stefan11
commented
5 years ago And all the other papers cited:
- Warren J Plath. 1973. Transformational grammar and transformational parsing in the request system. In COLING 1973 Volume 2: Computational And Mathematical Linguistics: Proceedings of the Inter- national Conference on Computational Linguistics, volume 2.
Petrick 1965; Zwicky et al. 1965; Woods 1970, 1973; Plath 1973; Marcus 1980; Kuhns 1990; Fong 1991; Stabler 1992; Fong and Ginsburg 2012)
Principar (Lin, 1993), and its descendant Minipar (Lin, 2001, 2003), are the only truly wide- coverage parsers in the Chomskyan tradition of which we are aware.
It is also statistical, having been self- trained on a 1GB corpus. However, while these parsers model the phrase structure and locality constraints of TG, they are not transformational: movement is merely ‘simulat[ed]’ (Lin, 1993, page 116) by passing features up a precompiled network of nodes representing a tree, from the site of the trace to the site of the antecedent, with the latter merged directly into its surface position, in the style of GPSG. Furthermore, in this approach, antecedents necessarily c-command their traces (Lin, 1993, page 115), presumably making these parsers unsuitable for implementing MP analyses involving remnant movement (see Stabler 1999).
Lin, Dekang. 1993. Principle-based parsing without overgeneration. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 112–120. Columbus, Ohio, USA: Association for Computational Linguistics. https://doi.org/10.3115/981574.981590.