From c486cebadaaf3b3a694bb141eb66ae96f6591b1f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Jim Pryor Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 07:57:05 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] reader: tweaking markup Signed-off-by: Jim Pryor --- reader_monad.mdwn | 31 ++++++++++++++++--------------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/reader_monad.mdwn b/reader_monad.mdwn index 1cd8e900..a246e4fe 100644 --- a/reader_monad.mdwn +++ b/reader_monad.mdwn @@ -194,21 +194,22 @@ I guess you haven't you been paying close enough attention, or you don't have mu In Heim and Kratzer's textbook Semantics in Generative Grammar, the interpretation of complex phrases like \[[interprets complex phrases]] are trees that look like this: - -> VP -> / \ -> / \ -> / \ -> / \ -> / \ -> / NP -> / / \ -> / / \ -> V / \ -> | / \ -> \[[interprets]] AP N -> / \ | -> \[[complex]] \[[phrases]] +
+ VP + / \ + / \ + / \ + / \ + / \ + / NP + / / \ + / / \ + V / \ + | / \ +\[[interprets]] AP N + / \ | + \[[complex]] \[[phrases]] +
Now the normal way in which the nodes of such trees are related to each other is that the semantic value of a parent node is the result of applying the functional value of one of the daughter nodes to the value of the other daughter node. (The types determine which side is the function and which side is the argument.) One exception to this general rule is when multiple adjectives are joined together, as happens in \[[interprets complex English phrases]]. We'll ignore that though. -- 2.11.0