pith. sign in

arxiv: cmp-lg/9505034 · v1 · submitted 1995-05-16 · cmp-lg · cs.CL

Semantic Ambiguity and Perceived Ambiguity

classification cmp-lg cs.CL
keywords ambiguitylanguageformalizationissuesliteraturesemanticsomeunderspecification
0
0 comments X p. Extension
read the original abstract

I explore some of the issues that arise when trying to establish a connection between the underspecification hypothesis pursued in the NLP literature and work on ambiguity in semantics and in the psychological literature. A theory of underspecification is developed `from the first principles', i.e., starting from a definition of what it means for a sentence to be semantically ambiguous and from what we know about the way humans deal with ambiguity. An underspecified language is specified as the translation language of a grammar covering sentences that display three classes of semantic ambiguity: lexical ambiguity, scopal ambiguity, and referential ambiguity. The expressions of this language denote sets of senses. A formalization of defeasible reasoning with underspecified representations is presented, based on Default Logic. Some issues to be confronted by such a formalization are discussed.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. 3D Instruction Ambiguity Detection

    cs.AI 2026-01 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    Defines 3D Instruction Ambiguity Detection as a new task, releases the Ambi3D benchmark, shows state-of-the-art 3D LLMs struggle with it, and proposes the AmbiVer framework that gathers multi-view visual evidence to g...