Instatiations and (obligatory vs. optional) actants

A formalism for ~he representation of "semantic emphases" is introduced, using principal and accessory instantiatiQns. It m~es it possible to convert predicate expressions inbo network-like structures. As an application criteria for ooligatory and optional actants are dealt with. 11 ~ 12, t I ~ t2, t I starts t2, t I finishes t 2 etco (Allen (1984); Bier-winch (1988) for the general framework).-Finally a set of primitive semantic predl-cares BI, B2, .o., ~hat may have as arguments elements of X, L and T as well as propositions A, ioe. predicates B wluh their (aopropriate) arguments. While ~he elements of the first four sets have the character of variables, the functions , relations and predicates are fixed and interpreted in a characteristic way. We use here the following functions: loc(e) = l: The location of e is 1. ~ime(e) = t: The time of e is to If e is a path, one may define Init(e) = e' and fln(e) = e" (cf. Bierwisch 41988)). One has time(inlt(e)) starts time(e) etc. We will use the following predicates: On the basis of these formal components one has to give a definition of wellformed expressions. One needs furthermore an axiom system expressing the fundamental properties of the predicates. We skip this here° 2. Instaatiations For each proposition A we assume an addi-tlonal argument place that is filled in by an element e of Eo We say that "e is an Instan-tiation of A" or "e instantiates A" and write A~] (Bierwisch (1988), Reichenbach (19#8))o We introduce here a distinction between two types of Instantiations, namely-principal instantiations, representing a semantic emphasis, denoted by e p,-accessory instantlations, denoted by eao For each primitive predicate in a given inventory one Instantiatlon rule has to be formulated. The rules are applied recurslvely and provide a means for "calculating" the Instantlations for complex propositions. The results are network-like structures consistq ing of conditions only on the level of the sets X, E, L and T. ACT(x) Is]| e is an action of x. HAVE(x,y)[e] , e is a state, that involves x's having (owning, ...) of yo NOT(A) [e]$ a condition, that implies ~.&~e]. It should be note~ that for concrete A's concrete rules can be formulated (preserving presuppositions and certain arguments). In the next rules the index i = 1,2 indicates whether the first or the second argumen~ yields the principal Instantlation. For the index j = …