Parsing and Interpreting Comparatives

1. INTRODUCTION We describe a fairly comprehensive handling of the syntax and semantics of comparative constructions. The analysis is largely based on the theory developed by Pinkham, but we advance arguments to support a different handling of phrasal comparatives-in particular, we use direct interpretation instead of C-ellipsis. We .explain the reasons for dividing comparative sentences into different categories, and for each category we give an example of the corresponding Montague semantics. The ideas have all been implemented within a large-scale grammar for Swedish. This paper is written with two distinct audiences in mind. On the practical side, we try to present a cookbook which the natural language interface implementor can ~use if he wishes to incorporate comparative constructions into his system's coverage. This is, we trust, interesting in itself; a quick glance at Table 1 should be enough to show that this construction is more common than is perhaps generally realized. Thus in addition to the obvious more, less and as much as, used together with an adjective, adverb or determiner, we also include such words as same, before and after, used in appropriate ways. We also try to give a usable classification of the various kinds of constructions generally lumped together under the blanket heading of "Comparative Ellipsis". Examples of comparatives 1) John is taller than Mary. 2) Few people run as fast as John. 3) John bought more books than Mary. 4) John was happier in New York than in London. 5) John has more books than Mary has newspapers. 6) John had this job before me. 7) John was born in the same city as Mary. 8) Mary had more friends than John thought. 9) More men than women bought the book. 10) Mary seems brighter than most of the pupils.