What is Syntax Columbia University什么是语法哥伦比亚大学.pptVIP

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Recursion [[Flights] [from Denver]] [[[Flights] [from Denver]] [to Miami]] [[[[Flights] [from Denver]] [to Miami]] [in February]] [[[[[Flights] [from Denver]] [to Miami]] [in February]] [on a Friday]] Etc. NP - NP PP Implications of Recursion and Context-Freeness VP - V NP (I) hate flights from Denver flights from Denver to Miami flights from Denver to Miami in February flights from Denver to Miami in February on a Friday flights from Denver to Miami in February on a Friday under $300 flights from Denver to Miami in February on a Friday under $300 with lunch This is why context-free grammars are appealing! If you have a rule like  VP - V NP It only cares that the thing after the verb is an NP It doesn’t have to know about the internal affairs of that NP Grammar Equivalence Can have different grammars that generate same set of strings (weak equivalence) Grammar 1: NP ? DetP N and DetP ? a | the Grammar 2: NP ? a N | NP ? the N Can have different grammars that have same set of derivation trees (strong equivalence) With CFGs, possible only with useless rules Grammar 2: NP ? a N | NP ? the N Grammar 3: NP ? a N | NP ? the N, DetP ? many Strong equivalence implies weak equivalence Normal Forms c There are weakly equivalent normal forms (Chomsky Normal Form, Greibach Normal Form) There are ways to eliminate useless productions and so on Chomsky Normal Form A CFG is in Chomsky Normal Form (CNF) if all productions are of one of two forms: A ? BC with A, B, C nonterminals A ? a, with A a nonterminal and a a terminal Every CFG has a weakly equivalent CFG in CNF “Generative Grammar” Formal languages: formal device to generate a set of strings (such as a CFG) Linguistics (Chomskyan linguistics in particular): approach in which a linguistic theory enumerates all possible strings/structur