<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="W06-1512">
  <Title>Semantic Interpretation of Unrealized Syntactic Material in LTAG</Title>
  <Section position="3" start_page="0" end_page="0" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
1 Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The problem of ellipsis resolution is to recover the interpretation of the elided material. For example, in (1), the elided VP is interpreted as being identical to the verb in the preceding sentence. Likewise, in the gapping structures, as shown in (2), the interpretation of a gap is being identified with the interpretation of the preceding verb.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1">  (1) Mary likes Bill. Jane does too.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> (2) Mary ate beans and others -- rice.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3">  Whereas some approaches assume syntactic identity between the antecedent and the elided material (e.g. Fiengo and May 1994), others suggest that VP ellipsises are proforms, semantically identified with their antecedents (see Dalrymple et al 1991, Shieber et al 1996, Hardt 1993, 1999).</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> This paper follows semantic approaches to ellipsis resolution. It adopts the LTAG semantics of Kallmeyer and Romero 2004 and proposes that resolution of ellipsises and gaps is part of a general disambiguation procedure, which is also responsible for resolution of underspecified representations of scope.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>