---
title: "Handling Scope Ambiguities in English — paper by Hurum (1988)"
description: "Hurum presents a LISP program that resolves scope ambiguities in single English sentences. 20 references, cited by 4 papers here."
authors: ["Sven Hurum"]
year: 1988
venue: "Second Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing"
source: "https://aclanthology.org/A88-1008/"
doi: "10.3115/974235.974246"
licence: "CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/hurum-1988-handling-scope-ambiguities-english/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/hurum-1988-handling-scope-ambiguities-english/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [1988](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/1988/) / Handling Scope Ambiguities in English

# Handling Scope Ambiguities in English

**Authors:** Sven Hurum · **Year:** 1988 · **Venue:** [Second Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/anlp/) ([ANLP 1988](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/venues/anlp/1988/)) · **Publisher:** [Association for Computational Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/publishers/association-for-computational-linguistics/) · **Licence:** [CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/A88-1008/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/A88-1008.pdf) · [DOI 10.3115/974235.974246](https://doi.org/10.3115/974235.974246) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W2009582169)

**Citations:** 16 citations (OpenAlex, 2026-10-14) · 4 in our library, of the 149,439 papers whose bibliographies we read

## Summary
Hurum presents a LISP program that resolves scope ambiguities in single English sentences. A modified GPSG parser produces logical forms in which quantifiers, coordinators and negation are left unscoped, at their surface positions. The scoper then moves these operators into place. It does this bottom-up and left-to-right in a single pass and returns every valid reading. As it builds readings, it discards logically equivalent duplicates and ranks the rest by preference. The ranking uses domain-independent weights for pairs of operators, indexed by operator type and by the structural relation between the two operators. The author derived these weights from his own judgements on many pragmatically neutral sentences, checking them against earlier empirical studies. Much of the paper covers the hard cases. Coordination can create vacuous quantification and duplicated operators, and it is unclear how pairs should be chosen for comparison and how their weights should be combined. The work matters because it treats coordinators and preference heuristics, which earlier scoping algorithms had mostly ignored. It also gives a clear hook for adding pragmatic knowledge later.

## Key points
- **Operators handled:**
  - Quantifiers, coordinators and negation are unscoped and get moved by the scoper.
  - Adverbs, predicates and connectives such as if-then are recognized but stay in place.
  - Tense, aspect and modals currently take innermost scope.
- **Coordination:** coordination is supported in four kinds of construction: coordinated verbs, coordinated verb phrases, coordinated noun phrases, and coordinated complements of nouns.
- **Redundancy test:** a reading is dropped when two commutative operators apply back to back and the outer one has a larger surface-position suffix than the inner one.
  - For a quantifier next to a coordinator, only the reading with the quantifier inside the coordinator is kept.
  - Any reading containing an operator pair weighted below a min-weight parameter is also pruned.
- **Ranking:**
  - Readings are ordered by their average pairwise scoping weight.
  - The weight table stays small through default values and "standard" operator types, with some standing for existentials and each for universals.
- **Embedding hierarchy:** following van Lehn (1978), an embedded operator takes wide scope less readily as its host phrase moves from a PP to a VP to a full clause.

## Interesting ideas
- Leaving operators in their surface positions during parsing and resolving scope in a separate later pass keeps the parser simple and makes scoping its own inspectable step.
- A canonical order based on surface position (the outer operator must come earlier in the sentence) eliminates logically equivalent readings without any theorem proving.
- Preferences are stored as pairwise weights indexed by operator type and structural relation, with defaults and stand-in types keeping the table tiny and readable.
- Pragmatic or domain knowledge acts as a veto: setting a pair's weight below the min-weight threshold removes every reading that contains that ordering.
- Operators copied across a coordination must scope the same way in every copy, which is tracked per reading.

## For Mova

How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests:

- **I1** (frames): quantifiers, negation and "or" could stay attached to their UD nodes, and a dedicated scope stage could list the possible orderings before frames are committed.
- **I2** (world): when building the world of a text, the same rule could collapse equivalent quantifier orderings, so only genuinely different worlds are enumerated.
- **I3** (frames): a small explainable table keyed by quantifier type and UD relation (e.g. inside an obl PP vs inside a ccomp clause) could rank readings and print the reason for each choice.
- **I4** (world): ontology or knowledge-graph facts could veto implausible scope orderings through the same threshold, without changing the core scoper.
- **I5** (frames): when a shared object is distributed over coordinated verbs ("hope and intend to buy a boat"), Mova could enforce one consistent entity reading across both frames.

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

## Institutions

- [University of Alberta](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/universities/university-of-alberta/) — University, Edmonton, Canada · 51 works · 5,017 citations

📚 Shelves (4): [🖥️ Computer Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/) · 18,614 works · [🤖 Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/artificial-intelligence/) · 17,965 works · [🎭 Arts and Humanities](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/) · 17,450 works · [🗣️ Language and Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/language-and-linguistics/) · 17,296 works

🧭 Topics (1): [English](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/topics/english/) · 2,379 works

## Cite

Cite as: Sven Hurum. 1988. Handling Scope Ambiguities in English. Second Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@inproceedings{hurum1988handling,
  title = {{Handling Scope Ambiguities in English}},
  author = {Sven Hurum},
  booktitle = {Second Conference on Applied Natural Language Processing},
  year = {1988},
  doi = {10.3115/974235.974246},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.3115/974235.974246}
}
```

- [← previous Identifying Zero Pronouns in Japanese Dialogue](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/yoshimoto-1988-identifying-zero-pronouns-japanese-dialogue/)
- [next → Presuppositions as Beliefs](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/horton-1988-presuppositions-as-beliefs/)
- [↑ back to papers of 1988](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/1988/)

## References

20 references, 3 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Dahl, V. (1979), "Quantification in a Three-V~.lued Logic for Natural Language Question-Answering Systems", Proceedings of the Sixth International Joint Conference for Artificial Intelligence, 182-187. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Dahl%2C+V%2E+%281979%29%2C+%22Quantification+in+a+Three%2DV%7E%2Elued+Logic+for+Natural+Language+Question%2DAnswering+Systems%22%2C+Proceedings+of+the+Sixth+International+Joint+Conference+for+Artificial+Intelligence%2C+182%2D187)
2. Ene, M. (1981), Tense Without Scope: An Analysis of Nouns as Indexicals, unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation (University of Wisconsin, Madison). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ene%2C+M%2E+%281981%29%2C+Tense+Without+Scope%3A+An+Analysis+of+Nouns+as+Indexicals%2C+unpublished+Ph%2ED%2E+Dissertation+%28University+of+Wisconsin%2C+Madison%29%2E)
3. Fodor, J.D. (1976), The Linguistic Description of Opaque Contexts, Ph.D. Dissertation, available from Indiana University Linguistics Club. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Fodor%2C+J%2ED%2E+%281976%29%2C+The+Linguistic+Description+of+Opaque+Contexts%2C+Ph%2ED%2E+Dissertation%2C+available+from+Indiana+University+Linguistics+Club%2E)
4. Gil, D. (1982), "Quantifier Scope, Linguistic Variation, and Natural Language Semantics", Linguistics and Philosophy 5, 421-472. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00355582)
5. Hintikka, 1. (1974), "Quantification vs. Quantification Theory", Linguistic Inquiry 5, 153-177. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hintikka%2C+1%2E+%281974%29%2C+%22Quantification+vs%2E+Quantification+Theory%22%2C+Linguistic+Inquiry+5%2C+153%2D177%2E)
6. Hobbs, J.R. (1983), "[An Improper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/hobbs-1983-improper-treatment-quantification-ordinary-english/)", Proceedings of the Twenty-First Annual Meeting of the Association for Computaional Linguistics, 57-63.
7. Hobbs, J.R. & S.M. Shieber (1987), "[An Algorithm for Generating Quantifier Scopings](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/hobbs-1987-algorithm-generating-quantifier-scopings/)", (In preparation).
8. Hurum, S. (1987), Quantifier Scoping in Initial Logical Translations of English Sentences, M.Sc. thesis, University of Alberta, 1-242. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hurum%2C+S%2E+%281987%29%2C+Quantifier+Scoping+in+Initial+Logical+Translations+of+English+Sentences%2C+M%2ESc%2E+thesis%2C+University+of+Alberta%2C+1%2D242%2E)
9. Hurum, S. & L.K. Schubert (1986), "Two Types of Quantifier Scoping", Proceedings of the Sixth Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence", 39-43. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Hurum%2C+S%2E+%26+L%2EK%2E+Schubert+%281986%29%2C+%22Two+Types+of+Quantifier+Scoping%22%2C+Proceedings+of+the+Sixth+Canadian+Conference+on+Artificial+Intelligence%22%2C+39%2D43%2E)
10. Ioup, G. (1975), "Some Universals for Quantifier Scope", in J.P. Kimball (ed.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 4, (New York: Academic Press), 37-58. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368828_003)
11. Lepore, E. & J. Garson (1983), "Pronouns and Quantifier-Scope in English", Journal of Philosophical Logic 12, 327-358. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00263482)
12. McCord, M.C. (1981), "Focalizers, the Scoping Problem and Semantic Interpretation Rules in Logic Grammars", Proceedings of the International Workshop on Logic Programming for Expert Systems, Logicon, (Woodland Hills). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=McCord%2C+M%2EC%2E+%281981%29%2C+%22Focalizers%2C+the+Scoping+Problem+and+Semantic+Interpretation+Rules+in+Logic+Grammars%22%2C+Proceedings+of+the+International+Workshop+on+Logic+Programming+for+Expert+Systems%2C+Logicon%2C+)
13. Saarinen, E. (1980), "Quantifier Phrases are (at Least) Five Ways Ambiguous in Intensional Contexts", in F. Heny (ed.), Ambiguities in lntensional Contexts, (Dordrecht: Reidel), 1-45. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-8377-9_1)
14. Saint-Dizier, P. (1985), "Handling Quantifier Scope Ambiguities in a Semantic Representation of Natural Language Sentences", in V. Dahl & P. Saint-Dizier (eds.), Natural Language Understanding Programming, (North-holland), 49-63. and Schubert, L.K. & F.J. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Saint%2DDizier%2C+P%2E+%281985%29%2C+%22Handling+Quantifier+Scope+Ambiguities+in+a+Semantic+Representation+of+Natural+Language+Sentences%22%2C+in+V%2E+Dahl+%26+P%2E+Saint%2DDizier+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Natural+Language+Understanding+Program)
15. Pelletier (1982), "From English to Logic: Context-Free Computation of 'Conventional' Logical Translation", American Journal of Computational Linguistics 8, 26-44. Reprinted (with corrections) in B.J. Grosz, K. Sparck-Jones & B.L. Webber (eds.), Readings in Natural Language Processing, (Los Altos: Morgan Kaufman), 1986. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Pelletier+%281982%29%2C+%22From+English+to+Logic%3A+Context%2DFree+Computation+of+%27Conventional%27+Logical+Translation%22%2C+American+Journal+of+Computational+Linguistics+8%2C+26%2D44%2E+Reprinted+%28with+corrections%29+in+B%2EJ%2E+)
16. Schubert, L.K. & F.J. Pelletier (1987a), "Problems in the Representation of the Logical Form of Generics, Plurals and Mass Nouns", in E. Lepore (ed.), New Directions in Semantics, (Academic Press). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Schubert%2C+L%2EK%2E+%26+F%2EJ%2E+Pelletier+%281987a%29%2C+%22Problems+in+the+Representation+of+the+Logical+Form+of+Generics%2C+Plurals+and+Mass+Nouns%22%2C+in+E%2E+Lepore+%28ed%2E%29%2C+New+Directions+in+Semantics%2C+%28Academic+Press%29%2E)
17. Schubert, L.K. & F.J. Pelletier (1987b), "Generically Speaking, With Remarks on the Interpretation of Pronouns and Tenses". To appear in G. Chierchia, B. Partee & R. Turner (eds.), Property Theory, Type Theory, and Semantics, (Dordrecht: Reidel). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Schubert%2C+L%2EK%2E+%26+F%2EJ%2E+Pelletier+%281987b%29%2C+%22Generically+Speaking%2C+With+Remarks+on+the+Interpretation+of+Pronouns+and+Tenses%22%2E+To+appear+in+G%2E+Chierchia%2C+B%2E+Partee+%26+R%2E+Turner+%28eds%2E%29%2C+Property+Theory%2C+Ty)
18. Van Lehn, K. (1978), Determining the Scope of English Quantifiers, MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory Technical Report AI-TR-483, 1-123. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Van+Lehn%2C+K%2E+%281978%29%2C+Determining+the+Scope+of+English+Quantifiers%2C+MIT+Artificial+Intelligence+Laboratory+Technical+Report+AI%2DTR%2D483%2C+1%2D123%2E)
19. Warren, D.H.D. & F.C.N. Pereira (1982), "[An Efficient Easily Adaptable System for Interpreting Natural Language Queries](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/warren-1982-efficient-easily-adaptable-system-interpreting/)", American Journal of Computational Linguistics 8, 1 1 0 - 1 1 9 . [↗](https://doi.org/10.5555/972942.972944)
20. Woods, W.A. (1978), "Semantics and Quantification in Natural Language Question Answering", Advances in Computers, vol. 17, (New York: Academic Press), 1-87. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2458(08)60390-3)

*Updated 1 November 2026*