Semantics in generative grammar

By Irene Heim, Angelika Kratzer. 1998

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Linguistics

Citations in the corpus

A Broad-Coverage Challenge Corpus for Sentence Understanding through Inference (2017, neutral): “Second, we search the corpus for hand-chosen key words indicative of interesting linguistic phenomena; descriptions of these are below: • Q UANTIFIERS : Single words with quantiﬁ-cational force (see Heim and Kratzer 1998; Szabolcsi 2010), e.g., many, all, few, some .”
Weakly Supervised Learning of Semantic Parsers for Mapping Instructions to Actions (2013, methodology): “…: λf.λx.f(x) ∧ g(x) AP : g → S\S : λf.λa.f(a) ∧ g(a) AP : g → S/S : λf.λa.f(a) ∧ g(a) where the first three are for prepositional, adjectival and adverbial modifications, and the fourth models the fact that adverbials are often topicalized.4 Figures 3 and 4 show parses that use type-raising rules.”
Assessing Composition in Sentence Vector Representations (2018, background): “Humans are able to extract meaning with remarkable robustness, and a key factor in human language understanding is composition: the productive combinatory capacity that allows sentence meaning to be derived systematically based on the meanings of its parts (Heim and Kratzer, 1998).”
When Do You Need Billions of Words of Pretraining Data? (2020, neutral): “This is not surprising, as semantic computation is generally thought to depend on syntactic representations (Heim and Kratzer, 1998), and Tenney et al. (2019a) report a similar result.”
On Labeling: Principle C and Head Movement (2010, background): “See Heim & Kratzer 1998:chap.”
Presupposition and Implicature in Compositional Semantics (2007, background): “This view can be attributed to Montague (1974) and Lewis (1970) and has been developed much further since.”
Context of Thought and Context of Utterance: A Note on Free Indirect Discourse and the Historical Present (2004, background): “In addition, (iii) the gender features of pronouns are sometimes pronounced but not interpreted, as is suggested by the following (Heim & Kratzer, 1998): (10) a.”
Wholesale Late Merger: Beyond the A/ Distinction (2009, methodology): “The resulting representation is straightforwardly interpreted by Functional Application, together with (cid:4) -abstraction induced by movement (e.g., Heim and Kratzer 1998).”
QR Obeys Superiority: Frozen Scope and ACD (2001, methodology): “Following widely accepted theories of generalized quantifiers (Barwise and Cooper 1981, Heim and Kratzer 1998), I will assume that object quantifiers are uninterpretable in situ and must raise to a node that denotes a closed proposition (a node of type t ).”
ON THE LFS OF ATTITUDE REPORTS (2003, background): “Our discussion will be guided by the view that LFs are interpreted compositionally, along the lines given in Heim and Kratzer 1998.”
A Natural Proof System for Natural Language (2017, background): “…(2011) offers to interpret LLFs as the abstract terms of Abstract Categorial Grammars (ACGs) (de Groote, 2001) or Lambda Grammars (Muskens, 2001, 2003).10 Muskens (2010) also observes that LLFs come close to the logical forms studied in generative grammar and found in (Heim and Kratzer, 1998).”
Efficient grounding of abstract spatial concepts for natural language interaction with robot platforms (2018, unknown): “In effect, correspondence variables model the uncertainty in the degree of association between a concept and a phrase and allow representation of groundings as probabilistic predicates [8].”
A Two-Tiered Theory of Control (2015, background): “-abstraction is an automatic outcome of movement (Heim and Kratzer 1998).”