<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C67-1033">
  <Title>1967 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS An INTEGRATED LANGUAGE THE0,RY</Title>
  <Section position="1" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
1967 INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE
ON COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS
An INTEGRATED LANGUAGE
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> ABSTRACT. * The outlines of an INTEGRATED LANGUAGE THEORY are drawn, with granmmr, semantics and text-theory as components. Problems of machine retrieva! and machine translation are discussed on the basi~f the outlined theory.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> At present it is unanimously agreed that no computational linguistics * can be developed without an (before - hand constructed) eXact language theory. (The computer - handling of such an exact4theory is in no way a transparent problem). The aim of the present paper is to outline such an exact integrated language theory.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> The most promising basis for such a theory is the generative view on language. Unfortunately the generative theory of language is at present unsatisfactorily developed. First, this is true for generative grammars. But all other language theory constructions rely heavily on grammar (Katz &amp; Fodor, Katz &amp; Postal, Abraham &amp; Kiefer).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> At present generative grammar consists of two components : a phrase structure compgnent and a transformational one (I do not touch upon the problems of the phonemic and morphophonemic levels). In Chomaky's formulatfon the phrase - structure component necessarily contains context-restricted rules. But this has the unpleasant consequence that the most important decision problems are unsolvable (in this component). Besides this, no satisfactory solution is formulated for the generation of discontinous structures.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> Chomsky's last formulation of this component has even some more inconveniences. The transformational component has no exact formulation as the transformational rules are unsatisfactorily defined. The problem of analysis is also not satisfactorily solved.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> For these reasons I propose a generative grammar also of two components : a matrix component and a transformational component. The matrix component consists of a regular elementary matrix ~rammar, containing only (ordered) elementary context - free rules , with Solvable main decision problems, and which generates in a natural way discontinous structures. Within the transformational component the notion of transformational rule is exactly defined. The problem of an adequate analysis (of the generated sentences), the main problem of generative language theory, is s~isfactoril M solved -l&amp;quot; &amp;quot;r by introducing the following analyses (graphs) : morphological (which usually is called the (phrase - structure) derivational graph), syntactical (not considered in Chomsky's variant), configurational (not considered in Chomsky's variant).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> At present no (integrated) language theory can be conceived without a * semantic component. In the theory which is outlined the semantic component is constructed as follows. A finite number of semantic categories (of the given language) are considered. Each word of the language is characterized by a proper semantic matrix and its definition . The dictionary of the language consists of triplets (word, proper semantic matrix, definition) called lexical issues. Each word of a configuration is characterized by its Semantic matrix and its definition. On the basis of the semantic matrices the notion of semantic regularity of configurations is defined. The semantic regularity of a sentence is defined as the condition of the semantic regularity of all the configurations in the configurational analysis of the sentence. The sense of a(semantic regular) sentence i~'its configu~ational graph, with all the words substituted by their lexical issues. The notion of truth is introduced (in accordance with Tarski), and three types of analiticity are defined : grammatical, semantical and deductive analit*icity. On the basis of the above outlined theory an exact text eomponen~*~is developed, i.e. a component of the integrated language theory which deals with units larger than the sentence.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> The outlinedintegrated language theory differs essentially from the constructions of Chomsky, Katz &amp; Fodor, Katz et Postal, Abraham &amp; Kiefer.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="8"> The exactly (and formally) constructed language theory permits to give a satisfactory solution to the theoreticali~ based machine translation and machine retrieval. This last is formulated in the terms of A -oriented ~bstract (of a paper), ~ - oriented abstract, N - oriented abstract, minimal N - oriented abstract, maximal N -oriented abstract and E - maximal superior N - oriented abstract.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="9"> -2-</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>