3
$\begingroup$

So far I have learned about categorial grammars, type logical grammars and formal semantics of natural language, the relevant tools are Cornell Semantic Parsing Framework https://github.com/clic-lab/spf and Grails 3 Type Logical Theorem prover http://www.labri.fr/perso/moot/grail3.html. My preferences are strongly biased in favor of symbolic methods and that is why I was sure that I am learning the best technique in the domain of symbolic methods.

But now I have discovered that Grammatical framework https://www.grammaticalframework.org/ (GF) is based on categorial grammars, I am still learning what this means and why the mainstream categorial grammar and type logical semantics literature in no way mentions GF.

But it would nice to hear how GF is connected with semantic parsing and semantic parsers? Is it possible from the GF grammars more or less automatically construct categorial grammar parser and lexicon? By semantic parsing and formal semantics I mean more or less Montague grammars and the use of logical formulas (usually lambda calculus or sophisticated logics in guise of lambda calculus) for the representation of the meaning of the natural language texts.

And more general question - GF is more or less connected with the frame semantics and FrameNet (I am still learning what this means), so - the question is - how frame semantics is connected with formal semantics of natural language? Can I assume that frame semantics is less formal, more coarse grained semantic than formal semantic. I.e. frame semantics is just collection of crude information that can be used for the derivation of the formulas for the formal semantics, i.e. can I assume that the frame net is just one step towards full formal semantics and that encoding frame semantical knowledge into logical form can give the formal semantics? Are there efforts to do this?

So - actually - I am trying to find connection between GF and frame semantics from the one side with the catgorial/type logical grammars with Montagua approach to the other side.

My topic belongs to the computer science, because linguists in no case develops such theories and because most of relevant articles are indexed by DBPL.

The GF Book https://www.grammaticalframework.org/gf-book/ has chapter 1.9 about relation with other grammars, the connection with categorial grammars is mentioned but not explicitly stated and deepened.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.