+0200}, author = {Dahl, Deborah A. and Palmer, Martha S. and Passonneau, Rebecca J.}, biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2df91cdae3507eced199c81f0822ce49e/seandalai}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics}, interhash = {5dedb08fd7c50cf4b6c8596324189462}, intrahash = {df91cdae3507eced199c81f0822ce49e}, keywords = {1987 acl compounds nominalisation}, timestamp = {2007-10-12T14:32:56.000+0200}, title = {Nominalizations in PUNDIT}, url = {http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/P/P87/P87-1019.pdf}, year = 1987 }