<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C88-1037">
  <Title>Expressing quantifier scope in French generation</Title>
  <Section position="5" start_page="183" end_page="183" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
8 Conclusions
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> We have shown how quantification scope can be expressed in a natural and precise way in French generation. We have insisted on two important aspects: selecting sentence structure and determiners. We have also shown some limitations of natural language expression of quantifier scope. In some cases input :nessage restructuring can solve the problem but in others we reach the intrinsic limits of natural language.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The methodology we propose is, at the time of writing, being implemented in the French generator HermSs. Further detail on our method (including a discussion of the interaction of quantifier scope with negation) can be found in/Gailly 88/.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> As further conclusions we will now consider two possible extensions to our approach and a possible application to understanding: null * Application to other languages. We have not studied this problem in detail but we are convinced that correct quantifier scope expression for other languages will have to consider both the influence of sentence structure and of determiner choice. The set of default scope rules will have to be adapted to account for the syntax of the language.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> The reinforcement mechanism will have to incorporate the determiners available in the particular language.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> * Application to domains where a precise expression is not required. In our approach we provide obvious indications of quantifier scope; this leads to a precise style compatible with the target applications. In other domains, a weaker expression might be required, that is reinforcement should not be used whenever the quantifier scope is obvious from the context. Our method could still be used but the reinforcement mechanism would only be invoked whenever the lack of reinforcement would produce an ambiguous senfence, This kind of decision would be taken by an expert module using pragmatic knowledge as well as a complete domain and discourse model.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> * Use of our heuristics in scoping algorithms for parsing. The algorithm proposed by/Hobbs &amp; Shieber 87/, for example, produces all possible scopings consistent with the logical structure of English. As the authors suggest, this algorithm can be extended in order to produce scopings in decreasing order of plausibility: our default scope rules could be used as syntactic and order rules. Our observation of the dominating effect of some determiners could also be used as lexical rules but the authors consider that lexical rules are difficult to integrate in their algorithm.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>