<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="P84-1034">
  <Title>A PROPER TREATMEMT OF SYNTAX AND SEMANTICS IN MACHINE TRANSLATION</Title>
  <Section position="3" start_page="159" end_page="159" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
II SYNTAX AND SEMANTICS
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> It is not entirely possible to distinguish a syntax directed approach from a semantics directed approach, because syntax and semantics are always performing their linguistic functions reciprocally* As Wilks \[16\] points out, it is plausible but a great mistake to identify syntactic processing with superficial processing, or to identify semantic processing with deep processing. The term &amp;quot;superficial&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;deep&amp;quot; only reflects the intuitive distance from the language representation in (superficial) character strings or from the language representation in our (deep) minds.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> Needless to say, machine translation inevitably has something to do with superficial processing* In various aspects of natural language processing, it is quite common to segment a superficial sentence into a collection of phrases* A phrase itself is a collection of words* In order to restructure the collection of phrases, the processor must first of all attach some sorts of labels to the phrases* If these labels are something like subject, object, complement, etc., then we will call this processor a syntax directed processor, and if these labels are something like agent, object, instrument, etc., or animate, inanimate, concrete, abstract, human, etc., then we will call this processor a semantics directed processor* The above definition is oversimplified and of course incomplete, but it is still enough for the arguments in this paper*</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>