These constructs correspond as directly as possible to properties of the linguistic structure that express them and are , to as small an extent as possible , dependent on the requirements of contextual resolution ( unlike , say , the metavariables of standard QLFs [ Alshawi and Crouch 1992 ] , or the labels of UDRS [ Reyle 1996 ] , which are motivated entirely by the mechanisms that operate on them after grammatical processing ) .
monotonic semantic interpretation
Hiyan Alshawi Richard Crouch
What is required is that QLFs are , as here , expressed in a typed higher-order logic , augmented with constructs representing the interpretation of context-dependent elements ( pronouns , ellipsis , focus , etc. ) . These constructs correspond as directly as possible to properties of the linguistic structure that express them and are , to as small an extent as possible , dependent on the requirements of contextual resolution ( unlike , say , the metavariables of standard QLFs [ Alshawi and Crouch 1992 ] , or the labels of UDRS [ Reyle 1996 ] , which are motivated entirely by the mechanisms that operate on them after grammatical processing ) . Syntactic properties relevant for binding constraints , parallelism , scope constraints , and so on , are not directly represented at QLF ( again unlike standard QLFs ) but are assumed to be available as components of the linguistic context . '
These constructs correspond as directly as possible to properties of the linguistic structure that express them and are , to as small an extent as possible , dependent on the requirements of contextual resolution ( unlike , say , the metavariables of standard QLFs [ @@CITATION ] , or the labels of UDRS [ Reyle 1996 ] , which are motivated entirely by the mechanisms that operate on them after grammatical processing ) .