Temporal Reasoning from Lexical Semantics

  • Sabine Bergler
  • James Pustejovsky
Conference paper
Part of the Informatik-Fachberichte book series (INFORMATIK, volume 238)


In this paper we discuss the problem of extracting, ordering, and verifying events in the semantic interpretation of text. In particular, we propose a structurally-oriented temporal reasoning mechanism that draws on the linguistic and discourse structure of a text, yet behaves according to fairly simple, independent structural principles of composition.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Allen, James, 1983. Maintaining Knowledge About Temporal Intervals. Communications of the ACM 26 (1983).Google Scholar
  2. Allen, James and P.J. Hayes, 1985. A Commonsense Theory of Time. In: Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence 1985, Los Angeles, Ca.Google Scholar
  3. Dowty,David R., 1986. The Effects of Aspectual Class on the Temporal Structure of Discourse: Semantics or Pragmatics? In: Linguistics and Philosophy 9, Reidel, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  4. Grosz, B J. and Candice L. Sidner, 1986. Attention, Intentions, and the Structure of Discourse. Computational Linguistics 1986 (3).Google Scholar
  5. Hayes, P.J., 1979. The Naive Physics Manifesto. In: D. Michie(ed), Expert Systems in the Microelectronic Age. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  6. Hinrichs, Erhard, 1986. Temporal Anaphora in Discourses of English. In: Linguistics and Philosophy 9, Reidel, North-Holland.Google Scholar
  7. Hobbs, Jerry R., 1982. Towards an Understanding of Coherence in Discourse. In: Lehnert and Ringle (eds): Strategies for Natural Language Processing, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  8. Hobbs, Jerry R., 1985. Ontological Promiscuity. In: Proceedings of the 23th meeting of die Association for Computational Linguistics, Chicago.Google Scholar
  9. Hobbs, Jerry et al., 1987.Commonsense Metaphysics and Lexical Semantics. Computational Linguistics 1987 (3–4).Google Scholar
  10. Hobbs, Jerry et al.,1988. The TACITUS Knowledge Base. SRI Technical Report.Google Scholar
  11. Kamp, Hans and Christian Rohrer, 1981. Tense in Texts. In Bäuerle,Schwarz and Stechow (eds): Meaning, use and interpretation of language, Berlin 1983.Google Scholar
  12. McDermott, D.V., 1982. A Temporal Logic for Reasoning About Processes and Plans. Cognitive Science 6 (1982).Google Scholar
  13. Polanyi, Livia, 1987. Keeping it all straight: interpreting narrative time in real discourse, In: Proceedings of WCCFL87, University of Arizona, p229–246Google Scholar
  14. Pustejovsky, James, 1988a. Type Coercion. Manuscript. Brandeis University.Google Scholar
  15. Pustejovsky, James, 1988b. Event Semantic Structure. Brandeis Technical Report. Brandeis University.Google Scholar
  16. Pustejovsky, James and Sabine Bergler, in preparation. Temporal Designators and the Liveness of Properties. Submission to ACL 1989.Google Scholar
  17. Scha, Remko and Livia Polanyi, 1988. An Augmented Context Free Grammar for Discourse. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, August 1988, Budapest, HungaryGoogle Scholar
  18. Schank, R. and R. Abelson,1977. Scripts Plans Goals and Understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associatess.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Webber, Bonnie, 1987. The Interpretation of Tense in Discourse. Proceedings of the 25th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Stanford University, Stanford, California 1987.Google Scholar
  20. Webber, Bonnie, 1988. Tense as Discourse Anaphora. Computational Linguistics 1988 (1).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sabine Bergler
    • 1
  • James Pustejovsky
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentBrandeis UniversityWalthamUSA

Personalised recommendations