other,01P861038,bq 
of the two
<term>
formalisms
</term>
.
<term>

Unificationbased grammar formalisms

</term>
use structures containing sets of

#14623
We then turn to a discussion comparing the linguistic expressiveness of the two formalisms.Unificationbased grammar formalisms use structures containing sets of features to describe linguistic objects. 
other,81P861038,bq 
</term>
use structures containing sets of
<term>

features

</term>
to describe
<term>
linguistic objects

#14631
Unificationbased grammar formalisms use structures containing sets offeatures to describe linguistic objects. 
other,111P861038,bq 
of
<term>
features
</term>
to describe
<term>

linguistic objects

</term>
. Although
<term>
computational algorithms

#14634
Unificationbased grammar formalisms use structures containing sets of features to describelinguistic objects. 
tech,12P861038,bq 
linguistic objects
</term>
. Although
<term>

computational algorithms for unification of feature structures

</term>
have been worked out in experimental

#14638
Althoughcomputational algorithms for unification of feature structures have been worked out in experimental research, these algorithms become quite complicated, and a more precise description of feature structures is desirable. 
tech,172P861038,bq 
out in experimental research , these
<term>

algorithms

</term>
become quite complicated , and a

#14654
Although computational algorithms for unification of feature structures have been worked out in experimental research, thesealgorithms become quite complicated, and a more precise description of feature structures is desirable. 
other,282P861038,bq 
and a more precise description of
<term>

feature structures

</term>
is desirable . We have developed

#14665
Although computational algorithms for unification of feature structures have been worked out in experimental research, these algorithms become quite complicated, and a more precise description offeature structures is desirable. 
model,43P861038,bq 
is desirable . We have developed a
<term>

model

</term>
in which descriptions of
<term>
feature

#14674
We have developed amodel in which descriptions of feature structures can be regarded as logical formulas, and interpreted by sets of directed graphs which satisfy them. 
other,93P861038,bq 
model
</term>
in which descriptions of
<term>

feature structures

</term>
can be regarded as
<term>
logical formulas

#14679
We have developed a model in which descriptions offeature structures can be regarded as logical formulas, and interpreted by sets of directed graphs which satisfy them. 
other,153P861038,bq 
structures
</term>
can be regarded as
<term>

logical formulas

</term>
, and interpreted by sets of
<term>

#14685
We have developed a model in which descriptions of feature structures can be regarded aslogical formulas, and interpreted by sets of directed graphs which satisfy them. 
other,233P861038,bq 
</term>
, and interpreted by sets of
<term>

directed graphs

</term>
which satisfy them . These
<term>
graphs

#14693
We have developed a model in which descriptions of feature structures can be regarded as logical formulas, and interpreted by sets ofdirected graphs which satisfy them. 
other,14P861038,bq 
graphs
</term>
which satisfy them . These
<term>

graphs

</term>
are , in fact ,
<term>
transition graphs

#14700
Thesegraphs are, in fact, transition graphs for a special type of deterministic finite automaton. 
other,74P861038,bq 
<term>
graphs
</term>
are , in fact ,
<term>

transition graphs

</term>
for a special type of
<term>
deterministic

#14706
These graphs are, in fact,transition graphs for a special type of deterministic finite automaton. 
tech,144P861038,bq 
graphs
</term>
for a special type of
<term>

deterministic finite automaton

</term>
. This
<term>
semantics
</term>
for
<term>

#14713
These graphs are, in fact, transition graphs for a special type ofdeterministic finite automaton. 
other,15P861038,bq 
deterministic finite automaton
</term>
. This
<term>

semantics

</term>
for
<term>
feature structures
</term>

#14718
Thissemantics for feature structures extends the ideas of Pereira and Shieber [11], by providing an interpretation for values which are specified by disjunctions and path values embedded within disjunctions. 
other,35P861038,bq 
</term>
. This
<term>
semantics
</term>
for
<term>

feature structures

</term>
extends the ideas of Pereira and

#14720
This semantics forfeature structures extends the ideas of Pereira and Shieber [11], by providing an interpretation for values which are specified by disjunctions and path values embedded within disjunctions. 
other,265P861038,bq 
for values which are specified by
<term>

disjunctions

</term>
and
<term>
path values
</term>
embedded

#14743
This semantics for feature structures extends the ideas of Pereira and Shieber [11], by providing an interpretation for values which are specified bydisjunctions and path values embedded within disjunctions. 
other,285P861038,bq 
specified by
<term>
disjunctions
</term>
and
<term>

path values

</term>
embedded within
<term>
disjunctions

#14745
This semantics for feature structures extends the ideas of Pereira and Shieber [11], by providing an interpretation for values which are specified by disjunctions andpath values embedded within disjunctions. 
other,325P861038,bq 
<term>
path values
</term>
embedded within
<term>

disjunctions

</term>
. Our interpretation differs from

#14749
This semantics for feature structures extends the ideas of Pereira and Shieber [11], by providing an interpretation for values which are specified by disjunctions and path values embedded withindisjunctions. 
other,126P861038,bq 
of Pereira and Shieber by using a
<term>

logical model

</term>
in place of a
<term>
denotational semantics

#14763
Our interpretation differs from that of Pereira and Shieber by using alogical model in place of a denotational semantics. 
other,186P861038,bq 
<term>
logical model
</term>
in place of a
<term>

denotational semantics

</term>
. This
<term>
logical model
</term>
yields

#14769
Our interpretation differs from that of Pereira and Shieber by using a logical model in place of adenotational semantics. 