<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="P81-1013">
  <Title>A GRAMMAR AND A LEXICON FOR A TEXT-PRODUCTION SYSTEM</Title>
  <Section position="10" start_page="53" end_page="54" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
5. CONCLUSION
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> I have discus.s~l a gremmm&amp;quot; and a lexicon for PENMAN in two steps.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> F~rst I looked at them a~ independent components -- the semantic entry, the grammar and the syntactic entry -- and then, after identifying the problems of integrating them into a system, I tumed to strategies for re!sting the grammar to the conceptual representation and the syntactic entry to the semantic one within the lexicon.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> and the systemic notation and indicated how their design features can be Out to good use in PENMAN. For instance, the distinction between intension and exten*on in the knowledge representation makes it I~OS.~ble to let iexical semantic~ be part of the conceptuals. It was also suggested that the relations SuberC.,at~gory and Indivlduates can be to find expre~-~ions for a particular concept.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> The second steO attempted to connect the grammar to semantics through the notion of the choice expel, making use of a design principle of systemic grammars where the notion of choice is taken as ba~c. I pointed out the correlation between the structure of a concept and the notion of structure in the systemic framework and allowed how the two can be matched in a lexical entry and in the generation of a sentence, a slrstegy that could be adopted because of the multl.funotional nature of structure in systemic grammars. This second step has been at the same time an attempt to start exploring the potential of a combination of a KL-ONE like representation and a Sy~emic Grammar.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> Although many ~%oects have had to be left out of the discussion, there are s number of issues that are of linguistic interest and significance. The most basic one is perhal~ the task itself:, designing * model where a grammar and a lexicon can actually be mate to function as more than just structure generators. One issue reiatat to this that has been brought uD was that different ~ external to the grammar find resonance in different I=ari~ of the grammar and that there is a partial correlation between tim conceptual structure of the knowleclge reOresentation and the grammar and lexicon.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> AS was empha.~zacl in the introduction, PENMAN is at the design stage: there is a working sentence generator, but the other 8.qDect~ of what has been di$cut~tecl have not been imDlement~l and there is no commitment yet to a frozen design. Naturally, a large number of problems still await their solution, even at the level of design and, cleerly, many of them will have to wait. For example, selectivity among terms, beyond referential acleC/luacy, is not adclressecl.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> In general, while noting correlations between linguistic organization and conceptual organization, we do not want the relation tO be deterministic: part of being a good varbaiizar is being able to adopt different viewpoints -- verbalize the same knowledge in different ways.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="8"> This is clearly an ares for future research. Hopefully, ideas such as grammars organized around choice and cl~oice experts will ;)rove useful tools in working out extensions.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>