Robust processing of the Dutch verb phrase
The Dutch verb phrase (VP) is notorious for its syntactic intricacies. There are
three main reasons why it is difficult to robustly handle its complexity in a
processing model. First of all, a single VP can contain multiple modal
auxiliaries (‘modal stacking’). Second, perfect auxiliaries can not only take a
past participle as their argument but also a modal auxiliary in the infinitive
form. Finally, there are various word orders in which the verb forms can appear.
The first part of this paper presents a fully operational precision processing
model of the Dutch VP in Fluid Construction Grammar. The model shows that the
aforementioned challenges can be overcome by carefully managing the hierarchical
relations between the elements of the VP. The second part introduces a robust
comprehension method, which can process VPs containing morphological and word
order errors. This method allows in many cases to recover the intended meaning
of an erroneous VP, as well as to correct its form, using a strategy that
exploits the deep semantic analyses and the bidirectional nature of the
model.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.A meaning representation for the Dutch VP
-
3.A bidirectional grammar of the Dutch VP
- 3.1The grammar explicated
- 3.2The grammar at work
- 3.3Handling the syntactic intricacies of the Dutch VP
-
Modal stacking
- Perfect auxiliaries
- Word order variation
- 4A robust comprehension method
- 4.1The robust comprehension algorithm
- 4.2An example of robust comprehension
-
4.3A first validation
- 5.Further research
- 6.
Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
-
References
References (12)
References
Allen, J. (1984). Towards a general theory of action and time. Artificial intelligence, 23(2), 123–154.
Boogaart, R. (2013). De modaliteit van temporaliteit. Nederlandse Taalkunde, 18(3), 324–338.
Haeseryn, W., Romijn, K., Geerts, G., de Rooij, J., & van den Toorn, M. (1997). Algemene Nederlands Spraakkunst. Martinus Nijhoff/Wolters Plantyn, 2nd, revised edition.
Pani, A., & Bhattacharjee, G. (2001). Temporal representation and reasoning in artificial intelligence:
A review. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 34(1–2), 55–80.
Pardoen, J. (1986). Werkwoordclustering in de voltooide tijd. Voortgang, 71, 49–76.
Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2007). Do people use language production to make predictions during
comprehension? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(3), 105–110.
Pickering, M., & Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and
comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(04), 329–347.
Reichenbach, H. (1947). Elements of Symbolic Logic. Dover Publications Inc.
Steels, L. (2003). Language re-entrance and the inner voice. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 10(4–5), 173–185.
Steels, L. (Ed.) (2012). Computational issues in Fluid Construction Grammar. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Verkuyl, H., & Broekhuis, H. (2013). Temporaliteit en modaliteit. Nederlandse Taalkunde, 18(3), 306–323.
Cited by (2)
Cited by two other publications
Ungerer, Tobias & Stefan Hartmann
2023.
Constructionist Approaches,
van Trijp, Remi, Katrien Beuls, Paul Van Eecke & Andrew Kehler
2022.
The FCG Editor: An innovative environment for engineering computational construction grammars.
PLOS ONE 17:6
► pp. e0269708 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 january 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.