Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
R. Carnap (1952)
Meaning postulatesPhilosophical Studies, 3
(1952)
Meaning Postulates. Philosophical Studies 3: 65-73
S. Kanger, S. Öhman (1981)
Philosophy and Grammar
P. Johnson-Laird (1983)
Mental Models : Towards a Cognitive Science of Language
(1993)
Philosophy and Grammar, 59-78
(1987)
Two Aspects of Lexical Competence
A. Rosenfeld (1988)
Computer VisionScience, 253 5025
P. Johnson-Laird (1983)
Mental Models
H. Putnam (1980)
Models and realityJournal of Symbolic Logic, 45
W. Quine (1969)
Ontological Relativity and Other Essays
R. Montague (1975)
ENGLISH AS A FORMAL LANGUAGE
A. Herskovits (1986)
Language and Spatial Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Study of the Prepositions in English
A. Rosenfeld (1988)
Advances in Computer
(1991)
Understanding and Reference
R. Montague (1970)
Formal Philosophy
B. Partee (1980)
Montague Grammar, Mental Representations, and Reality
S. Harnad (1990)
The Symbol Grounding ProblemPhysica, D
Artificial Intelligence Review 10: 15-20, 1996. © 1996 Kluwer Academic Publishers. Printed in the Netherlands. Work on the Integration of Language and Vision at the University of Torino DIEGO MARCONI Facoltg: di Lettei'e e Filosofia, Palazzo Tartara, V. G. Ferraris 109, 13100 Vercelli, Italy, and Center for Cognitive Science, Via Lagrange 3, 10123 Torino, Italy, E.U. E-mail: erme@rs950.cisi.unito.it 1. THE PROBLEM OF LEXICAL SEMANTICS For us, the idea of an integration of artificial vision with natural-language pro- cessing grew out of reflections on the inadequacy of model-theoretic semantics as a theory of meaning. Belief-contexts and propositional attitudes in general are commonly regarded as the main stumbling block for theories in the model- theoretic tradition: no such theory seems capable of yielding the right truth-conditions for sentences like 'X believes that p', 'X wonders whether p' etc. However, another source of trouble has been highlighted since the early '80s (see Partee 1981), having to do with the lexical component, or rather the lack of a full-fledged lexical component in model-theoretic semantic theories. It can be argued that no semantic theory is complete (or indeed worth its name) without some account of lexical meaning. It is not enough for a semantic
Artificial Intelligence Review – Springer Journals
Published: Jun 24, 2004
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.