Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Spencer

Formal english grammar or syntax

Recommended Posts

Hi! I wonder if someone knows where i can find a formal specification of the english grammar or syntax. It doesnt have to be complete in the sense that it handles every little aspect and nuance of english but the biggest parts of it, preferably in Baccus-Naur form.. thank you --Spencer "Relax, this dragon is sleeping..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Heh... well, a good start might be The Chicago Manual of Style.... if you''re thinking about natural language processing, tho, Backus-Naur is a bit of a naive approach. Google for "natural language AI" for info.


How appropriate. You fight like a cow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I saw the Grand Canyon flying to New York. Now, how does that work in Baccus Naur form?

Anyway, have you ever heard of systemics grammar? I believe that''s what it is called.

For an interesting dialogue, read about SHRDLU. You might find a link in my sig. Also, learn about CD (Conceptual Dependency).

_______________________________

"To understand the horse you''ll find that you''re going to be working on yourself. The horse will give you the answers and he will question you to see if you are sure or not."
- Ray Hunt, in Think Harmony With Horses


ALU - SHRDLU - WORDNET - CYC - SWALE - AM - CD - J.M. - K.S. | LANL | CAA - BCHA - AQHA - APHA - R.H. - T.D. | 395 - SPS - GORDIE - SCMA - R.M. - G.R. - V.C. - C.F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Baccus-Naur is a notation for context free grammar... and English isn''t a context free grammar.

Although I Googled some interesting academic papers when searching for "english unrestricted grammar" and "english context sensitive grammar." Dry as hell and probably not very applicable to what you''re doing, but I''ll be damned if people don''t research some arcane stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''ve messed around with my own formalizations of English on paper, and I think they might work decently for properly formed sentences, but I never got around to doing anything with them.

Now, about your example, bishop_pass:
quote:

I saw the Grand Canyon flying to New York. Now, how does that work in Baccus Naur form?


I''m not sure if that''s strictly correct without a "while," eg "I saw the Grand Canyon while flying to New York." With a "while," I think it works. Still, you''re certainly right that people do leave out little words like that all the time, and a good natural language processor should be able to deal with that. That''s the sort of thing, though, that requires general knowledge, which we have for the most part been unsuccessful in giving to machines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Found something noteworthy in Bovine''s link...

In these notes, we use the system of tree annotations from the Penn Treebank of English, which is a database of trees for about 50,000 English sentences.

Found the webpage of this Treebank, here. Looks like it might have some useful resources - big globs of text with the various parts of speech annotated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by TerranFury
That''s the sort of thing, though, that requires general knowledge, which we have for the most part been unsuccessful in giving to machines.

But we have been successful with that exact thing if you limit the domain of discourse. Text adventure games could be much more robust and interesting if they had very sophisticated knowledge about their limited domain of discourse. Again, I urge others to learn about SAM, PAM, and POLITICS, built upon MARGIE and CD.



_______________________________

"To understand the horse you''ll find that you''re going to be working on yourself. The horse will give you the answers and he will question you to see if you are sure or not."
- Ray Hunt, in Think Harmony With Horses


ALU - SHRDLU - WORDNET - CYC - SWALE - AM - CD - J.M. - K.S. | LANL | CAA - BCHA - AQHA - APHA - R.H. - T.D. | 395 - SPS - GORDIE - SCMA - R.M. - G.R. - V.C. - C.F.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by TerranFury
That''s the sort of thing, though, that requires general knowledge, which we have for the most part been unsuccessful in giving to machines.
From what I''ve seen in my English class this semester, we''re having trouble giving it to humans, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by TerranFury I''m not sure if that''s strictly correct without a "while," eg "I saw the Grand Canyon while flying to New York."


You''re assuming the Grand Canyon does not possess the ability of flight =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i certainly don''t know where you''d find an English grammar, but i''m sure one''s out there. As for being in BNF, don''t they tell you not to use that? At least for NLP stuff. i don''t know, i could be wrong, it''s been a long time

A simple grammar would be something like:
s( Number, s( NP,VP) ) --> np(Number,NP), vp(Number,VP).
np(Number, np(D,Noun)) --> determiner(Number,D), noun(Number,Noun).
np(Number, np(PN) ) --> pronoun(Number,PN).
vp(Number, vp(V,NP) ) --> verb(Number,V), np(Number1,NP).
vp(Number, vp(V) ) --> verb(Number,V).
where it''s intended to be used with a lexicon that looks like:
noun(singular,noun(pizza)) --> [pizza].

Taking out the case agreement and all that you''d get something like:
S -> NP VP
NP -> Pronoun | Name | Noun
VP -> VP NP
PP -> Preposition NP

That''s part of the grammar for E1 that i think you can find in the AIMA book (ick) or look up on their Web site (aima.cs.berkeley.edu)

Not sure if that was what you were looking for

As for the context stuff, i believe most NLP work treats English as a CFG because it''s easier than writing context-sensitive and recursively enumerable grammars. i don''t know - it was never a big interest of mine and i''m surprised i remember this much

-baylor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites