@cite{rooth-1992} Bridge — Focus Interpretation @cite{rooth-1992} #
Bridges the empirical data in Focus/Basic.lean to the formal theory
in Focus/Interpretation.lean (FIP, Q-A congruence), with a full
compositional derivational chain through Montague semantics and
connection to English fragment entries.
Pipeline #
Fragments/English/Nouns ──▷ Montague Lexicon ──▷ Tree
│
interp
│
▼
propositions (QAWorld → Bool)
│
fromAlternatives
│
▼
QuestionDen / PropFocusValue
│
FIP / qaCongruent
│
▼
Bridge theorems ↔ Data
Model #
- Q-A congruence: 4 worlds crossing subject (Fred/Mary) × object (beans/rice). Subject focus matches "Who ate the beans?"; object focus does not.
- "Only" association: 3 worlds for who Mary introduced to Sue.
What's exercised #
AltMeaning,AltMeaning.unfeatured— O/A-value computation (§3)Focus,Background— focus/background partition (§4)Theme,Rheme,InfoStructure— information structure analysis (§5)HasInfoStructure— typeclass instance (§5b)FIPApplication— FIP application classification (§8)Tree,interp— compositional derivation (§10–§11)Derivation— derivation bundles (§13)Fragments.English.Nouns,.Predicates.Verbal— fragment entries (§14)
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.instBEqQAWorld.beq x✝ y✝ = (x✝.ctorIdx == y✝.ctorIdx)
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
"Fred ate the beans"
Equations
Instances For
"Mary ate the beans"
Equations
Instances For
"Fred ate the rice"
Equations
Instances For
Focused "FRED" in "FRED ate the beans" (Rooth §2.4, ex. 23a): O-value = "Fred"; A-value = {"Fred", "Mary"}.
Equations
Instances For
Non-focused "ate the beans": singleton A-value (no alternatives).
Exercises AltMeaning.unfeatured.
Equations
Instances For
Unfeatured O-value equals the input.
Unfeatured A-value is a singleton containing the O-value. Non-focused expressions evoke no alternatives (@cite{rooth-1992} §1).
Focus partition of "FRED ate the beans": Fred is focused, evoking {Fred, Mary} as alternatives (Rooth §2.4, ex. 25a).
Equations
Instances For
Background of "FRED ate the beans": the non-focused material.
Instances For
Theme: the QUD presupposition "_ ate the beans" (λ-abstract). Rooth §2.4: in a Q-A pair, the theme corresponds to the question's content.
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.qaTheme = { content := "λx. x ate the beans" }
Instances For
Rheme: the answer "Fred".
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.qaRheme = { content := "Fred" }
Instances For
Full information structure of "FRED ate the beans" in response to "Who ate the beans?"
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Background list matches the background elements.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Exercises the HasInfoStructure typeclass: a FocusedSentence determines an InfoStructure.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Equations
Instances For
The typeclass correctly extracts focus.
The typeclass correctly extracts background.
@cite{rooth-1992} §2.4, constraint (26d): In a Q-A pair ⟨ψ, α⟩, ⟦ψ⟧° ⊆ ⟦α⟧f. The ordinary semantic value of the question is a subset of the focus semantic value of the answer.
"Who ate the beans?" — Hamblin question with subject alternatives. ⟦Q⟧° = {fredAteBeans, maryAteBeans} (Rooth §2.4, ex. 24).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Focus value of "[FRED]_F ate the beans" — same subject alternatives. ⟦A⟧f = {fredAteBeans, maryAteBeans} (Rooth §2.4, ex. 25a).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Focus value of "Fred ate the [BEANS]_F" — object alternatives. ⟦A⟧f = {fredAteBeans, fredAteRice} (varies object, not subject).
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Q-A congruence: subject focus value = question denotation. ⟦[FRED]_F ate the beans⟧f = ⟦Who ate the beans?⟧ (Rooth §2.4).
FIP (27) holds: question alternatives ⊆ focus value. Trivially satisfied when the sets are equal.
FIP fails for object focus: "maryAteBeans" is in the question alternatives but not in the object-focus alternatives. This is why "#Fred ate the BEANS" is not a congruent answer to "Who ate the beans?"
Witness: "Mary ate the beans" is an answer to the question...
...but is NOT in the object-focus alternative set.
Rooth §2.1, constraint (26a): the domain of quantification C of a focusing adverb is a subset of the focus semantic value ⟦α⟧f.
Rooth's formalization (30b): only(C) introduces
∀P[P ∈ C ∧ P(m) → P = VP']
where C is constrained by the FIP to be a set of properties
matching the focus semantic value.
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.instBEqOnlyWorld.beq x✝ y✝ = (x✝.ctorIdx == y✝.ctorIdx)
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
"Mary introduced Bill to Sue"
Equations
Instances For
"Mary introduced John to Sue"
Equations
Instances For
Focus on BILL (Rooth §2.1, ex. 3a): O-value = introBill; A-value = {introBill, introJohn}. Focus determines the domain of "only".
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
"Only Bill" = Mary introduced Bill but not John (Rooth §2.1).
Equations
Instances For
"Only John" = Mary introduced John but not Bill.
Equations
Instances For
Different focus → different "only" meaning. Focus on BILL excludes John; focus on JOHN excludes Bill (Rooth §2.1, exs. 3a vs 3b).
The Q-A congruent datum uses the correct FIPApplication.
The Q-A incongruent datum uses the correct FIPApplication.
Focus in the congruent answer matches the data.
Focus in the incongruent answer matches the data.
The "only Bill" datum uses focusing adverb application.
The "only Sue" datum uses focusing adverb application.
The data (Basic.lean) says "FRED ate the beans" is congruent and "#Fred ate the BEANS" is incongruent with "Who ate the beans?". The theory (FIP, §6) explains:
- Subject focus produces a focus value equal to the question
denotation (§6a), so FIP is satisfied.
- Object focus produces a focus value that differs (§6b):
maryAteBeans ∈ ⟦Q⟧° but maryAteBeans ∉ ⟦A⟧f, so FIP fails.
For "only" (§7), the data says focus determines what "only"
excludes. The theory confirms: the FIP constrains the domain C
of "only" to be a subset of the focus value, so different focus
positions yield different exclusion domains.
Bridge: congruent judgment confirmed by FIP.
Bridge: incongruent judgment explained by FIP failure.
The propositions in §2 were hand-defined. Here we derive them
compositionally: entity denotations + a world-indexed verb meaning
are combined via direct function application and Heim & Kratzer's
interp to produce the same truth conditions.
The derivational chain is:
Fragment entry → Montague LexEntry → Tree → interp → Bool
run once per world to yield a world-indexed proposition.
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.instBEqE.beq x✝ y✝ = (x✝.ctorIdx == y✝.ctorIdx)
Instances For
Equations
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.focusModel = { Entity := Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E, decEq := inferInstance }
Instances For
World-indexed verb semantics for "ate".
ateInWorld w obj subj follows Montague's argument order
(object first, then subject).
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.ateInWorld Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.QAWorld.fredBeans Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.beans Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.fred = true
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.ateInWorld Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.QAWorld.fredRice Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.rice Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.fred = true
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.ateInWorld Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.QAWorld.maryBeans Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.beans Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.mary = true
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.ateInWorld Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.QAWorld.maryRice Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.rice Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.mary = true
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.ateInWorld w obj subj = false
Instances For
Montague lexicon parameterized by world. Maps surface forms to typed denotations.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.focusLex w "Fred" = some { ty := Semantics.Montague.Ty.e, denot := Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.fred }
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.focusLex w "Mary" = some { ty := Semantics.Montague.Ty.e, denot := Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.mary }
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.focusLex w "beans" = some { ty := Semantics.Montague.Ty.e, denot := Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.beans }
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.focusLex w "rice" = some { ty := Semantics.Montague.Ty.e, denot := Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.E.rice }
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.focusLex w word = none
Instances For
Syntax tree: [S [NP Fred] [VP [V ate] [NP beans]]]
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.tree_fredAteBeans = (Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "Fred").bin ((Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "ate").bin (Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "beans"))
Instances For
Syntax tree: [S [NP Mary] [VP [V ate] [NP beans]]]
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.tree_maryAteBeans = (Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "Mary").bin ((Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "ate").bin (Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "beans"))
Instances For
Syntax tree: [S [NP Fred] [VP [V ate] [NP rice]]]
Equations
- Phenomena.Focus.Rooth1992Bridge.tree_fredAteRice = (Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "Fred").bin ((Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "ate").bin (Core.Tree.Tree.leaf "rice"))
Instances For
Extract the Bool truth value from a tree interpretation.
Returns none if the tree is uninterpretable or has non-t type.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
The propositions from §2 were stipulated directly. Here we show
they are derivable: running interp at each world produces
the same truth values.
Compositionally derived "Fred ate beans" proposition.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Compositionally derived "Mary ate beans" proposition.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Compositionally derived "Fred ate rice" proposition.
Equations
- One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
Instances For
Grounding: compositional "Fred ate beans" = hand-defined proposition.
Grounding: compositional "Mary ate beans" = hand-defined proposition.
Grounding: compositional "Fred ate rice" = hand-defined proposition.
Direct function application matches tree interpretation.
Connect the model's lexicon to English fragment entries. Fragment entries provide morphological and syntactic properties; the bridge verifies that these properties are consistent with the model and that fragment surface forms feed the compositional lexicon.
Fred is a proper name in the English fragment.
Mary is a proper name in the English fragment.
"bean" is countable in the English fragment.
Fragment surface forms feed the Montague lexicon. The form field of each fragment entry matches a lexicon key.
"eat" is transitive (NP complement).
"eat" has past tense "ate" matching the lexicon entry.
The past form of "eat" is in the Montague lexicon.
The complete derivational chain from fragments to FIP:
1. Fragment entries (§14) provide surface forms and properties
2. Surface forms feed the Montague lexicon (§10)
3. Tree derivations compose meanings via interp (§11)
4. Running at each world yields propositions grounding §2 (§12)
5. Propositions build Hamblin questions and focus values (§6)
6. FIP/qaCongruent proves congruence (§6a) or incongruence (§6b)
7. Theoretical predictions match empirical judgments (§9)
End-to-end: the compositionally derived question matches the hand-built question, so the FIP results in §6 apply to the compositional derivation.