汉语量化结构的形式分析
|
摘要
二战后,伴随着计算机科学的发展,产生了用机器处理自然语言的实际需要。理论计算机科学的成熟使得对自然语言的形式语义学研究在上个世纪70年代后登上了美国语言学界的舞台,并很快辐射到欧洲。众所周知,自然语言是包含歧义的语言,机器处理必须制定严格的元语言规范,这部分工作与语义学和句法学的界面有密切关系。在我国,80年代末已经有学者尝试用现代逻辑方法研究自然语言,此后通过引介,现代的形式语义学方法开始在语言学界有了更多的运用。但由于学科间的隔阂和研究传统的影响,形式语义学目前在国内仍停留在较为新鲜和陌生的状态。
自然语言的形式语义学是舶来品,过去的研究都侧重于对国外研究成果的引入,关注的语言现象也大多是英语。本文在延续这一传统的同时,力图做到某些突破,就是能把形式语义学的一些理论结果应用于汉语语义的研究中,并以汉语实际面临的问题为导向,构造一个较为完整的汉语部分语句系统。该部分语句系统聚焦于汉语丰富的“广义量化结构”上。在这方面,前辈学者利用结构主义或认知语言学的方法取得了丰硕的成果,形式语义学中蒙太格语法包含的广义量词思想恰好可以作为一个合适的工具处理这些问题。实际上论文所用到的不仅仅是蒙太格语法和广义量词这样的工具。在对自然语言语义的研究中,笔者还发现了事件语义和可能世界语义学复合的作用,它们都适合表示自然语言语义的一个侧面。笔者在讨论汉语量化意义跨句子照应的问题上还考虑了语篇的作用,这涉及运用动态广义量词的思想。
在绪论中,我们界定了研究对象“自然语言的量化结构”,并介绍了研究的工具和方法。第二章介绍了蒙太格语法体现的广义量词思想,为部分语句系统的建立做了铺垫。第三章建立了这个部分语句系统,对汉语量化表达式的生成我们采取了量化嵌入的方法,这是为了避免在句法上涉及转换。本章探讨了构造汉语部分语句系统的难点,并且提出:根据汉语句式多变的实际情况,需要利用特殊的计算模型并建立一部“句式词典”。本章提出了利用LR方法中的状态转移给出主要动词语义的方法,这吸收了句式语义学的主要观点。第四章探讨了该系统在深入研究汉语量化表达式方面可能的扩展。在汉语名词性量化短语的形式语义分析中引入了半格语义,通过格语义把汉语的量化表达式按量化限定范围的差异分成“种类”、“子类”、“复数”、“单数”四大类。在汉语中光杆名词有着非常复杂的歧义现象,本章除了描写这种歧义外还研究了如何排除这种歧义的方法。半格语义与量化结构中的几个专题密切相关,在这一章中笔者深化了对汉语中聚合和分配问题的研究。接着,笔者介绍了一种包含同态内核的半格,以刻画个体和质料的差别。最后,利用半格语义解决两个问题:“多中心词问题”和“部分性难题”。第五章是对汉语中动量词、时量词和度量词的形式描写。在这一章中引入了事件这个本体作为可能世界语义学的补充。在形式语言学的研究传统里,这部分属于修饰语量化的研究,它是广义量词理论的一个专题性的分枝,因此本章梳理了该项研究的背景,并构造了新的动态量词的解释方法。在这一章中引入了与上一章中“个体——质料”代数相对应的“事件——过程”代数,并对这种语义模型做了应用。第六章是对所有量化结构计算的一个总结,其中我们着重探讨了第三章中遗留的一个问题:词汇树特别是不连续结构的识别和计算。该章利用和发展了Cooper储存的方法,尝试解决大量跟不连续结构有关的语义学问题:如“的”字结构的计算问题,不可化归的广义量词的计算以及广义量词辖域的排歧。
After the second World War,the development of computer science urged the need and practice of natural language processing(NLP).The mature and prosperity of the theoretic computer science led the formal semantics of the natural language on the stage of American linguistics in the late 1970s,whose influence was brought to Europe at an unexpected quick pace,As is well known,the natural language has much more ambiguity than the artificial language such as the program language.Adopting machine to process the natural language requires a set of strict meta-language rules,which are closely related to the interface between semantics and syntactics.At home,Wang Weixian and others(1989) and Chen Zongming(1993) began to study natural language by the methods of modern logic at the end of the 1980s.Later the theory and practice of formal semantics were introduced to China.Unfortunately it still remains as an area in which few Chinese scholars touch because of the difference between traditional research method and the new school.
Since the study of natural language from the perspective of formal semantics is of strong foreign origin,the literature underlines the introduction of foreign theories and practices,with English as the target of study.The thesis cherishes this tradition,on the basis of which a breakthrough is expected.The author wants to apply the formal semantics to the study of the Chinese language and tries to construct a fragment system of Chinese with the practical problems Chinese faces as the guideline.The system focuses on the abundant resources of "generalized quantified structure",which are well examined by many scholars who start from the perspective of structuralism or cognitive linguistics.The GQT(generalized quantifier theory) in formal semantics functions as a practical tool to deal with the quantification in the language.The thesis also finds the unification function of the possible world semantics and event semantics,both of them being suitable for presenting one profile of the natural language semantics.When taking generalized quantifier binding variables in two or more than two sentences as a problem,we introduce the dynamic generalized quantifier.
In the chapter one,I defined the term "generalized quantified structure",which is the main object of my research.There's also a concise survey of the research about the tool and method. The second chapter is the introduction part,which explains the GQT and its application in the Montague grammar.This chapter functions as the basis for the following chapters.The third chapter sets up a fragment system.Based the system,and the author points out a number of peculiar difficulties that one may face in constructing the system.These difficulties concern the real conditions of the Chinese syntactic and require certain computing model.In coping with the meaning combination of the generalized quantifiers,the author uses the method of Quantify In to avoid transformation in syntactic.In this chapter,the main verb's logical translation could be dicided by the state of LR algorithm,which absorb the point of the theory of constructional meaning.The fourth chapter examines the quantified Chinese noun phrases. The semantics of semi-lattice is introduced,through which the Chinese quantification are classified into four types on the standard of quantified object:classes,subclasses,plurals and singulars.The Chinese bare nouns have very complicated phenomena of ambiguity,the thesis describes the ambiguity caused by bare nouns and seeks the way to resolve the ambiguity.The issues in the semantics of semi-lattice are closely related to each other and the chapter deepens the problem of collection and distribution in the Chinese language.The chapter also introduces a semi-lattice which includes kernel of homomophism to distinguish the difference between individual and mass.The utility of semantics of semi-lattice can solve the problem of hydra and that of partitive puzzle.The fifth chapter is a formal depict of the Chinese verb-measure words,time-measure words and measure words.The concept of ontology of events is introduced as a supplementary to the possible world semantics.In the traditions of the formal linguistics,ontology of events belong in the research area of adverb quantification,which is a branch of GQT.The author sort out the background of the very research and construct a new interpretation for dynamic quantifiers.In the fifth chapter event-process algebra is introduced as a contrast to individual-stuff algebra,and I applied this semantic model to linguistical problem.The sixth chapter is a summary for the computation of quantification.The author reviews a puzzle unsolved in the second chapter:the recognition and computation of the compound structure,especially those of the cleft structure.Cooper storage is utilized and developed to solve semantic problems associated with Discontinuous Constituency,for example the computation of the structure with "de",the computation of unreducible generalized quantifiers.In the end of this chapter,the author support a dynamic tactic to resolve ambiguity in the scope of generalized quantifiers.
自然语言的形式语义学是舶来品,过去的研究都侧重于对国外研究成果的引入,关注的语言现象也大多是英语。本文在延续这一传统的同时,力图做到某些突破,就是能把形式语义学的一些理论结果应用于汉语语义的研究中,并以汉语实际面临的问题为导向,构造一个较为完整的汉语部分语句系统。该部分语句系统聚焦于汉语丰富的“广义量化结构”上。在这方面,前辈学者利用结构主义或认知语言学的方法取得了丰硕的成果,形式语义学中蒙太格语法包含的广义量词思想恰好可以作为一个合适的工具处理这些问题。实际上论文所用到的不仅仅是蒙太格语法和广义量词这样的工具。在对自然语言语义的研究中,笔者还发现了事件语义和可能世界语义学复合的作用,它们都适合表示自然语言语义的一个侧面。笔者在讨论汉语量化意义跨句子照应的问题上还考虑了语篇的作用,这涉及运用动态广义量词的思想。
在绪论中,我们界定了研究对象“自然语言的量化结构”,并介绍了研究的工具和方法。第二章介绍了蒙太格语法体现的广义量词思想,为部分语句系统的建立做了铺垫。第三章建立了这个部分语句系统,对汉语量化表达式的生成我们采取了量化嵌入的方法,这是为了避免在句法上涉及转换。本章探讨了构造汉语部分语句系统的难点,并且提出:根据汉语句式多变的实际情况,需要利用特殊的计算模型并建立一部“句式词典”。本章提出了利用LR方法中的状态转移给出主要动词语义的方法,这吸收了句式语义学的主要观点。第四章探讨了该系统在深入研究汉语量化表达式方面可能的扩展。在汉语名词性量化短语的形式语义分析中引入了半格语义,通过格语义把汉语的量化表达式按量化限定范围的差异分成“种类”、“子类”、“复数”、“单数”四大类。在汉语中光杆名词有着非常复杂的歧义现象,本章除了描写这种歧义外还研究了如何排除这种歧义的方法。半格语义与量化结构中的几个专题密切相关,在这一章中笔者深化了对汉语中聚合和分配问题的研究。接着,笔者介绍了一种包含同态内核的半格,以刻画个体和质料的差别。最后,利用半格语义解决两个问题:“多中心词问题”和“部分性难题”。第五章是对汉语中动量词、时量词和度量词的形式描写。在这一章中引入了事件这个本体作为可能世界语义学的补充。在形式语言学的研究传统里,这部分属于修饰语量化的研究,它是广义量词理论的一个专题性的分枝,因此本章梳理了该项研究的背景,并构造了新的动态量词的解释方法。在这一章中引入了与上一章中“个体——质料”代数相对应的“事件——过程”代数,并对这种语义模型做了应用。第六章是对所有量化结构计算的一个总结,其中我们着重探讨了第三章中遗留的一个问题:词汇树特别是不连续结构的识别和计算。该章利用和发展了Cooper储存的方法,尝试解决大量跟不连续结构有关的语义学问题:如“的”字结构的计算问题,不可化归的广义量词的计算以及广义量词辖域的排歧。
After the second World War,the development of computer science urged the need and practice of natural language processing(NLP).The mature and prosperity of the theoretic computer science led the formal semantics of the natural language on the stage of American linguistics in the late 1970s,whose influence was brought to Europe at an unexpected quick pace,As is well known,the natural language has much more ambiguity than the artificial language such as the program language.Adopting machine to process the natural language requires a set of strict meta-language rules,which are closely related to the interface between semantics and syntactics.At home,Wang Weixian and others(1989) and Chen Zongming(1993) began to study natural language by the methods of modern logic at the end of the 1980s.Later the theory and practice of formal semantics were introduced to China.Unfortunately it still remains as an area in which few Chinese scholars touch because of the difference between traditional research method and the new school.
Since the study of natural language from the perspective of formal semantics is of strong foreign origin,the literature underlines the introduction of foreign theories and practices,with English as the target of study.The thesis cherishes this tradition,on the basis of which a breakthrough is expected.The author wants to apply the formal semantics to the study of the Chinese language and tries to construct a fragment system of Chinese with the practical problems Chinese faces as the guideline.The system focuses on the abundant resources of "generalized quantified structure",which are well examined by many scholars who start from the perspective of structuralism or cognitive linguistics.The GQT(generalized quantifier theory) in formal semantics functions as a practical tool to deal with the quantification in the language.The thesis also finds the unification function of the possible world semantics and event semantics,both of them being suitable for presenting one profile of the natural language semantics.When taking generalized quantifier binding variables in two or more than two sentences as a problem,we introduce the dynamic generalized quantifier.
In the chapter one,I defined the term "generalized quantified structure",which is the main object of my research.There's also a concise survey of the research about the tool and method. The second chapter is the introduction part,which explains the GQT and its application in the Montague grammar.This chapter functions as the basis for the following chapters.The third chapter sets up a fragment system.Based the system,and the author points out a number of peculiar difficulties that one may face in constructing the system.These difficulties concern the real conditions of the Chinese syntactic and require certain computing model.In coping with the meaning combination of the generalized quantifiers,the author uses the method of Quantify In to avoid transformation in syntactic.In this chapter,the main verb's logical translation could be dicided by the state of LR algorithm,which absorb the point of the theory of constructional meaning.The fourth chapter examines the quantified Chinese noun phrases. The semantics of semi-lattice is introduced,through which the Chinese quantification are classified into four types on the standard of quantified object:classes,subclasses,plurals and singulars.The Chinese bare nouns have very complicated phenomena of ambiguity,the thesis describes the ambiguity caused by bare nouns and seeks the way to resolve the ambiguity.The issues in the semantics of semi-lattice are closely related to each other and the chapter deepens the problem of collection and distribution in the Chinese language.The chapter also introduces a semi-lattice which includes kernel of homomophism to distinguish the difference between individual and mass.The utility of semantics of semi-lattice can solve the problem of hydra and that of partitive puzzle.The fifth chapter is a formal depict of the Chinese verb-measure words,time-measure words and measure words.The concept of ontology of events is introduced as a supplementary to the possible world semantics.In the traditions of the formal linguistics,ontology of events belong in the research area of adverb quantification,which is a branch of GQT.The author sort out the background of the very research and construct a new interpretation for dynamic quantifiers.In the fifth chapter event-process algebra is introduced as a contrast to individual-stuff algebra,and I applied this semantic model to linguistical problem.The sixth chapter is a summary for the computation of quantification.The author reviews a puzzle unsolved in the second chapter:the recognition and computation of the compound structure,especially those of the cleft structure.Cooper storage is utilized and developed to solve semantic problems associated with Discontinuous Constituency,for example the computation of the structure with "de",the computation of unreducible generalized quantifiers.In the end of this chapter,the author support a dynamic tactic to resolve ambiguity in the scope of generalized quantifiers.
引文
白硕(1995),语言学知识的计算机辅助发现,科学出版社。
蔡曙山(1998),言语行为和语用逻辑,中国社会科学出版社。
曹逢甫(2004),汉语的句子与子句结构,北京语言大学出版社。
陈嘉映 译(2002),哲学中的语言学,华夏出版社。
陈平(1987),释汉语中与名词性成分相关的四组概念,中国语文,第2期。
陈宗明 主编(1993),汉语逻辑概论,人民出版社。
储泽祥(2005)肯定、否定与时量成分在汉语动词前后的位置,汉语学报,第4期。
丁声树(1961),现代汉语语法讲话,商务印书馆。
方立(2000),逻辑语义学,北京语言文化大学出版社。
方梅(1993),宾语与动量词语的次序问题,中国语文,第1期。
冯志伟(1995)论歧义结构的潜在性,中文信息学报,第4期。
弗雷格(1891),函数和概念,弗雷格哲学论著选辑,王路译,2001,商务印书馆。
何宏华(2007),汉语量词辖域与逻辑式,语文出版社。
黄华新(2000),逻辑与自然语言理解,吉林人民出版社。
黄正德(1983),汉语生成语法--汉语中的逻辑关系及语法理论,宁春岩、侯方、张达三译,黑龙江大学科研处出版。
蒋严,潘海华(2005),形式语义学引论,中国社会科学出版社。
靳光瑾(2001),现代汉语动词语义计算,北京大学出版社。
金顺德(1994),蒙塔古语法,当代西方语法理论,俞如珍、金顺德编著,上海外语教育出版社,366-405。
[美]肯耐斯(2000),编译原理及实践,冯博琴等译,机械工业出版社。
刘街生(2003)现代汉语动量词的语义特征分析,语言研究,第2期。
陆俭明(1981)修饰数量词的副词,语言教学与研究,第1期。
陆俭明(1988)程度副词在表示程度比较的句式中的分布情况的考察,世界汉语教学,1988年第2期。
陆俭明(2003)语义在自然语言处理中的作用,中文信息处理若干重要问题,徐波、孙茂松、靳光瑾主编,科学出版社,71-77。
陆俭明、马真(2003)关于时间副词;“的”字结构和“所”字结构,现代汉语虚词散论,语文出版社。
吕叔湘 主编(2003),现代汉语八百词,商务印书馆。
马庆株(1981)时量宾语和动词的类,中国语文,第2期。
马庆株(1983)现代汉语的双宾语构造,语言学论丛第十辑,商务印书馆。
马庆株(1984)动词后面时量成分与名词的先后次序,语言学论丛第十三辑,商务印书馆。
马庆株(1988)自主动词和非自主动词,中国语言学报,第三期。
麦考莱,J.D.(1998)语言逻辑分析,王维贤、徐颂列等译,杭州大学出版社。
沈复兴(1995),模型论导引,北京师范大学出版社。
沈家煊(1985),词序与辖域--英汉比较,语言教学与研究,第1期。
沈家煊(1995),有界和无界,中国语文,第5期。
沈家煊(1999),转指和转喻,当代语言学,第1期。
沈家煊(2000),句式和配价,中国语文,第4期。
施春宏(2008),汉语动结式的句法语义研究,北京语言文化大学出版社。
邵敬敏(1996),动量词的语义分析及其与动词的选择关系,中国语文,第2期。
沈阳(1994),现代汉语空语类研究,山东教育出版社。
石定栩(2000),汉语句法的灵活性和句法理论,当代语言学,第1期。
石定栩(2002),乔姆斯基的形式句法--历史进程与最新理论,北京语言文化大学出版社。
石毓智(2002),论汉语的结构意义和词汇标记之关系--有定和无定范畴对汉语句法结构的影响,当代语言学,第1期。
石毓智(2003)汉语的“数”范畴与“有定”范畴之关系,语言研究,第2期。
屈承熹(1976),汉语的“定指”、“预设”、“主题”与“焦点”,汉语中的预设和量化,汤廷池等编,台湾学生书局。
王维贤、李先焜、陈宗明(1989),语言逻辑引论,湖北教育出版社。
吴平(2004),含有量化名词词组的及物性结构的语义分析及其在自然语言处理中的实现问题,语言科学,第1期。
吴平(2007),句式语义的形式分析与计算,北京语言大学出版社。
徐杰(2004),普遍语法原则与汉语句法现象,北京大学出版社。
徐烈炯(1988),生成语法理论,上海外语教育出版社。
徐烈炯、刘丹青(2007),话题的结构和功能,上海教育出版社。
徐颂烈(1998),现代汉语总括表达式研究,浙江教育出版社。
徐通锵(1997a),有定性范畴和语言的语法研究--语义句法再议,语言研究,第1期。
徐通锵(1997b),语言论--语义型语言的结构原理和研究方法,东北师范大学出版社。
薛小英(2006),量词提升与辖域解释,当代语言学,第3期。
杨春雷(2004),汉语量化词辖域的约束条件系统,现代外语,第27卷第3期。
姚双云 储泽祥(2003)汉语动词后时量、动量、名量成分不同现情况考察,语言科学,第5期。
俞士汶 主编(2003),计算语言学概论,商务印书馆。
袁毓林(1998),汉语动词的配价研究,江西教育出版社。
袁毓林(2005),“都”的加合性语义功能及其分配性效应,当代语言学,第4期。
邹崇理(1995),逻辑、语言和蒙太格语法,社会科学文献出版社。
邹崇理(2002),逻辑、语言和信息--逻辑语法研究,人民出版社。
邹崇理(2003),刻画量化结构及其推理的汉语部分语句系统,西南师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),第29卷第3期。
邹崇理(2007)关于非连续量词的类型--逻辑语义处理,浙江社会科学,第2期。
詹卫东(1999)一个汉语语义知识框架:广义配价模式,计算语言学文集,黄昌宁,董振东主编,全国第五界计算语言学联合会议。
詹卫东(2000),面向中文信息处理的现代汉语短语结构规则研究,清华大学出版社、广西科学技术出版社。
张红欣(2006)20世纪80年代以来汉语动量词研究,南京师范大学学报,第3期。
张炯(2008),利用储存器计算非连续结构,哈尔滨工业大学学报(社科版),第5期。
张乔(1998),广义量词理论及其对模糊量词的应用,当代语言学,第2期。
赵元任(1968)中国话的文法,加利福尼亚大学出版社。
周北海、毛翌(2005),常识推理的形式刻画,哲学动态2005年增刊。
周礼全主编(1994),逻辑--正确思维和有效交际的理论,人民出版社。
周小兵(1997),动宾组合带时量词语的句式,语言教学与研究,第4期。
朱德熙(1980a)汉语句法里的歧义现象,中国语文,第2期。
朱德熙(1980b)现代汉语语法研究,商务印书馆。
朱德熙(1982)语法讲义,商务印书馆。
朱德熙(1999)朱德熙文集:第一卷,商务印书馆。
朱德熙、卢甲文、马真(1961),关于动词形容词“名物化”的问题,北京大学学报,人文科学版,第4期。
Aho,V.& Ullman,D.(1972),The Theory of Parsing,Translation and Compling,Vol 1.Englewood Cliffs,Prentice Hall,Inc.
Allen,J.(1995),Natrural Language Understanding(2~(nd) edition ).Benjamin/Cum--mings:Menlo Park.California.
Allen,J.(2005),自然语言理解,刘群等译,电子工业出版社。
Andews(2002),An Introduction to Mathematical Logic and Type Theory:To Truth Through Proof,2~(nd) Edition,Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Aoun,J.& Yen-Hui Li(李艳惠)(1993),Syntax of Scope,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press.
Barwise,J.& R.Cooper(1981),Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language.Linguistics and Philosophy 4:159-219
Bach,E.(1986),The Algebra of Events.Linguistics and Philosophy 9:5-16.
Benthem,van J.(1986),Essays in Logical Semantics.Dordrecht:Reidel.
Benthem,van J.(1987),Towards a Computational Semantics.In General Quantifiers:Lingustic and Logical Approaches.Dordrecht:Reidel,73-91.
Benthem,van J.& ter A.Meulen(eds.)(1997),Handbook of Logic and Language.Amserdam:Elsevier.
Boas,J.(1995),Predicate logic unplugged,In Proceedings of the 10th Amsterdam Colloquium.
Brualdi,R.(1999),Introductory Combinatorics,3~(rd) Edition,Prentice Hall,Inc.
Calson,G.(1977),A Unified Analysis of the English Bare Plural,Linguistics and Philosophy 1:413-457
Calson,G.(1981),Aspects and Quantification,Syntax and Semantics 14.
Chierchia, G. (1990), Anaphora and Dynamic Logic. ILTI Prepublication LP-90-07.University of Amsterdam.
Chierchia, G. & S. McConnell-Ginet(2000), Meaning and Grammar. The MIT Press.
Chierchia, G.& R. Turner(1988), Semantics and Property Theory, Linguistics and Philosophy 11:261-302
Chomsky, N. (1965), Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.(1981), Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Chomsky, N.(1986), Barriers. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Copestake, A., D. Flickinger & LA. Sag (1999), Minimal Recursion Semantics: an introduction. Manuscript. Stanford University.
Cresswell, M. (1976), The Semantics of Degree. In Montague Grammar, ed. B. Partee, Acadamic Press, New York, 261-292.
Cresswell, M.(1978), Adverbs of Space and Time, In Formal Semantics and Pragmatics for Natural Language, ed. F. Guenthner & S. J. Schmidt, Reidel, Dordrecht, 171-199.
De Swart (1993), Adverbs of Quatification: A Generalized Quantifier Approach.
Dowty, D.(1977), Toward a Semantic Analysis of Verb Aspect and the English Imperfective Progressive, Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 45-79.
Dowty, D.(1979), Word Meaning and Montague Grammar, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Fox, C. (1998), Mass Terms and Plurals in Property Theory, In Plurality and Quantification, ed. F. Hamm & Erhard Hinrichs, Kluwer Acadamic Publishers, 113-176.
Fox C., S. Lappin & C. Pollard (2002a), Intensional First-Oder Logic with Types, Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium for Logic and Language.
Fox C., S. Lappin & C. Pollard(2002b), A High-order Fine-Grained Logic for Intensional Semantics, Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium for Logic and Language.
Gallin(1975), Intensional and High-order Modal Logic, North-Holland, Amterdam.
Groenendijk, J. & M. Stokhof(1989), Type-shifting Rules and the Semantics of Inrerrogatives. Properties, Types, and Meaning, vol 2, ed. Chierchia etc. Kluwer, Dordrecht.21-68.
Groenendijk, J. & M. Stokhof(1990), Dynamic Predicate Logic: Towards a Compositional, Non-representational Semantics of Discourse. Linguistics & Philosohy, 13.
Gamut, L.T. F(1991), Logic, Language and Meaning, vol 2, University of Chicago Press.
Huang, C-T. James (黄正德) (1998), Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar[M]. New York/London:: Garland.
Huang, Shi-Zhe (黄师哲) (1996), Quatification and Predication in Mandarin Chinese: a case study of dou. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania
Gratzer, G. (1998), General Lattice Theory, 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Birkhauser.
Heim, I. (1982), The Semantics of Definites and Indefinites. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Heim, I.(1983), File Change Semantics and Familiarity Theory of Definiteness. In Use and Interpretation of Language, ed. R. Bauerle et al. Meaning, Berlin: De Gruyter, 164-189.
Heim, I & A. Krazer.(1998), Semantics in Generative Grammar[M]. Massachusetts: Blackwell.
Henkin, L(1950), Completeness in the Theory of Types, Jounal of Symbolic Logic, 15,81-91.
Higginbotham, J. & R. May (1981), Questions, Quantifiers, and Crossing. The Linguistic Review 1:41-79.
Hintikka, J.(1967), Individuals, Possible worlds, and Epistemic Logic. Nous, 1: 33-62.
Hoepleman, J.& C. Rohrer (1980), On the Mass Count Distinction and the French Imparfait and Passe Simple, in C. Rohrer (ed.), Time, Tense and Aspect, Tuebingen, Niemeyer, pp. 629-645.
Joshi, A. & K. Vijay-Shanker (1999), Compositional Semantics with Lexicalized Tree-Adjoining Grammar: How Much Underspecification is Necessary? In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Computational Semantics.
Kallmeyer L. & A. Joshi (2003), Factoring Predicate Argument and Scope Semantics: Underspecified Semantics with LTAG. Research on Language and Computation 1: 3-58.
Kamp(1981), A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In Truth, Interpretation and Information, ed. Groenendijk, J. & M. Stokhof, Dordrecht, Foris.1-41
Karttunen, L. (1977) , The Syntax and Semantics of Questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1:3-44.
Keenan, E. & J. Stavi (1986), A Semantic Characterization of Natural Language Determiners. Linguistics and Philosophy 9: 253-326
Keenan, E. (1987), Unreducible n-ray Quantifiers in Natural Language. In General Quantifiers: Lingustic and Logical Approaches. Dordrecht: Reidel, 109-150.
Keenan, E. & D. Westerstahl(1995), Generalized Quantifiers in Linguistics and Logic. In Handbook of linguistics and logic, ed. J. van Benthem & A. ter. Meulen. Amserdam: Elsevier.
Knuth, D. (1965),On the Translation of Languages from Left to Right. Information and. Control, 8:607-639.
Knuth, D.(2005), The Art of Computer Programming, Vol4, Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as ADDISON WESLEY.
Kuno, Susumu, Ken-ichi Takami & Yuru Wu (1999), Quantifier Scope in English, Chinese and Japanese, Language 75, 1: 63-111.
Lakoff, G. (1987), Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, R. (1987), Nouns and Verbs, Language Vol. 63, No. 1.
Lewis, D. (1973), Counterfactuals, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Lewis, D.(1975), Adverbs of Qualification. In Formal Semantics of Natural Language, ed. E. Keenan, Cambridge University Press.
Lavin, B. & M. Hovav (1996), Lexical Semantics and Syntactic Structure, In The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, Shalon Lappin, ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996
Lindstrom, P.(1966), First-order Predicate logic with Generalized Quantifiers. Theoria 32: 186-195.
Link, G. (1983), The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: a lattice-theoretical approach. In Use and Interpretation of Language, ed. R. Bauerle et al. Meaning, Berlin: De Gruyter, 302-323.
Lonning, J. T.(1987), Mass Terms and Quantification, Linguistics and Philosophy 10:1-52.
May, R.(1985), Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Mostowski, A. (1957), On a Generalization of Quantifiers. Fundmata Mathematicae 44:12-36
Montague, R. (1970a), English as a formal language
Montague, R.(1970b), Universal grammar In Formal Philosophy, ed. R. Thomason, 1974, Yele University.
Montague, R.(1973), The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English. In Formal
Philosophy. ed. R. Thomason, 1974, Yele University.
Mourelatos, A. (1978), Events, Processes, and States, Linguistics and Philosophy 2: 415-434.
Partee, B. (1973), Some Transformational Extensions of Montague Grammar, Journal of Phi-losophical logic 2.
Partee, B.(1975), Montague Grammar and Transformational Grammar, Linguistic Inquiry 6.
Partee, B.(1979), Constraining Transformational Montague Grammar: a Framework and a Fragment, In Linguistics, Philosophy and Montague Grammar, ed. S. Davis & M. Mithun, Austin: University of Texas Press.
Peter, S. & Ritchie (1971), On Restricting the Base Component of Transformational Grammars. Information Science 18.483-501.
Peter, S. & Ritchie(1973), On the Generative Power Transformational Grammars. Information Science 6.49-83.
Pollard, C & I.A. Sag (1994), Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago, IL: CSLI, University of Chicago Press.
Sher, G.(1990), Ways of Branching Quantifiers, Linguistics and Philosophy 13:393-422.
Teng, Shou-xin (邓守信) (1975), A Semantic Study of Transitivity Relation in Chinese, University of California Press.
Tichy, P. (1988), The Foundation of Frege's Logic, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Tomason, R. & Johnson, jr. (1969), Predicate Calculus with Free Variables. Journal of Symbolic Logic. 34(1).
Tomason, R.(1970), Indeterminist Time and Truth-Value Gaps, Theoria, 36.
Turner, R.(1992), Properties, Propositions and Semantic Theory. In Computational Linguistics and Formal Semantics.Cambridge University Press, 1992, 159-180.
van Eijck(1995), Quantifiers and Partiality, in Quantifiers, Logic and Language, ed. van der Does, J. and van Eijck, J., Stanford: CSLI, 105-144.
van der Does, J. and van Eijck (1995), Quantifiers, Logic and Language, ed. Stanford: CSLI
Vendler, Z(1970), Linguistics in Philosophy, Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Westerstahl, D (1995) Quantifiers in Natural Language: A Survey of Some Recent Work. In M. Krynicki, M. Mostowski, W. Szczerba(eds.) Quantifiers:Logics, Models, Computation. Vol. 1. 359-408, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Wittgenstein, L.(1979)Wittgenstein's Lectures: Cambridge 1932-1935, 49, Totowa,New Jersey:Rowman and Littlefield, 1979.
Wu Jianxin (吴建新) (1999) Syntax and Semantics of Quantification in Chinese, Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland.
Yasuhara, M(1969) The Incompleteness of L_p Language. Fundamenta Mathematicae 66: 147-152.
蔡曙山(1998),言语行为和语用逻辑,中国社会科学出版社。
曹逢甫(2004),汉语的句子与子句结构,北京语言大学出版社。
陈嘉映 译(2002),哲学中的语言学,华夏出版社。
陈平(1987),释汉语中与名词性成分相关的四组概念,中国语文,第2期。
陈宗明 主编(1993),汉语逻辑概论,人民出版社。
储泽祥(2005)肯定、否定与时量成分在汉语动词前后的位置,汉语学报,第4期。
丁声树(1961),现代汉语语法讲话,商务印书馆。
方立(2000),逻辑语义学,北京语言文化大学出版社。
方梅(1993),宾语与动量词语的次序问题,中国语文,第1期。
冯志伟(1995)论歧义结构的潜在性,中文信息学报,第4期。
弗雷格(1891),函数和概念,弗雷格哲学论著选辑,王路译,2001,商务印书馆。
何宏华(2007),汉语量词辖域与逻辑式,语文出版社。
黄华新(2000),逻辑与自然语言理解,吉林人民出版社。
黄正德(1983),汉语生成语法--汉语中的逻辑关系及语法理论,宁春岩、侯方、张达三译,黑龙江大学科研处出版。
蒋严,潘海华(2005),形式语义学引论,中国社会科学出版社。
靳光瑾(2001),现代汉语动词语义计算,北京大学出版社。
金顺德(1994),蒙塔古语法,当代西方语法理论,俞如珍、金顺德编著,上海外语教育出版社,366-405。
[美]肯耐斯(2000),编译原理及实践,冯博琴等译,机械工业出版社。
刘街生(2003)现代汉语动量词的语义特征分析,语言研究,第2期。
陆俭明(1981)修饰数量词的副词,语言教学与研究,第1期。
陆俭明(1988)程度副词在表示程度比较的句式中的分布情况的考察,世界汉语教学,1988年第2期。
陆俭明(2003)语义在自然语言处理中的作用,中文信息处理若干重要问题,徐波、孙茂松、靳光瑾主编,科学出版社,71-77。
陆俭明、马真(2003)关于时间副词;“的”字结构和“所”字结构,现代汉语虚词散论,语文出版社。
吕叔湘 主编(2003),现代汉语八百词,商务印书馆。
马庆株(1981)时量宾语和动词的类,中国语文,第2期。
马庆株(1983)现代汉语的双宾语构造,语言学论丛第十辑,商务印书馆。
马庆株(1984)动词后面时量成分与名词的先后次序,语言学论丛第十三辑,商务印书馆。
马庆株(1988)自主动词和非自主动词,中国语言学报,第三期。
麦考莱,J.D.(1998)语言逻辑分析,王维贤、徐颂列等译,杭州大学出版社。
沈复兴(1995),模型论导引,北京师范大学出版社。
沈家煊(1985),词序与辖域--英汉比较,语言教学与研究,第1期。
沈家煊(1995),有界和无界,中国语文,第5期。
沈家煊(1999),转指和转喻,当代语言学,第1期。
沈家煊(2000),句式和配价,中国语文,第4期。
施春宏(2008),汉语动结式的句法语义研究,北京语言文化大学出版社。
邵敬敏(1996),动量词的语义分析及其与动词的选择关系,中国语文,第2期。
沈阳(1994),现代汉语空语类研究,山东教育出版社。
石定栩(2000),汉语句法的灵活性和句法理论,当代语言学,第1期。
石定栩(2002),乔姆斯基的形式句法--历史进程与最新理论,北京语言文化大学出版社。
石毓智(2002),论汉语的结构意义和词汇标记之关系--有定和无定范畴对汉语句法结构的影响,当代语言学,第1期。
石毓智(2003)汉语的“数”范畴与“有定”范畴之关系,语言研究,第2期。
屈承熹(1976),汉语的“定指”、“预设”、“主题”与“焦点”,汉语中的预设和量化,汤廷池等编,台湾学生书局。
王维贤、李先焜、陈宗明(1989),语言逻辑引论,湖北教育出版社。
吴平(2004),含有量化名词词组的及物性结构的语义分析及其在自然语言处理中的实现问题,语言科学,第1期。
吴平(2007),句式语义的形式分析与计算,北京语言大学出版社。
徐杰(2004),普遍语法原则与汉语句法现象,北京大学出版社。
徐烈炯(1988),生成语法理论,上海外语教育出版社。
徐烈炯、刘丹青(2007),话题的结构和功能,上海教育出版社。
徐颂烈(1998),现代汉语总括表达式研究,浙江教育出版社。
徐通锵(1997a),有定性范畴和语言的语法研究--语义句法再议,语言研究,第1期。
徐通锵(1997b),语言论--语义型语言的结构原理和研究方法,东北师范大学出版社。
薛小英(2006),量词提升与辖域解释,当代语言学,第3期。
杨春雷(2004),汉语量化词辖域的约束条件系统,现代外语,第27卷第3期。
姚双云 储泽祥(2003)汉语动词后时量、动量、名量成分不同现情况考察,语言科学,第5期。
俞士汶 主编(2003),计算语言学概论,商务印书馆。
袁毓林(1998),汉语动词的配价研究,江西教育出版社。
袁毓林(2005),“都”的加合性语义功能及其分配性效应,当代语言学,第4期。
邹崇理(1995),逻辑、语言和蒙太格语法,社会科学文献出版社。
邹崇理(2002),逻辑、语言和信息--逻辑语法研究,人民出版社。
邹崇理(2003),刻画量化结构及其推理的汉语部分语句系统,西南师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),第29卷第3期。
邹崇理(2007)关于非连续量词的类型--逻辑语义处理,浙江社会科学,第2期。
詹卫东(1999)一个汉语语义知识框架:广义配价模式,计算语言学文集,黄昌宁,董振东主编,全国第五界计算语言学联合会议。
詹卫东(2000),面向中文信息处理的现代汉语短语结构规则研究,清华大学出版社、广西科学技术出版社。
张红欣(2006)20世纪80年代以来汉语动量词研究,南京师范大学学报,第3期。
张炯(2008),利用储存器计算非连续结构,哈尔滨工业大学学报(社科版),第5期。
张乔(1998),广义量词理论及其对模糊量词的应用,当代语言学,第2期。
赵元任(1968)中国话的文法,加利福尼亚大学出版社。
周北海、毛翌(2005),常识推理的形式刻画,哲学动态2005年增刊。
周礼全主编(1994),逻辑--正确思维和有效交际的理论,人民出版社。
周小兵(1997),动宾组合带时量词语的句式,语言教学与研究,第4期。
朱德熙(1980a)汉语句法里的歧义现象,中国语文,第2期。
朱德熙(1980b)现代汉语语法研究,商务印书馆。
朱德熙(1982)语法讲义,商务印书馆。
朱德熙(1999)朱德熙文集:第一卷,商务印书馆。
朱德熙、卢甲文、马真(1961),关于动词形容词“名物化”的问题,北京大学学报,人文科学版,第4期。
Aho,V.& Ullman,D.(1972),The Theory of Parsing,Translation and Compling,Vol 1.Englewood Cliffs,Prentice Hall,Inc.
Allen,J.(1995),Natrural Language Understanding(2~(nd) edition ).Benjamin/Cum--mings:Menlo Park.California.
Allen,J.(2005),自然语言理解,刘群等译,电子工业出版社。
Andews(2002),An Introduction to Mathematical Logic and Type Theory:To Truth Through Proof,2~(nd) Edition,Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Aoun,J.& Yen-Hui Li(李艳惠)(1993),Syntax of Scope,Cambridge,Mass:MIT Press.
Barwise,J.& R.Cooper(1981),Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language.Linguistics and Philosophy 4:159-219
Bach,E.(1986),The Algebra of Events.Linguistics and Philosophy 9:5-16.
Benthem,van J.(1986),Essays in Logical Semantics.Dordrecht:Reidel.
Benthem,van J.(1987),Towards a Computational Semantics.In General Quantifiers:Lingustic and Logical Approaches.Dordrecht:Reidel,73-91.
Benthem,van J.& ter A.Meulen(eds.)(1997),Handbook of Logic and Language.Amserdam:Elsevier.
Boas,J.(1995),Predicate logic unplugged,In Proceedings of the 10th Amsterdam Colloquium.
Brualdi,R.(1999),Introductory Combinatorics,3~(rd) Edition,Prentice Hall,Inc.
Calson,G.(1977),A Unified Analysis of the English Bare Plural,Linguistics and Philosophy 1:413-457
Calson,G.(1981),Aspects and Quantification,Syntax and Semantics 14.
Chierchia, G. (1990), Anaphora and Dynamic Logic. ILTI Prepublication LP-90-07.University of Amsterdam.
Chierchia, G. & S. McConnell-Ginet(2000), Meaning and Grammar. The MIT Press.
Chierchia, G.& R. Turner(1988), Semantics and Property Theory, Linguistics and Philosophy 11:261-302
Chomsky, N. (1965), Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Chomsky, N.(1981), Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
Chomsky, N.(1986), Barriers. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Copestake, A., D. Flickinger & LA. Sag (1999), Minimal Recursion Semantics: an introduction. Manuscript. Stanford University.
Cresswell, M. (1976), The Semantics of Degree. In Montague Grammar, ed. B. Partee, Acadamic Press, New York, 261-292.
Cresswell, M.(1978), Adverbs of Space and Time, In Formal Semantics and Pragmatics for Natural Language, ed. F. Guenthner & S. J. Schmidt, Reidel, Dordrecht, 171-199.
De Swart (1993), Adverbs of Quatification: A Generalized Quantifier Approach.
Dowty, D.(1977), Toward a Semantic Analysis of Verb Aspect and the English Imperfective Progressive, Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 45-79.
Dowty, D.(1979), Word Meaning and Montague Grammar, Reidel, Dordrecht.
Fox, C. (1998), Mass Terms and Plurals in Property Theory, In Plurality and Quantification, ed. F. Hamm & Erhard Hinrichs, Kluwer Acadamic Publishers, 113-176.
Fox C., S. Lappin & C. Pollard (2002a), Intensional First-Oder Logic with Types, Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium for Logic and Language.
Fox C., S. Lappin & C. Pollard(2002b), A High-order Fine-Grained Logic for Intensional Semantics, Proceedings of the Seventh Symposium for Logic and Language.
Gallin(1975), Intensional and High-order Modal Logic, North-Holland, Amterdam.
Groenendijk, J. & M. Stokhof(1989), Type-shifting Rules and the Semantics of Inrerrogatives. Properties, Types, and Meaning, vol 2, ed. Chierchia etc. Kluwer, Dordrecht.21-68.
Groenendijk, J. & M. Stokhof(1990), Dynamic Predicate Logic: Towards a Compositional, Non-representational Semantics of Discourse. Linguistics & Philosohy, 13.
Gamut, L.T. F(1991), Logic, Language and Meaning, vol 2, University of Chicago Press.
Huang, C-T. James (黄正德) (1998), Logical Relations in Chinese and the Theory of Grammar[M]. New York/London:: Garland.
Huang, Shi-Zhe (黄师哲) (1996), Quatification and Predication in Mandarin Chinese: a case study of dou. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania
Gratzer, G. (1998), General Lattice Theory, 2nd ed. Boston, MA: Birkhauser.
Heim, I. (1982), The Semantics of Definites and Indefinites. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Heim, I.(1983), File Change Semantics and Familiarity Theory of Definiteness. In Use and Interpretation of Language, ed. R. Bauerle et al. Meaning, Berlin: De Gruyter, 164-189.
Heim, I & A. Krazer.(1998), Semantics in Generative Grammar[M]. Massachusetts: Blackwell.
Henkin, L(1950), Completeness in the Theory of Types, Jounal of Symbolic Logic, 15,81-91.
Higginbotham, J. & R. May (1981), Questions, Quantifiers, and Crossing. The Linguistic Review 1:41-79.
Hintikka, J.(1967), Individuals, Possible worlds, and Epistemic Logic. Nous, 1: 33-62.
Hoepleman, J.& C. Rohrer (1980), On the Mass Count Distinction and the French Imparfait and Passe Simple, in C. Rohrer (ed.), Time, Tense and Aspect, Tuebingen, Niemeyer, pp. 629-645.
Joshi, A. & K. Vijay-Shanker (1999), Compositional Semantics with Lexicalized Tree-Adjoining Grammar: How Much Underspecification is Necessary? In Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Computational Semantics.
Kallmeyer L. & A. Joshi (2003), Factoring Predicate Argument and Scope Semantics: Underspecified Semantics with LTAG. Research on Language and Computation 1: 3-58.
Kamp(1981), A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In Truth, Interpretation and Information, ed. Groenendijk, J. & M. Stokhof, Dordrecht, Foris.1-41
Karttunen, L. (1977) , The Syntax and Semantics of Questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1:3-44.
Keenan, E. & J. Stavi (1986), A Semantic Characterization of Natural Language Determiners. Linguistics and Philosophy 9: 253-326
Keenan, E. (1987), Unreducible n-ray Quantifiers in Natural Language. In General Quantifiers: Lingustic and Logical Approaches. Dordrecht: Reidel, 109-150.
Keenan, E. & D. Westerstahl(1995), Generalized Quantifiers in Linguistics and Logic. In Handbook of linguistics and logic, ed. J. van Benthem & A. ter. Meulen. Amserdam: Elsevier.
Knuth, D. (1965),On the Translation of Languages from Left to Right. Information and. Control, 8:607-639.
Knuth, D.(2005), The Art of Computer Programming, Vol4, Pearson Education, Inc., publishing as ADDISON WESLEY.
Kuno, Susumu, Ken-ichi Takami & Yuru Wu (1999), Quantifier Scope in English, Chinese and Japanese, Language 75, 1: 63-111.
Lakoff, G. (1987), Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Langacker, R. (1987), Nouns and Verbs, Language Vol. 63, No. 1.
Lewis, D. (1973), Counterfactuals, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Lewis, D.(1975), Adverbs of Qualification. In Formal Semantics of Natural Language, ed. E. Keenan, Cambridge University Press.
Lavin, B. & M. Hovav (1996), Lexical Semantics and Syntactic Structure, In The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, Shalon Lappin, ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996
Lindstrom, P.(1966), First-order Predicate logic with Generalized Quantifiers. Theoria 32: 186-195.
Link, G. (1983), The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: a lattice-theoretical approach. In Use and Interpretation of Language, ed. R. Bauerle et al. Meaning, Berlin: De Gruyter, 302-323.
Lonning, J. T.(1987), Mass Terms and Quantification, Linguistics and Philosophy 10:1-52.
May, R.(1985), Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.
Mostowski, A. (1957), On a Generalization of Quantifiers. Fundmata Mathematicae 44:12-36
Montague, R. (1970a), English as a formal language
Montague, R.(1970b), Universal grammar In Formal Philosophy, ed. R. Thomason, 1974, Yele University.
Montague, R.(1973), The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English. In Formal
Philosophy. ed. R. Thomason, 1974, Yele University.
Mourelatos, A. (1978), Events, Processes, and States, Linguistics and Philosophy 2: 415-434.
Partee, B. (1973), Some Transformational Extensions of Montague Grammar, Journal of Phi-losophical logic 2.
Partee, B.(1975), Montague Grammar and Transformational Grammar, Linguistic Inquiry 6.
Partee, B.(1979), Constraining Transformational Montague Grammar: a Framework and a Fragment, In Linguistics, Philosophy and Montague Grammar, ed. S. Davis & M. Mithun, Austin: University of Texas Press.
Peter, S. & Ritchie (1971), On Restricting the Base Component of Transformational Grammars. Information Science 18.483-501.
Peter, S. & Ritchie(1973), On the Generative Power Transformational Grammars. Information Science 6.49-83.
Pollard, C & I.A. Sag (1994), Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago, IL: CSLI, University of Chicago Press.
Sher, G.(1990), Ways of Branching Quantifiers, Linguistics and Philosophy 13:393-422.
Teng, Shou-xin (邓守信) (1975), A Semantic Study of Transitivity Relation in Chinese, University of California Press.
Tichy, P. (1988), The Foundation of Frege's Logic, Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
Tomason, R. & Johnson, jr. (1969), Predicate Calculus with Free Variables. Journal of Symbolic Logic. 34(1).
Tomason, R.(1970), Indeterminist Time and Truth-Value Gaps, Theoria, 36.
Turner, R.(1992), Properties, Propositions and Semantic Theory. In Computational Linguistics and Formal Semantics.Cambridge University Press, 1992, 159-180.
van Eijck(1995), Quantifiers and Partiality, in Quantifiers, Logic and Language, ed. van der Does, J. and van Eijck, J., Stanford: CSLI, 105-144.
van der Does, J. and van Eijck (1995), Quantifiers, Logic and Language, ed. Stanford: CSLI
Vendler, Z(1970), Linguistics in Philosophy, Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press.
Westerstahl, D (1995) Quantifiers in Natural Language: A Survey of Some Recent Work. In M. Krynicki, M. Mostowski, W. Szczerba(eds.) Quantifiers:Logics, Models, Computation. Vol. 1. 359-408, Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Wittgenstein, L.(1979)Wittgenstein's Lectures: Cambridge 1932-1935, 49, Totowa,New Jersey:Rowman and Littlefield, 1979.
Wu Jianxin (吴建新) (1999) Syntax and Semantics of Quantification in Chinese, Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland.
Yasuhara, M(1969) The Incompleteness of L_p Language. Fundamenta Mathematicae 66: 147-152.