Aad  P @ P   00P0HH $ @d HHHH̀̀̀ff@  d Footnote TableFootnote**.\t.\t/ - :;,.!?bt4bvTOCHeading1Heading2   EquationVariables>l56677,7E78@9A9)B9,C9AD<$lastpagenum><$monthname> <$daynum>, <$year>"<$monthnum>/<$daynum>/<$shortyear>;<$monthname> <$daynum>, <$year> <$hour>:<$minute00> <$ampm>"<$monthnum>/<$daynum>/<$shortyear><$monthname> <$daynum>, <$year>"<$monthnum>/<$daynum>/<$shortyear> <$fullfilename> <$filename> <$paratext[Title]> <$paratext[Heading1]> <$curpagenum> <$marker1> <$marker2> (Continued)+ (Sheet <$tblsheetnum> of <$tblsheetcount>)Heading & Page <$paratext> on page<$pagenum>Pagepage<$pagenum>See Heading & Page%See <$paratext> on page<$pagenum>. Table All7Table<$paranumonly>, <$paratext>, on page<$pagenum>Table Number & Page'Table<$paranumonly> on page<$pagenum> &HTML Headings33A55A7799;;==?\Aj555555555555555555555::5 5555555555555555555555555555555555;Q;S6 66666 6 66666666;;6  6"6$6&6(;;6, 6.60626466686:6<6>6@6B6D6F6H6J6L6N6P6R6T6V6X6Z6\6^6`6b6d6f6h6j6l6n6p6r6t6v6x6z6|6~666666666666666666666666>4>6+>86666666666>:6666666><+6666666>>6666666>@677777 7 7 7777777777!7#7%7'7)7+7.70727476787:7<7>7@7B7D7G7I7K7M7O7Q7S7U7W7Y7[7]7_7a7c7e7g7i7k7m7o7q7s7u7w7y7{7| 77777777777777 777 777 77 77777>B*>D:e>F>H):w7 7 77777 8V8W8X8X8Y8Y8Y8X8X8X8Z8Z8[8\8]8^8_8`8X8X8X8a8X8X8X8b8c8d8d8e8f8g8h8g8i8i8j8k8d8l8d8m8d8d8d8n8d8d8d8d8d8o8p8X8X8q8X8r8X8s8X8t8t9X9j9k9s9u9u9d9 d9 n9 d9 d9 d9v(1) 9v(1) 9v(1) 9w9v(1) 9d9d9d9l9d9d9d9x9d9e9y9z9{9 y9!y9"y9#k9$d9%d9&n9'd9(j9+k9.|9/d90n91d92d93d94d95d96}97}98d99d9:d9;f9<d9=d9>n9?d9@j9Ck9Dd9E~(1) 9F9G9H9I9J9KY9L9Md9Nd9O9P9Q9R9S9T9U9V9W9X9Y9Zd9[d9\d9]n9^d9_d9`d9a9bd9cd9dd9en9fd9gd9hd9i9j9k9ld9m9n9o9p9qd9rd9sl9td9ud9vd9wd9xd9y 9z 9{ 9| 9} 9~ 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 99 9 9 9 9 >J:.:BFJNQTWZ]`dhlorux{~W{ @l }$6 5$6 WdHTML Mapping Table }6 56 We }6 56 We }26 526 We }_6 5_6 We }$F.5$F.W dFrameMaker Source Item }F~5F~W d HTML Item }F65F6W e }2F-.52F-. $Include PEAuto# }_F?.5 _F?.W  d Comments }$V5$VW  e }VH5!VHW  dElement }V65 $V6 $New Web PEPage? }2V-52V-W e }_V?5_V?W e }$t5!%$tW dP:Body }tH5$&tHW dP }t65%'t6W dN }2t-5&(2t-W dN }_t?5')_t?W d }$,5(*$,W d P:Bulleted }H,5)+H,,dLI e Parent = UL Qe Depth = 0 }6,5*,6,W dN }2-,5+-2-,W dN }_?,5,._?,W d }$5-/$W d P:CellBody }H5.0HW dP }65/16W dN }2-5022-W dN }_?513_?W  d }$524$W! dP:CellHeading }H535HW" dP }65466W# dN }2-5572-W$ dN }_?568_?W% d }$579$W& d P:Footnote }H58:HW' dP }659;6W( dN }2-5:<2-W) dN }_?5;=_?W* d }$5<>$ W+ d P:Heading1 }H5=?H W, dH* }65>@6 W- dN }2-5?A2- W. dN }_?5@B_? W/ d }$5AC$ W0 d P:Heading2 }H5BDH W1 dH* }65CE6 W2 dN }2-5DF2- W3 dN }_?5EG_? W4 d }$5FH$ W5 dP:HeadingRunIn }H5GIH W6 dH* }65HJ6 W7 dN }2-5IK2- W8 dN }_?5JL_? W9 d }$,5KM$, W: d P:Indented }H,5LNH,, =dP ;e Parent = UL Q<e Depth = 0 }6,6MO6, W> dN }2-,6NP2-, W? dN }_?,6OQ_?, W@ d }$<6PR$< WA dP:Mapping Table Cell }<H6 QS<H WB dP }<66 RT<6 WC dN }2<-6 SU2<- WD dN }_<?6TV_<? WE d }$L6UW$LWF dP:Mapping Table Title }LH6VXLHWG dP }L66WYL6WH dN }2L-6XZ2L-WI dN }_L?6Y[_L?WJ d }$\,6Z\$\,WK d P:Numbered }\H,6[]\H,,NdLI Le Parent = OL QMe Depth = 0 }\6,6!\^\6,WO dN }2\-,6#]_2\-,WP dN }_\?,6%^_\?,WQ d }$b,6'a$b, WR d P:Numbered1 }bH,6)`bbH,, UdLI Se Parent = OL QTe Depth = 0 }b6,6-acb6, WV dN }2b-,6/bd2b-, WW dN }_b?,61ce_b?, WX d }$63df$ WY dP:TableFootnote }H65egH WZ dP }667fh6 W[ dN }2-69gi2- W\ dN }_?6;hj_? W] d }$6=ik$ W^ d P:TableTitle }H6?jlH W_ dH* }66Akm6 W` dN }2-6Cln2- Wa dN }_?6Emo_? Wb d }$6Gnp$ Wc dP:Title }H6IoqH Wd dH* }66Kpr6 We dN }2-6Mqs2- Wf dN }_?6Ort_? Wg d }$6Qsu$ Wh d C:Emphasis }H6StvH Wi dEM }66Uuw6 Wj dN }2-6Wvx2- Wk dN }_?6Ywy_? Wl d }$6[xz$ Wm dC:EquationVariables }H6]y{H Wn dEM }66_z|6 Wo dN }2-6a{}2- Wp dN }_?6c|~_? Wq d }$6e}$ Wr dX:Heading & Page }H6g~H Ws dHeading }66i6 Wt dN }2-6k2- Wu dN }_?6m_? Wv d }$6o$ Ww dX:Page }H6qH Wx dHeading }66s6 Wy dN }2-6u2- Wz dN }_?6w_? W{ d }$6y $ W| dX:See Heading & Page }H6{ H W} d See Also }66} 6 W~ dN }2-6 2- W dN }_?6 _? W d }$6 $ W d X:Table All }H6 H W d Table All }666 W dN }2-62- W dN }_?6_? W d }$6$ W dX:Table Number & Page }H6H $Table PENumber }666 W dN }2-62- W  dN }_?6'_? W  d }$R 60$R "W dHTML Options Table }R 6R "W e }hR 6hR "W e }$b6$b"W dControl }b6b"W dValue }hbH6hbH"W d Comments }$r6$r"W d Image Format }r6r"W d0001IMAGGIF GIF }hrH6 hrH"W d }$6!$"W d!Copy Files Imported by Reference }6 ""W dN }hH6!&hH"W d }l>3 $l Ge6 }u>5 #%u GUTe heading 3 }H>7 $H Ge }$$ 6"*$$ " WdSystem Macros }$ 6$ " We }$ 6$ " We }\$ 6\$ " We }$4h6&+$4h"!W d Macro Name }4h6*,4h"!W d Replace With }4h6+-4h"!W  dHead }\4B6,.\4B"!W! d Comments }$Dh6-/$Dh""W" d StartOfDoc }Dh6.0Dh""W# d }Dh6/1Dh""g% <$default���Etitle> }\DB602\DB""W% d }$ph613$ph"#W& d EndOfDoc }ph624ph"#W' d }ph635ph"#W( d }\pB646\pB"#W) d }$h657$h"$W* dStartOfSubDoc }h668h"$W+ d }h679h"$g% <$default���Etitle> }\B68:\B"$W- d }$h69;$h"%W. d EndOfSubDoc }h6:<h"%W/ d }h6;=h"%W0 d }\B6<>\B"%W1 d }$h6=?$h"&W2 dStartOfFirstSubDoc }h6>@h"&W3 d }h6?Ah"&gl% <$default���Etitle> }\B6@B\B"&W5 d }$h6AC$h"'W6 dEndOfFirstSubDoc }h6BDh"'W7 d }h6CEh"'W8 d }\B6DF\B"'W9 d }$h6EG$h"(W: dStartOfLastSubDoc }h6FHh"(W; d }h6GIh"(go% <$default���Etitle> }\B6H\B"(W= d }$$h6$K$$h%)W> dEndOfLastSubDoc }$h7$JL$h%)W? d }$h7$KM$h%)W@ d }\$B7$LN\$B%)WA d }$: 7$MQ$: %*WBdCross-Reference Macros }: 7 $: %*WCe }D: 7 $D: %*WDe }$J7$NR$J%+WE d Macro Name }J7$QSJ%+WF d Replace With }DJ?7$RTDJ?%+WG d Comments }$Z7$SU$Z%,WH dHeading }Z7$TVZ%,WI d <$paratext> }DZ?7$UWDZ?%,WJ d }$j7$VX$j%-WK d See Also }j7$WYj%-WL dSee <$paratext>. }Dj?7$XZDj?%-WM d }$z7 $Y[$z%.WN d Table All }z7"$Z\z%.gO%Table <$paranumonly>, E <$paratext> }Dz?7$$[]Dz?%.WP d }$7&$\^$%/WQ d Table Number }7($]_%/WR dTable <$paranumonly> }D?7*$^`D?%/WS d }$Z 7-$_d$Z %0WTdGeneral Macros }vZ 7/$vZ %0WUe }Z 71$Z %0WVe }2Z 73$2Z %0WWe }$jev75$`e$jev%1WX d Macro Name }vjev77$dfvjev%1WY d Replace With }jC79$egjC%1WZ dHead }2jQ7;$fh2jQ%1W[ d Comments }$zev7=$gi$zev%2W\ d }vzev7?$hjvzev%2W] d }zC7A$ikzC%2W^ d }2zQ7C$jl2zQ%2W_ d }$ 7F$ko$ %3W`dCharacter Macros }l 7H$l %3Wae } 7J$ %3Wbe }$H7L$lp$H%4Wc d Character }l7N$oql%4Wd d Replace With }?7P$pr?%4We d Comments }$H7R$qs$H%5Wf d }l7T$rtl%5Wg d¢ }?7V$su?%5Wh d }$H7X$tv$H%6Wi d }l7Z$uwl%6Wj d© }?7\$vx?%6Wk d }$H7^$wy$H%7Wl d }l7`$xzl%7Wm d® }?7b$y{?%7Wn d }$H7d$z|$H%8Wo d }l7f${}l%8Wp d° }?7h$|~?%8Wq d }$H7j$}$H%9Wr d }l7l$~l%9Ws d-- }?7n$?%9Wt d }$H7p$$H%:Wu d }l7r$l%:Wv d- }?7t$?%:Ww d }$H7v$$H%;Wx d }l7x$l%;Wy d... }?7z$?%;Wz d d7~$$7$$# l $$7$$#`j`ejoty~ 'zupkf#a1, &*.26:>BFJNQTWZ]`dhlorux{~d7 $$h7 $$h l $$h7 $$h % W @l }$h 7 $h  <W|dHeadings Table }h 7 h  <W}e }h 7 h  <W~e }$Cl7 $Cl =W dHeading Level }Cu7 Cu =W dParagraph Format }CH7 CH =W d Comments }$Sl7 $Sl >W d1 }Su7 Su >W dTitle }SH7 SH >W d }$il7 $il ?W d2 }iu7 iu ?W UTUTd Heading1 }iH7 iH ?W d }${l7 ${l @W d3 }{u7 {u @W  d Heading2 }{H7 {H @W  d }$l7 $l AW  d4 }u7 u AW d HeadingRunIn }H7 H AW  d }$l7  $l BW d4 }u7 !u BW  d TableTitle }H7 H BW d $$7$$aI#a1, &*.26:>BFJNQTWZ]`dhlorux{~$$7$$&""ld7&& $$7$$$pJ&JNQTWZ]`dhlorux{~$$7$$$#%%l}$<7($< CW d P:Block Text }<H7')<H CW dH* }<67(*<6 CW dN }2<-7)+2<- CW dN }_<?7*_<? CW d }> l~H¯8HH¯I Iz+z%o I am inclined to agree with Van Langendoncks assessment that it is difficult to ascribe any other meaning to 5yywith  except that of instrument. I am less inclined to concede that this (instrumentality) is a language-internal BEnotion. ~H¯9KH¯L ez+z%q Very few verbs, in fact, take Temporal complements. Examples include  spend  (a period of time), which pyvtakes an NP complement (e.g. He spent five years traveling.) and last (a period of time), which can take either an NP EAor a PP complement (e.g. His travels lasted (for) five years.). ~Hº9*NHºO  z+z%k In this and the following sections, the term locative prepositional phrase may be taken to subsume both PyE7locative  and temporal  prepositional phrases. ~Hœ309-QHœ3030R 2-2-%W Furthermore, as will be discussed in the next section, Case Grammar, a theory that is p_seen as verb-centric had its birth as a proposal regarding prepositional use. This is an indiYcation of the intimate relationship between these two parts of speech, and an indication EUthat Davidson was perhaps on the right track in treating prepositions as predicates. ~HB9BTHBU_iTzie_ This dimension may also be conceptualized as [  motion] or [  directional]. d9GG HHˆ9EHHˆ…55G47޸7%bFrom  above  to  under : Enabling the generation of the correct preposition from vȂ޸Ean Interlingual representation 5oAGm e1. Introduction 6z+Fe 7ScR1%aThe approach to machine translation (MT) known as Interlingual MT requires the composition of an 0^ gunambiguous language-neutral representation of the meaning of the source text from which an equivalent itext in a target language may be generated. Thus, a subproblem for any Interlingua (IL)-based MT system lis that of decoding the lexical and compositional meaning of the source language (SL) text. Note that this lsubproblem presupposes that all (or at least most) of the lexical units in the source sentence actively condtribute a meaning component to the whole. This is true for most open-class words and even for many hclosed-class words (i.e. pronouns, and even seemingly content-free words like articles, which may carry ginformation such as definiteness, gender, and number). The same cannot be said of prepositions, whose jcontribution to the meaning of the discourse unit is often impossible to isolate. Furthermore, while the jmeanings of some elements (referring expressions, for example) can potentially be reduced to a simple refjerential relation between a concept and an object in a model of the world, prepositional meaning seems to nbe influenced by many factors that are difficult to separate from one another. As an indication of the impact iof the complexity of prepositional meaning on MT, we might note that prepositions participate in a majornity of the divergence types outlined in (Dorr, 1993). This paper will seek to outline those elements of prephositional meaning that an adequate interlingual representation must be able to accommodate in order for E'successful translation to be possible. 8z+e 9oAG>e$2.Issues in Prepositional Meaning :z+&e ;Sc2H%mThe first thing that one may notice when considering the issue of prepositional meaning is that instances of 0>/<ka particular preposition in varying contexts do not seem to retain a constant meaning. Consider, for examjple, the following excerpt from the text serving as a basis for this workshop (Otero, 1997), in which the wthree italicized uses of the preposition  in  represent three distinct senses (roughly: abstract containment, E.temporal containment, and physical location): <z+me =Scx%(1) Three of the most 04oadvanced institutions  in  the ACCION network started their programmes as non-profit organizations and {have,  in  the last five years, converted into regulated financial institutions that are part of the financial sysltem in their countries but specialize in serving the microenterprise sector. One of the most successful of E5these institutions is BancoSol  in  Bolivia. >z+e 1?%~In addition to this polysemy, further reflection will lead to the realization that there are certain cases in which it is difzficult to attribute any specific meaning component at all to the preposition itself. That is, prepositions seem not only xto vary in meaning according to their context, but in certain cases they seem to be semantically vacuous. As a case in point, it would be difficult to ascribe any isolable meaning to the use of  in  in the phrase specialize in serving the E-microenterprise sector from the text above. @e AScH%kThe concept of the semantic vacuity of prepositions is not a new one: one finds accounts of semantic vacu0 /&iity of prepositions both in the theoretical and computational literature. On the most obvious level, we imight note that much of the information contained in prepositions in English is carried by (grammatical) ecase-marking inflections in more highly inflected languages (Comrie 1987; Fromkin and Rodman 1988). lStockwell, Schachter, and Partee extend this idea to semantic case roles, asserting that whenever a preposiotion marks case, it is semantically void of any other content, stating that prepositions in their role as case emarkers appear to lack independent semantic significance (Stockwell, Schachter, and Partee 1973). E They provide following examples Bz+_e CSck{e6(2) Someone opened the door  with  the key. DwbMeThe key opened the door. AEe7(3) The clown was amusing  to  the children. HHˆ9EHHˆ?JFF ld9JJ HHˆ9HHHˆ}22@@JFScSeThe clown amused the children. Gz+e HSci%~noting that  with  and  to  are used to mark the Instrument used to complete the action, and the Dative case, 0Pirespectively but do not carry independent semantic content. Van Langendonck (1974) opens his discussion kwith an example very similar to (2), and states, But we cannot possibly imagine the meaning of the actant 4ywith  in the phrase  with the key  of sentence [2] except in terms of the language-internal notion instruvcO wment . Therefore the preposition  with  is here a case marker without any lexical content of its own. e QoAG`e,3.1Locating the Content-full Prepositions Rz+!e SSc%lIf we accept that certain prepositions do not need to be represented in an IL representation, then a method 0^ifor determining which ones to include and which to exclude must be devised. Do we include only the ones mthat are not recoverable during generation? Only semantically non-null (content-full) ones? If the latter, ELthen how do we determine which are content-free and which are content-full? Tz+(e USc48%kTurning to syntactic cues, Hutchins & Somers (1992) provide some insight into a potential solution to this @Edilemma. They write: _Vz+KV}e HHˆ9HHHˆGMII ld9MM HHˆ9KHHˆ†h33AAMWScS%?If a prepositional phrase is a complement, we must look to the 0iCverb to see how to translate it. On the other hand, adjunct prepo@sitional phrases can usually be translated independently of the Everb. Xz+ne YScB%mSupport for the plausibility of this assertion can be found in the work of numerous linguists. For example, 0NKfwith respect to learnability of prepositions heading complement phrases, Celce-Murcia and Larsen FreeE]man (1983: 253) provide a perspective from within the field of applied linguistics, writing: Zz+e!<e [Scp%XMany English verbs and adjectives occur with one and only one preposition. Such a prep0|y]osition must be entered in the lexical entry of the verb or adjective concerned, and it must \be learned as an integral part of the verb or adjective even though these are still combinaE?tions of V + PP or adj + PP from the structural point of view. \z+e ]Sci%dBeneath the surface of Hutchins and Somers and Celce-Murcia and Larsen Freemans assertions is the 0P eassumption of the lack of semantic value of heads of complement PPs in their role as Case assigners, dwhich, as has been shown, is a common interpretation of the role of prepositions heading complement Ephrases (see section 2). ^z+Tbe _Sc:%]Although Hutchins and Somers heuristic provides a very good first approximation as to which 0nprepositions are likely to be content-free and which are likely to be content-full, for our purposes, we must lgo one step further. Specifically, in cases in which the preposition heads a L(ocative) complement preposiutional phrase, the heuristic will fail. That is, according to the heuristic, it is necessary to look to the verb to jtranslate (locative) complements, whereas in reality the preposition itself should be the focus. Unfortuhnately, the workshop text does not afford examples of this phenomenon, but the following simple example nwill serve to illustrate the point. Although it would be generally agreed that the (Locative) PP following a vverb like  put  is subcategorized for by the verb, many different prepositions are permitted in the head posiEgtion, and these prepositions seem to translate fairly directly, or at least independently of the verb: `z+Pme aSc\eN(4)  He put the book in/ on/ near / under / next to / behind the box. b4AGh+eW Il a mis le livre dans/ sur/ prs de/ sous / cot de/ derrire la bote. cz+se dSc~%cIn fact, many authors have commented on the distinct nature of Locative and Temporal prepositional vc kphrases . Somers himself confirms this observation, stating "For those verbs taking a Locative complenot the same as that of NP, but rather is the same as P + NP. hz+e iSc%%dA similar sentiment is echoed by Somers (1987), who is working from a computational viewpoint. Som01nOhers, however, also adds the observation that Locatives ... are most commonly realized by prepositional E phrases. jz+H@e _koAGT'be 3.2An Additional Complication HHˆ9KHHˆJPLL ld9PP HHˆ9NHHˆ44BBPClz+ze mScR%hAn additional complication worth noting (with respect to the use of the complement/adjunct heuristic to 0i idistinguish content-full from content-free prepositions) is that the distinction between complements and wadjuncts is not always clear-cut. Thus, in his  Valency and Case in Computational Linguistics , rather than a ibinary complement / adjunct distinction, Somers (1987) proposes a five-level 'range' of complementarity, lfrom 'integral complements' (essentially frozen expressions and collocations) to 'extra-peripherals' (which mcan be equated to sentence modifiers). This finer-grained distinction is important, because the varying levkels of the complementarity scale seem to correspond to the degree to which prepositions retain (or fail to lretain) their semantic content. For example, consider sentences (5) - (8), which progress from greater to ilesser levels of complementarity, accompanied by increasing content-retention on the part of the preposiEtion involved. nz+ke oScCeGBancoSol took  on  large amounts of risk in its early years. pieRThe ACCION network specializes  in  serving the microenterprise sector. qe;a. PRODEM talked  to  BancoSol before investing. ree ySc84%lAfter having decided what not to include in the IL representation, the next logical question is what do we 0D{jinclude in the IL representation? Requisite components that must either be present in the IL representaE`tion or derivable during generation to enable the choice of the correct TL preposition include: zz+[8le {ScfDe<Distinction between locative and non-locative prepositions |z+re }Sc}ͨeFor non-locative prepositions: ~ eSemantic roles of arguments z+e ScqeFor locative prepositions: eStativity of prepositions e'Fine-grained locative representation e:Relationships between items linked by the preposition z+υ,e څ+e;The following sections will discuss each of these in turn. e # s>e@4.1Distinction between Locative and Non-Locative Prepositions z+Te  T%xTo say that the distinction between locative and non-locative prepositions must be included in the IL representation is v+ |a bit misleading . In actuality, locative and non-locative prepositional phrases should be distinguished in the IL repue&(11) The mouse ran under the table. =z+Ove _>Sc[$%wPossible interpretations include a path, destination, and location (area) reading of the preposition  under . HHˆ9THHˆSYUU ld9YY HHˆ9WHHˆh77Y>ScSgAs this ambiguity cannot be preserved in many languages, it would be desirable to choose between these 0imvarious meanings, and to accommodate a distinct representation for each in the IL. Similarly to the stative mdistinction, however, Trujillo has demonstrated that, at least for English and Spanish, it might be possible dto glean much of this information by means of constraints imposed on possible meanings by other eleE\ments in the sentence (namely the verb and the noun that is the object of the preposition). ?z+BTse @oAGMe?4.5Relationships between objects linked by the preposition Az+YVe BScd.%iSo far, we have been concerned with cases in which the choice of preposition depends on the locative sta0pltus of the preposition, and perhaps on features of the verb to which the prepositional phrase attaches. In kmany cases, however, the object of the preposition imposes selectional restrictions of sorts on the actual EApreposition chosen. Take, for example, sentences (12) and (13): Cz+e DScMeS(12)  ACCION International est un organisme priv bas  aux  tats-Unis. E4&ec Lit. ACCION International is an organization private based  at -the States-United Fea Eng. ACCION International is a private organization based  in  the United States. Gz+Re HSce+(13)Je lai vu  sur  la photo. ITe) I saw it  on  the photo. Je!I saw it  in  the photo. Kz+Ee LSc%In (12), French selects the preposition    (to/at) before  tats-Unis , whereas English chooses in. Japkow0litz and Wiebe (1991) suggest that in these cases, it is the conceptualization of the NP object that differs kbetween languages, such that while a photo is conceptualized as a container in English (thus the choice of in), a  photo  is conceptualized as a surface in French (leading to the choice of the preposition  sur  (on) in kFrench). A similar explanation could be given for the sentences in (12). While this does not necessarily mimpose any constraints on the IL representation itself, it does suggest the necessity of a language-specific gKB during the generation phase. The content of this KB would minimally consist of a conceptual hierarmchy to assist in resolving such generation problems. This may not be a simple matter, since a change in the EWverb can cause differing salient conceptual characteristics of NPs to come into focus. Mz+ge NoAGre5.Conclusion Oz+}ϴe PSc~%lIt has been suggested that in many cases, prepositions are semantically null (content-free) elements that 0djneed not be represented in an IL representation. This places much of the burden of correct prepositional jchoice on the generation process. Content-full prepositions were then divided into locative and non-locaitive groups, and necessary information for enabling the generation of the correct preposition from an IL hrepresentation was discussed for each. Since not all content-full prepositions have the same semantic nweight, differing amounts of information are necessary for different types of prepositions. It has been furmther suggested that even in the case of content-full prepositions, much of the information necessary for the Eigeneration component can be gleaned from features of the IL representation of other sentential elements. Qz+e RSc%iThe standard IL problems remain: if the problem of prepositional choice is viewed as a problem of gener0jation from an underspecified IL representation, then all prepositional distinctions necessary for all lanfguages must be provided for in the IL representation. However, as alluded to in section (4.4), it is msometimes not possible to provide information in the representation that is not present in the source text. jFinally, the scope of what can be generated or inferred from the IL representation will be constrained by lthe domain of the IL system. This is particularly true with respect to any conceptual hierarchy that might jbe used during generation. Providing an IL for unrestricted text, even for the representation of preposiE9tional meaning, is not yet a trivially solvable problem. Sz+R6e ToAG]$e References Uz+h%Anderson, John M. 1971.  The Grammar of Case  Towards a Localist Theory .   Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, ed. psgSidney W. Allen, Eugenie J. A. Henderson, Fred W. Householder, John Lyons, R. B. Lepage, F. R. Palmer, E=and J. L. M. Trim, 4. New York: Cambridge University Press. HHˆ9WHHˆV\XX ld9\\ HHˆ9ZHHˆ!%%\ Vz+z%qCelce-Murcia, Marianne, and Diane Larsen-Freeman. 1983. Prepositions. Chap. 19 In  The Grammar Book An ESL/5yETable Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies :19-34. #\%{---. 1968. The Case for Case. Chap. 1 In  Universals in Linguistic Theory. , ed. Emmon Bach and Robert T. Harms. E+New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. !]%wFromkin, Victoria, and Robert Rodman. 1988.  An Introduction to Language.   Fourth ed. Philadelphia: Harcourt E%Brace Jovanovich College Publishers. ^%wHobbs, Jerry. 1985. "Ontological Promiscuity," in  Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Association for 5E*Computational Linguistics . Chicago. #_%}Hutchins, J. W., and H. L. Somers. 1992.  An Introduction to Machine Translation.  San Diego: Academic Press, Inc. EHarcourt Brace Jovanovich. !`%rJapkowitz, Nathalie, and Janyce M. Wiebe. 1991. A System for Translating Locative Prepositions from English into EpFrench.  29th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics  29 (18-21 June):153-60. !a%{Nilsen, Don Lee Fred. 1972.  Toward a Semantic Specification of Deep Case.  Janua Linguarum Series Minor, ed. C. E7H. Van Schooneveld, 152. The Hague: Mouton & Co. N.V. !b%|---. 1973.  The Instrumental Case in English.  Janua Linguarum Series Minor, ed. C. H. Van Schooneveld, 156. The EHague: Mouton & Co. N.V. ceZOtero, Mara, Latin America: ACCION Speaks Louder Than Words,  UNESCO Courier , de January, 1997. !e%|Somers, H. L. 1987.  Valency and Case in Computational Linguistics.  Edinburgh Information Technology Series, ed. EDS. Michaelson and Y. Wilks. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. fevSpang-Hanssen, E. 1963.  Les prpositions incolores en franais moderne.   Copenhagen: G. E. C. Gads Forlag. !g%|Stockwell, Robert P., Paul Schachter, and Barbara Hall Partee. 1973.  The Major Syntactic Structures of English.  E&New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. hv+iv% Trujillo, A. 1992. Spatial Lexicalization in the Translation of Prepositional Phrases. in  30 th  ACL, Student Session . z+tvE+Newark, Delaware. 28 June 2 July, 1992. !i%oVan Langendonck, W. 1974. Internally Referring Prepositions and the Subcategorization of Space and Time DenomEKinations in a Netherlandic Case Grammar.  Leuvense Bijdragen  63. W# !e HHˆ9ZHHˆY[[ l}H9 l MG$e5 }u>;  u MG,UTe heading 2 }H>= #H MG4e }l>?  l NG<e2 }u>A u NGUTe heading 1 }H>C H NGe }l>E !l OGe7 }u>G u OGe Block Text }H>I  H OGje dLeftdRightd Referenced dHTMLdHTMLd Headingsd HTMLd$HTMLd Ed Hd Kd Nd QdTdWdZ @@ Mapping Table Title. @@ Body. @@ Mapping Table Cell. @@ Header. @@ Footer. f@T   HeadingRunInBody. @@  Mapping Table Cell. @@  Mapping Table Cell. @@   Mapping Table Cell. f@  Body@@ Mapping Table Cell. f@  Blockquote. f@  heading 1. f@  $Hl Dhtitle. f@   $Hl Dh heading 2. f@  Block Text. f@  CellFooting. f@ Bodyf@  Bulleted\tf@ CellBodyf@ CellBodyf@  CellHeadingf@  CellHeadingf@  Footnotef@T Heading1Body f@T  Heading2Bodyf@ $ Body Text 2. f@  Indentedf@  Numbered.\tf@E  Numbered1.\tNumberedf@  TableFootnotef@T   TableTitleT:Table : f@T   TableTitleT:Table :  f@P TitleBodyf@  $Hl Dh footnote text. f@  $Hl Dh Body Text. QHf@  $Hl DhBody Text Indent 2. $f@  $ heading 3. @@ Mapping Table Cell. @@ Mapping Table Cell. @@  Mapping Table Cell. 9*f@ Body. fff@   ff$Hl DhTitle. f@  $Hl DhBody. $Hf@  $Hl DhBody. Hlf@  $Hl DhBody. f@   Blockquote. f@  heading 1. f@ Body. f@   Blockquote. f@  $Hl Dhtitle. f@   $Hl Dh heading 2. f@  Hl DhBody. f@  Block Text. $$f@  Block Text. f@  $Hl DhBody. f@ $ Body Text 2. $f@  $Hl DhBody. ~lf@  l~ DhBody. l~f@  $Hl DhBody. ~~f@  ~ DhBody. f@ Body. f@  $Hl Dh footnote text. f@  Hl DhBody. f@ ! $Hl DhBody. pf@  pHl DhBody. HHlf@  Hl DhBody. lf@  $Hl DhBody. $$$f@  $Hl DhBody. f@  $Hl Dh Body Text. $f@  $Hl DhBody. f@  DhBody. HHHf@  Hl DhBody. ZHf@  HZl DhBody() . Zlf@ $HZl DhBody. f@  Hl DhBody. $f@  $Hl DhBody. f@  $Hl DhBody. f@ $ Body Text 2. f@  $Hl DhFootnote. HHHf@  Hl DhBody. ZHf@  HZl DhBody() . HZf@  $Hl DhBody. 6Zf@ $6Hl DhBody. HHf@  Hl DhBody. HHf@ + Hl DhBody. QHf@  $Hl DhBody Text Indent 2. Hlf@  $Hl DhBody. $f@  $Hl DhBody. LQ$f@  LQl DhBody. lf@  $Hl DhBody. HHf@  Hl DhBody. $f@  $ heading 3. $f@  $Hl DhBody. $f@  $Hl DhBody. $f@ $ Body Text 2. $f@ $Body. $$f@ $Body.  Emphasis EquationVariables )  ڝ [  ڝ ڝ) )  )  ڝ ڝ ڝ )  )  ڝ[  ) [  ڝ)  )  ڝ ڝ )  w ڝ ڝ )  uo&  ڝ ڝڝuo&   tu   tu   ڝ w ڝ ڝ w ڝ tu   w tu  ThinMediumDoubleThick@ Very Thin "HHHHHFormat A "HHHHHFormat BH Mapping Tablez>ŽDH6-? Hz  )hhhB_ N*/?_ 02evevCQ p3;H?) <luHO$6z $Fz$Vz !"#$tz$%&'($z,)*+,-$z./012$z34567$z 89:;<$z = > ? @ A $z B C D E F $z G H I J K $z, L M N O P $<z Q R S T U $Lz VWXYZ$\z,[\]^_$bz, `abcd$z efghi$z jklmn$z opqrs$z tuvwx$z yz{|}$z ~$z $z     $z  $zC $R "$b"$r"$" !")M #$%$$z !"& ' ( ) $4z ""*!+!,!-!$Dz!#"."/"0"1"$pz"$"2#3#4#5#$z#%"6$7$8$9$$z$&":%;%<%=%$z%'">&?&@&A&$z&("B'C'D'E'$z')"F(G(H(I($$z(%J)K)L)M)$:_ +%N*O*P*$J_*,%Q+R+S+$Z_+-%T,U,V,$j_,.%W-X-Y-$z_-/%Z.[.\.$_.%]/^/_/$Z_ 1%`0a0b0c0$j_02%d1e1f1g1$z_1%h2i2j2k2$ 4%l3m3n3$35%o4p4q4$46%r5s5t5$57%u6v6w6$68%x7y7z7$79%{8|8}8$8:%~999$9;%:::$:%;;;$) =  <<<$C)<> ===$S)=? >>>$i)>@ ???${)?A @@@$)@B AAA$)AO B B!B$<zL 'C(C)C*C+CzE",D-D.D/D0DzFD"1E]E^E_E`EzGE"aFbFcFdFeFzHF fGgGhGiGjGzIG kHlHmHnHoHzJH pIqIrIsItIzKI uJvJwJxJyJzLJ zK{K|K}K~KzCK LLLLL)N MM M)OM  N N N)BN  OOOComment d BlackT!WhiteddARedddGreendd BluedCyandMagentad YellowColor 8Header/Footer $1Header/Footer $1Header/Footer $2Header/Footer $2IndexIndexCommentCommentSubjectSubjectAuthorAuthorGlossaryGlossaryEquationEquation Hypertext Hypertext  Cross-Ref Cross-Ref Conditional TextConditional TextPositionFMPrivatePositionFMPrivateRangeEndFMPrivateRangeEndFMPrivate HTML Macro HTML Macro Times-Roman FrameRoman Times-Bold FrameRoman FrameRoman FrameRoman FrameRomanHelvetica-Bold FrameRomanSymbol FrameRoman FrameRomanTimes-BoldItalic FrameRoman FrameRomanTimes Helvetica SymbolArial TimesNewRoman RegularRegular BoldRegularItalicɾȿU@!9cMH)Fw&`rOBcq:\񔊻ul}J,3  Ȃ{}rJQzW'>^,dnDCe!&̥"ǥPN[ n̲/ktqD8"e?u AGe87jZ@8BvYEk+I:% W*yBSo"Rwي#@ixa'/oFS*^wT{+W:\*:2RtO (zvqE̍o8Z9zZ