It may be better if dependency semantics based interpretation goes into a direction where an incomplete/incorrect sentence is reformulated to be syntactically correct and then gets interpreted, mainly due to functionality like tagging what is actually prepared during syntactic analysis. Answering questions depends on tagging so that needs to be investigated.
If a sentence is syntactically incorrect but can be interpreted based on dependency semantics then based on the structured syntactic error reports we could loop over each error message of the syntactic interpretations and check which symbols the syntactic parser expects. Replacing the wrong symbol with the expected one and retrying the syntactic interpretation with an nlg generated sentence can then be done. The question is how many times shall it be done for each error message? As after the symbol replacement the interpretation may fail again many times till a syntactically correct sentence is generated (if at all).
It may be better if dependency semantics based interpretation goes into a direction where an incomplete/incorrect sentence is reformulated to be syntactically correct and then gets interpreted, mainly due to functionality like tagging what is actually prepared during syntactic analysis. Answering questions depends on tagging so that needs to be investigated.
If a sentence is syntactically incorrect but can be interpreted based on dependency semantics then based on the structured syntactic error reports we could loop over each error message of the syntactic interpretations and check which symbols the syntactic parser expects. Replacing the wrong symbol with the expected one and retrying the syntactic interpretation with an nlg generated sentence can then be done. The question is how many times shall it be done for each error message? As after the symbol replacement the interpretation may fail again many times till a syntactically correct sentence is generated (if at all).