<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C86-1005">
  <Title>EX'I~NDING Tfiq~ PlKPRESSIVE CAPACITY OF Tf~E SFIMANTIC (DMPONENT ~F ~\[~, OPFJ~A SYST~</Title>
  <Section position="6" start_page="27" end_page="28" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
5- CONCLUSION
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The extensions to the OPERA system proposed here give a powerful dialogue capacities to OPERA.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> On the basis of the DR-theory, we propose an extension for the treatment of anaphora. We do not treat here the definite article as a definite refence since in our system the definite article must be interpreted as an indefinite article. However notice that even if in the framework of DR-theory the definite article is explained as a definite anaphora, its anaphoric link requires often the use of deduction. We prefer therefore not to treat the definite anaphora.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2">  The extension toellipsis described in this paper is limited to VP-ellipsis; in fact the other \]dnds of elliptic sentences can be seen as conjoined to the preceding sentences. Even if the treatment proposed is not the one described by KLEIN, the notion of partial logic formula is equivalent to that of partial-DRS.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> In order to handle the dialogue we introduce the notion of a current situation DRS.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> But, is the level of logic translations (i.e our logical formulas) necessary, since we translate these formu\]ms into DRSs? The reason to maintain this intermediate representation is that our use of DRSs is only justified by the accounting of the dialogue, so that we do not need the complex features of a DRS system. Then for reason of efficiency we think that it is better to evaluate translations on the data base (this enables the t~e of an optimization algorithm before executing the queries).</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>