We compare two
<term>
wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English
</term>
,
<term>
LEXSYS
</term>
and
<term>
XTAG
</term>
, finding that the two
<term>
grammars
</term>
exploit
<term>
EDOL
</term>
in different ways .
#30392We compare two wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English, LEXSYS andXTAG, finding that the two grammars exploit EDOL in different ways.
lr,3-3-E99-1029,ak
We compare two
<term>
wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English
</term>
,
<term>
LEXSYS
</term>
and
<term>
XTAG
</term>
, finding that the two
<term>
grammars
</term>
exploit
<term>
EDOL
</term>
in different ways .
#30384We compare twowide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English, LEXSYS and XTAG, finding that the two grammars exploit EDOL in different ways.
tech,16-2-E99-1029,ak
We consider how this can be exploited to limit the need for
<term>
feature structure unification
</term>
during
<term>
parsing
</term>
.
#30379We consider how this can be exploited to limit the need for feature structure unification duringparsing.
other,14-1-E99-1029,ak
One of the claimed benefits of
<term>
Tree Adjoining Grammars
</term>
is that they have an
<term>
extended domain of locality ( EDOL )
</term>
.
#30355One of the claimed benefits of Tree Adjoining Grammars is that they have anextended domain of locality ( EDOL ).
lr-prod,9-3-E99-1029,ak
We compare two
<term>
wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English
</term>
,
<term>
LEXSYS
</term>
and
<term>
XTAG
</term>
, finding that the two
<term>
grammars
</term>
exploit
<term>
EDOL
</term>
in different ways .
#30390We compare two wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English,LEXSYS and XTAG, finding that the two grammars exploit EDOL in different ways.
tech,12-2-E99-1029,ak
We consider how this can be exploited to limit the need for
<term>
feature structure unification
</term>
during
<term>
parsing
</term>
.
#30375We consider how this can be exploited to limit the need forfeature structure unification during parsing.
lr,17-3-E99-1029,ak
We compare two
<term>
wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English
</term>
,
<term>
LEXSYS
</term>
and
<term>
XTAG
</term>
, finding that the two
<term>
grammars
</term>
exploit
<term>
EDOL
</term>
in different ways .
#30398We compare two wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English, LEXSYS and XTAG, finding that the twogrammars exploit EDOL in different ways.
other,19-3-E99-1029,ak
We compare two
<term>
wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English
</term>
,
<term>
LEXSYS
</term>
and
<term>
XTAG
</term>
, finding that the two
<term>
grammars
</term>
exploit
<term>
EDOL
</term>
in different ways .
#30400We compare two wide-coverage lexicalized grammars of English, LEXSYS and XTAG, finding that the two grammars exploitEDOL in different ways.
lr,6-1-E99-1029,ak
One of the claimed benefits of
<term>
Tree Adjoining Grammars
</term>
is that they have an
<term>
extended domain of locality ( EDOL )
</term>
.
#30347One of the claimed benefits ofTree Adjoining Grammars is that they have an extended domain of locality (EDOL).