THEORY OF FORMAL GRAMMARS

A. V. Gladkii and A. YR. Dikovskii U D C 51:801

The p r e s e n t s u r v e y m a i n l y c o v e r s published w o r k s a b s t r a c t e d in the Soviet m a t h e m a t i c a l a b s t r a c t

journal ( " R e f e r a t i v n y t Z h u r n a l - M a t e m a t i k a n) in the p e r i o d f r o m 1969 through 197!.
Not included in the s u r v e y a r e w o r k s devoted wholly to applications of f o r m a l g r a m m a r s to n a t u r a l
languages and p r o g r a m m i n g languages.
U n d e r s t a n d a b l y , we could not possibly discuss in depth all of the r e l e v a n t w o r k s that have been a b -
s t r a c t e d in the s t a t e d period. M e r e p a s s i n g mention of a p a r t i c u l a r p a p e r o r nothing beyond its inclusion in
the l i t e r a t u r e cited is not to be i n t e r p r e t e d in any s e n s e as a value judgmenz (in p a r t i c u l a r , m a n y p a p e r s
have not been d e s c r i b e d for the s i m p l e r e a s o n that they w e r e not available to the authors and the a b s t r a c t s
did not a f f o r d a sufficient g r a s p of t h e i r content).
P r i o r to d i s c u s s i n g m o r e s p e c i a l i z e d a s p e c t s of the subject we mention s o m e books and s u r v e y a r -
ticles. T h r e e books have been published to date (to the b e s t of our knowledge) on the t h e o r y of g r a m m a r s - .
G i n s b u r g ' s book [87] on c o n t e x t - f r e e languages, G r o s s and Lentinrs book [111] (an e l e m e n t a r y text), and
Hopcroft and U l l m a n r s book [122].* Among r e c e n t s u r v e y s we cite a x t i c l e s by Aho and U l l m a n [57], Glad-
kii and Dikovskii [14], and Stotskii [42, 43] (on d e r i v a t i o n control). A b i b l i o g r a p h y on the theory of f o r m a l
languages and the t h e o r y of a u t o m a t a has also been c o m p i l e d by Wood [215].
We group the specific p r o b l e m s and r e s u l t s in eight s e c t i o n s . Sections 2 through 8 m o r e or l e s s c o r -
r e s p o n d to what we view as the m a j o r t r e n d s in the development of g r a m m a r t h e o r y . We had planned to
a s s e m b l e in Sec. I w o r k s of a " c l a s s i c a l " profile, so to speak; as it turned out, however, few w o r k s a c -
tually fall into this c a t e g o r y , and it is difficult to s y s t e m a t i z e those that do; on the other hand, t h e r e is
quite a l a r g e n u m b e r of w o r k s that r e s i s t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n in any " m a j o r n c a t e g o r y , and we have included
these as well in Sec. 1, which thus s e r v e s as a kind of "catchall w division of the s u r v e y .
The authors a r e indebted to M. K. Valley and ~. D. Stotskii f o r offering valuable suggestions and
pointing out s e v e r a l e r r o r s .

1. CLASSIFICATION OF GRAMMARS AND LANGUAGES; PROPERTIES

OF THE VARIOUS GRAM?dARS AND LANGUAGE CLASSES
Several " i n t e r m e d i a t e " (to the fundamental c l a s s e s of Chomsky) c l a s s e s of g r a m m a r s and languages
have been a c t i v e l y investigated in r e c e n t y e a r s . P a r t i c u l a r I y intriguing a r e c e r t a i n s p e c i a l types of con-
t e x t - s e n s i t i v e g r a m m a r s as well as v a r i a n t s of g r a m m a r s specifying c l a s s e s of languages that a r e s t r i c t l y
i n t e r m e d i a t e to c o n t e x t - s e n s i t i v e (CS) and c o n t e x t - f r e e (CF) languages.
A r e p r e s e n t a t i v e e x a m p l e is A h o ' s study [54]. The concept of an indexed g r a r n m a r is introduced,
which m a y be t n f o r m a I I y d e s c r i b e d as follows. A CF g r a m m a r F is given, along with a s e t of index e l e -
m e n t s called flags. A s s o c i a t e d with e v e r y r u I e of r : r = A - - x0BlxlB~...xn_iBnxu, w h e r e A, B i . . . . . B n
a r e n o n t e r m i n a l s y m b o l s and x0. . . . . x n a r e s t r i n g s of t e r m i n a l s y m b o l s , is a c e r t a i n s e t of flags a n d / o r
a finite Set of a t t r i b u t e s , i.e., o r d e r e d tuples of the f o r m ((1, . . . . ~.u), w h e r e the ~i a r e s t r i n g s of flags. A
d e r i v a t i o n t r e e in an indexed g r a m m a r is a d e r i v a t i o n t r e e in P, e v e r y node of which is a s s o c i a t e d with a

*A l e c t u r e c o u r s e by Gladkii [12] has also been published in m i m e o g r a p h f o r m .

T r a n s l a t e d f r o m Itogi Nauki i Tekhniki (TeoriFa V e r o y a t n o s t e i , M a t e m a t i c h e s k a y a Statistika, T e o r e -
t i c h e s k a y a Kibernetika), Vol. 10, pp. !07-142, !972.

0 1 9 7 4 Consultants Bureau. a division o f Plenum P a b l i s h i n g Corporation. 227 T e s t !7th Street. Y e w York, V. }'. ]OOil.
Vo part of" ~.his publication ,~av be reproduced, stored in a re~ri'eval s y s t e m , or transmitted, in ~n~" ;orrn or b~" an~" means,
electronic. ,nec,ZzanzcaL, photocopying, ,micro~liming, recordinz or ~therwise. without written "~errnission o t ~ h e publ~isher, t
copy o{ ;his ~zrticie is (zvailabte trom the p u b l i s h e r ?'or ".'15.00.

542
string of flags as follows: !) The root is associated with the empty string; 2) if a certain node corresponds
to an application of a rule r = A -- x0B1xtB2...Xn_~Bnxn and is associated with a string ~7, then flag strings
are associated with the nodes corresponding to BI .... B n in one of two ways, namely either, under the con-
dftion that (~I..... ~n) is one of the characteristics of rule r, a string ~iU is associated with each node Bi;
or, if U =/~7' and / is one of the flags of rule r, the sl;rmg U' is associated with each node B i (thus, the
tree is associated with a kind of "branching pushdown store "). The language generated by an indexed ~ram-
m a r can now be defined as the set of terminal strings T of trees of the type described for which the strings
associated with pendant nodes are empty and terminal symbols are located at pendant nodes. Examples of
indexed g r a m m a r s that generate CS languages are given. On the other hand, it is established that all "in-
dexed languages" are CS languages and that they form a full abstract family (see Sec. 5, below); hence it
follows that the class of "indexed languages" is strictly intermediate to CS and C F languages. It is proved,
in addition, that the language emptiness and finiteness problems are solvable in the class of indexed ~OTam-
mars. A special class of automata is defined, namely "nested-stack automata,"$ which exactly accept
"indexed languages."
Of considerable interest are one-sided CS ~o-rammars, i.e.,~oTammars with rules either of the type
A @ -" ' ~ or of the type ~A --- ~ (A [s a nonterminal symbol, ~,' ~%). For a long time it was not even
known whether such ~oTammars could generate anything other than C F languages. Examples providing an
answer to this question have been indicated by Samoilenko [38] and Havel [I!7]. Haines [113] later proved
that the class of languages generated by one-sided CS ~ r a m m a r s is exactly the class of CS languages.
Properly speaking, Haines obtained a stronger result, namely, that for each CS g r a m m a r F with a termi-
nal alphabet V it is possible to construct a g r a m m a r F' with a nonterminal alphabet W and rules of the type
A B -- ~ B and A -- ~, where A, B E W and ~6V~W, as well as a C F g r a m m a r F" with a terminal alphabet
W, such that L (1"3 coincides with the set of strings obtained from strings of the language L (F") by the rules
of F' (it has been hypothesized that it [s impossible to replace the C F g r a m m a r in this theorem with an au-
tomaton grammar).
W e now ~ve two results concerning "intermediate classes." Jones [126] and, independently, N e p o m -
nyashchii [32] have shown that the class of rudimentary languages (in the sense of Smullyan) strictly in-
cludes the class of C F languages. Arikawa [60] has investi~Tateda special class of elementary formal sys-
tems in the sense of Smullyan and has shown that languages representable in systems of this class are
strictlyintermediate to CS and C F languages. See also Liu [154].
A m o n g the studies on the theory of C F g r a m m a r s we cite the work of Crestln [70], in which it is
shown that a language L = {xx! xE{a, ..... a~}*}~-(~ > l) has infiniteambiguity (i.e.,given any C F g r a m m a r
F generating L, for any positive integer there is a string in L that has at least a distinct derivation trees
in F). A similar fact has been established by Ogden [168] for the language [{a~b~cJl L / > l}U{a~b/cj 1L / > I}]
(see also [159]).
W e also note Wood's generalization [216] of the Greibach normal form theorem.
Korenjak and Hopcroft [143] have investigated C F g r a m m a r s in which the right sides of the rules
start with terminal symbols and in different rules with identical left sides the first symbols of the right
sides are d~fferent. For such g r a m m a r s (which are called separative) the solvabilityof the equivalence
problem and other properties are determined. Separative C F g r a m m a r s have been introduced independent-
ly by Fuksman [45, 48], who also investigates another special class of separative grammars; the conditions
are given under which such g r a m m a r s exactly generate CS and C F languages.
Several papers have been concerned with bounded C F languages as well as linear and semilinear sets
(see [87] for the definitions).
Liu and Weiner [155] have shown that the class of semilinear sets is the least class that contains
stratified semilinear sets and is closed under intersection.
Ito [124] has proved that every semilinear set can be represented by a union of finitelym a n y disjoint
linear sets (thereby solving a problem stated by Ginsburg [87]). Siromoney [195] has proved that a .neces-
sary and sufficient condition for a bounded language to be similinear is the existence of an equal matrix
~o'rammar generating ~t (see Sec. 2, below). Maurer [161] has shown that the commutative closure ~J"of

J'The terminal string of a tree is the string "inscribed" on its pendant nodes (preserving linear order).
!See [55] for more derails on these automata.
~'TInotherwords, the set of all possible strings obtained from SiT,rigs of L by permutations of symbols.

543
e v e r y CF language tC-a,*a2*a3* (a~, a~, a, a r e e l e m e n t a r y symbols) is also a CF language. Drieux [76] has
deduced a n e c e s s a r y condition for a bounded CF language to be d e t e r m i n i s t i c and v e r i f e d the e x i s t e n c e of
unambiguous n o n d e t e r m i n i s t i c bounded CF languages.
L e t i c h e v s k i i [24] and Knuth [138] have defined s e m a n t i c s for CF languages. In [24] a c e r t a i n v e r y
g e n e r a l mode of specification of languages by m e a n s of generative a l g e b r a s is d i s c u s s e d (CF g - r a m m a r s
can be t r e a t e d a s a s p e c i a l c a s e of such a l g e b r a s ) ; the syntactic s t r u c t u r e of the language g e n e r a t e d by an
a l g e b r a is defined as z h o m o m o r p h i c mapping of the c o r r e s p o n d i n g f r e e a l g e b r a , i.e., the syntactic a l g e b r a
(in the c a s e of CF g r a m m a r s the syntactic a l g e b r a is the set of all possible labeled s y s t e m s of constituents),
onto the a l g e b r a g e n e r a t i n g the language. Another a l g e b r a of the s a m e type is also c o n s i d e r e d , n a m e l y the
s e m a n t i c a l g e b r a , and the s e m a n t i c s is specified by a h o m o m o r p h i c m a p p i n g $ of the sFatactic a l g e b r a onto
the s e m a n t i c a l g e b r a ; an i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of a s t r i n g is a S - m a p of its syntactic s t r u c t u r e . The s c h e m e of
the s e m a n t i c definition d e s c r i b e d in [138] is c o n s i d e r a b l y m o r e g e n e r a l , but is only applicable to CF Ian-
g~lages.
We now cite s o m e m o r e individualistic w o r k s . G r u s k a [112] has c o n s t r u c t e d an infinite h i e r a r c h y of
CF languages on the l e a s t possible n u m b e r of r u l e s of their g e n e r a t i n g g r a m m a r s and has obtained s e v e r a l
other r e s u l t s p e r t a i n i n g to the c o m p l e x i t y of CF g r a m m a r s .
~ulik [74] has i n v e s t i g a t e d " u - a r y g r a m m a r s , " which g e n e r a t e o r d e r e d s y s t e m s of n s t r i n g s ; a rule
of an n - a r y g r a m m a r r e p r e s e n t s an o r d e r e d n - a d ( r t , . . . , rn), where r i is e i t h e r a substitution rule or a
blank. The specification of o r d e r e d s y s t e m s of s t r i n g s by m e a n s of n-tape a u t o m a t a is d i s c u s s e d in a n o t h e r
p a p e r by the s a m e author [73].
Kr~l [147] has indicated c e r t a i n conditions for a language to be context f r e e .
See also [2, 75, 145, 151, 186, 214].

2. DERIVATION CONTROL
Before describing the concrete results on ~derivation control n (i.e., derivation-bounded grammars),
it will be to our advantage to introduce a general scheme from which individual types of control can be de-
duced as special cases.
Let F be a generative g r a m m a r . It is possible to associate with each derivation D in F a corre-
sponding map, i.e.,a sequence at,..., a s, where a i = (~i-t, ri, ki); here ~i is the i-th string of the deriva-
tion D, r i is the rule applied in the i-th step of D, i.e., in the t~ansltlon from ~ui_I to ~ui, and k i is the posi-
tion of the application of the rule in the i-th step, i.e., the distance from the left end of~i_ 1 to the start of
the to-be-substi~ted occurrence of the left side of the rule. Let P be a certain predicate on the set of
m a p s of all possible complete derivations r in F (control predicate). The set of those (terminal) strings
for which complete derivations exist with m a p s satis~ying P is denoted by L p (F).
Following are the most important special cases:
A. Generalized g r a m m a r s [Stotskii [39]). A predicate P depends only on a sequence of rules. If P is
specified by a g r a m m a r F', in place of L p (r) we write L (F, F'); the pair (I', F') is then properly referred
to as a generalized g r a m m a r .
AI. Matrix g r a m m a r s (Abraham [53]). Here L(F') is an iteration of a finite set of nonempty strings
(matrices).
B. P a r a l l e l c o n s i d e r a t i o n can he given to the c a s e in which the control p r e d i c a t e depends only on
sequences of s t r i n g s r i-
C. The control p r e d i c a t e depends on (sequences of) r u l e s and s t r i n g s , but not on the locations where
the r u l e s a r e applied.
C ! . P r o g r a m m e d g r a m m a r s (Rosenkrantz [184]). E a c h rule r E R (where R is the s e t of all r u l e s of
the g r a m m a r ) has a s s o c i a t e d with it two s e t s of r u l e s : S (r) and F (r). The control p r e d i c a t e P has the f o r m
v~ Q (i), w h e r e
0<i~--I

TA complete derivation is a derivation of a t e r m i n a l string f r o m a s t a r t symbol.

544
 .Q (i) - [rz (r~)] V (zPo, Pr . . . . . p~/R)

[Here and e l s e w h e r e the symbol Ap (~, p} signifies that rule p is applied to s t r i n g ~.]
C2. G r a m m a r s with o r d e r i n g (Fris [83]). A partial o r d e r i n g r e l a t i o n < is introduced in the set R;
the control predicate has the form vi [(vpdR)(Ap(~-t, p ) D ~ ( ~ < r~) 1.
0<i4~

C3. Each rule r E R has a c o r r e s p o n d i n g set of strings M (r), and the conwol predicate has the form

C31. All M (r) a r e r e ~ l a r sets (A languages). This is the case of g r a m m a r s with automaton r e s t r i c -
tions ( F r i s [83]).
C311. Each M(r) is either W* o r is r e p r e s e n t a b l e by the i n t e r s e c t i o n of sets of the form W*AW*
and the c o m p l e m e n t s to those sets (here W is the total v o c a b u l a r y of the g r a m m a r , and A is a nonterminal
symbol). This is a special case of the conditional g r a m m a r s of L o m k o v s k a y a (see below).
D. The c o n t r o l predicate depends not only on the strings and r u l e s , but also on the locations where
the latter a r e applied.
D1. Conditional g r a m m a r s (Lomkovskaya [28, 29]; see also [43]).
f
Let ~[-1 = ~ i - t ~ i ~ i - 1 , where Vi is the left side of rute r i and specifically identifies the o c c u r r e n c e
of ~i to be r e p l a c e d in the i-th step of a derivation. We associate with each r 6 R three sets of strings
M (r), M' (r), and M"(r), c o n s i d e r i n g the c a s e in which each of these sets is r e p r e s e n t e d as d e s c r i b e d in
case C311 above. The control predicate is r e p r e s e n t e d in the form

v~ [C~,,_~M (r,)) ~ (+L,6M' (r,)) ~ (=;_,~u" (r,))].

O<t.,~

D2, D3. E a c h of the c a s e s given above can have two c o r r e s p o n d i n g parallel c a s e s , in which the con-
trol p r e d i c a t e is augmented (conjunctively) by one of the following conditions:
In case D2: F o r e v e r y i a substituted o c c u r r e n c e of the left side of a rule r i in a s t r i n g ~ l - t is the
leftmost of those o c c u r r e n c e s of the left side of r i in r l which could have been substituted without violating
any of the o t h e r conditions.
In case DS: F o r e v e r y i to the left of a substituted o c c u r r e n c e of the left side of a rule r i in oai_ i
there a r e no o c c u r r e n c e s of nonterrninal symbols.
We denote these c a s e s with the same t e r m s as the c o r r e s p o n d i n g "main" c a s e s , witJa the addition in
case D2 of the qualifying adjective " l e f t - s i d e d , " for example, l e f t - s i d e d m a t r i x g r a m m a r , l e f t - s i d e d g r a m -
m a r with o r d e r i n g ; and with the addition in case D3 of the adjective " l e f t - t e r m i n a I . "
D41 (Kr~l [146]). The set of maps Mp satisfying a predicate P is included in an i t e r a ~ o n of a finite
set of maps, each of which has the form ( ~ , rl, k 0 , (~I, r~, k 2) . . . . . (~t-t, rt, kt), where ~,0=~oA,~,A~...
~,_~A,~, ~----~0~,~A~...~_,A~. . . . . . ~_~ =~o,=:~.....~;_~A~, and for e v e r y i the symbol A t and the s t r i n g ~oi are
the left and right sides of mate r i, r e s p e c t i v e l y . *
D42 (Kr~t [146]). The same with the addition of one new condition: An o c c u r r e n c e of -%-i is not in-
cluded in any s t r i n g ~i-t, ! -- i --< t.
We now highlight c e r t a i n r e s u l t s . Rosenkeantz [184] has investigated p r o g r a m m e d g r a m m a r s . He
shows, in p a r t i c u l a r , that a p r o g r a m m e d CF g r a m m a r in which con~racting males a r e admitted (i.e., a non-
a - f r e e ~ a m m a r ) g e n e r a t e s a r b i t r a r y r e c u r s i v e l y enumerable Ianguages, p r o g r a m m e d CS g r a m m a r s @n-
c r a t e all CS !an~oamges and only those, p r o g r a m m e d CF =oTammsms without contracting r u l e s generate a

tThis si"tuation is equivalent to a simultaneous application of rules r i..... r t under the condition tha~ each
ri+ I is applied to the right of r i.

545
c e r t a i n c l a s s of languages s t r i c t l y i n t e r m e d i a t e to the c l a s s e s of CS and CF tan~aages (this s t a t e m e n t i m -
plies analogous r e s u l t s for matTL"~ g r a m m a r s and g r a m m a r s with o r d e r i n g , since e i t h e r is r e a d i l y m o d e l e d
by p r o g r a m m e d g r a m m a r s ) , and p r o g r a m m e d l i n e a r and automaton g r a m m a r s g e n e r a t e all l i n e a r and au-
tomaton languages, respectively, and only those. A n algorithm recognizing emptiness of the generated ]an-
guags is obtained for "unconditional programmed C F grammars" [i.e.,those for which Vr(g(r)=F(r))].
Left-sided programmed g r a m m a r s are also investigated.
Stotskii [39, 40] has investigated the generative power of generalized grammars. He calls a general-
ized g r a m m a r (r, r') a "gTammar of type (5",~')" if r6~" and F'E#', where ./ and ~' are certain classes
of grammars. In particular, g r a m m a r s of type (A, A) exactly generate all A languages, those of type (A CF)
generate C F languages, and those of type (A, CS) and (CS, A) generate CS languages; the class of languages
geueratable by g r a m m a r s of type (CF, A) coincides with the class of languages generated by C F matrix
g r a m m a r s (the latter statement has been verified independently by Borshchev).
Ginsburg and Spanier [99] have investigated the properties of languages generated by left-terminal
generalized g r a m m a r s (r, r') ('leftmost derivations") such that the left side of each rule of the g r a m m a r
r is a nonempty string of nonterminal symbols. Following is one of the main results of the paper. Let
be a full abstract family of languages (see Sec. 5, below). Then the family of languages C2, generated by
left-terminal generalized g r a m m a r s (F, r'), subject to the given restriction, such that L (r')6S, is also a
full abstract family. The family C ~ in this case coincides with the set of languages of the form /2(LNL'),
where LEs, L' is a C F language, and h is a homomorphism. It follows from this result, in particular, that
if ~ is the class of all A languages, then C ~ coincides with the class of all C F languages and with the
class of languages generated by left-terminal matrix grammars. The following result also deserves men-
tion. If the g r a m m a r F' generates a bounded language, then the language generated by a left-terminal gen-
eralized g r a m m a r (F, F') is also bounded.
A series of papers is devoted to matrix g r a m m a r s and their generalizations. Siromoney [194] has
introduced the following definition: A matrix C F g r a m m a r is called equal if it satisfies the following con-
ditions: a) Its nonferminal vocabulary has the form

(1, An . . . . . A,,, A~t . . . . . A2, . . . . . AsL. . . . . As,},

where I is the s t a r t s y m b o l ; b) its m a t r i c e s have the f o r m { I - - xtAit...Xk.Aik } ( o n e - r u l e m a t r i x ) , the f o r m

{Att - " xtAj! . . . . . Aik - - XkAjk} , or the f o r m {All --- x t . . . . . Aik - - Xk}, w h e r e x i . . . . . x k a r e s t r i n g s in the
t e r m i n a l v o c a b u l a r y . The c l o s u r e p r o p e r t i e s of c l a s s e s of languages g e n e r a t e d by such g r a m m a r s a r e in-
vestigated, and unambiguous g r a m m a r s of this type a r e c o n s t r u c t e d for known a m b i g u o u s CF languages.
Equal m a t r i x CF g r a m m a r s have also been studied in the p r e v i o u s l y cited work of the s a m e author [195].
In p a r t i c u l a r , the solvability of the boundedness p r o b l e m for a language g s a e r a t e d by such a g r a m m a r is
p r o v e d in that p a p e r , along with the solvability of the equivalence p r o b l e m for equal m a t r i x g r a m m a r s
g e n e r a t i n g bounded languages.

I b a r r a [123] h a s studied a n o t h e r c l a s s of m a t r i x CF g r a m m a r s , which constitute a g e n e r a l i z a t i o n of

equal m a t r i x g r a m m a r s . The solvability of a n u m b e r of a l g o r i t h m i c p r o b l e m s and o t h e r r e s u l t s a r e e s -
tablished for these g r a m m a r s .
Krs [146] has invest'igatedCF g r a m m a r s subject to the control d e s c r i b e d above in c a s e s D41 and
D42. It is shown that the e m p t i n e s s and finiteness p r o b l e m s for a language axe unsolvable for both of these
grammar classes.
In [191] Salomaa d i s c u s s e s control p r e d i c a t e s of the type vi (r~F(i)), where F (n) is a function of a

natural a r g u m e n t , its values f o r m i n g the s e t s of r u l e s of the g r a m m a r . It is p r o v e d that CF g r a m m a r s

with this type of control and p e r i o d i c i t y of the function F g e n e r a t e e x a c t l y the s a m e c l a s s of languages as
matrix C F grammars. Another type of control predicates is also introduced, as follows: Let F (n) denote
the same entity as before. A m a p (c~0,rt, kl).... , (C~s_t, rs, ks) satisfies P if for every i = 1..... s there
is a string of rules u i (possibly empty) such that: a) any rule from u i is not applicable to the string ~ui_t;
b) m rtu2r2.., usr s 6 F(1)... F(n), where n = lutrl. ,. usrsI. An algorithm is described for solving the lan-
g,aage emptiness problem in the class of C F g"rammars with the given control mode under the condition of
periodicity of F.

546
 W e also mention the work of Kasami [131], who considers the following t~pe of control predicate
(type F) depending on a parameter n: Let L' be a standard A language (see [III] for the definition). A m a p
("~0,rl, k~)..... (~s_t,rs, ks) satisfiesthe predicate P (r~ "of degree n" if: a) r i ...r s 6 L'; b) one of the
first n occurrences of nonterminal symbols in the corresponding string ~i-I is replaced ("rewritten") in hhe
i-th step; c) a rewritten occurrence of the left side of rule r I is leftmost in o~i_i.

It is proved that ~ : c ~ c .. and ~ ~cS~, where ~ [s the class of languages generated by C F =~ram-
m a r s with control predicates "of de~ree n" and ~ is ~he class of fan,ages generated by C F g T a m m a r s
with predicates of the same type but without condition b).
Papers on the given topic have also been contributed by Navr~[til [166], Meitus [30], J~irvl [125], and
G. Rosenberg [180].

3. COMPLEXITY MEASURES FOR THE RECOGNITION

OF LANGUAGES AND FOR DERIVATION IN GRAMMARS
W e do not propose to discuss papers on the syntactic analysis (parsing) of languages generatable by
grammars. These papers are generally of an applied character, being concerned primarily with the de-
scription of specific parsing algorithms, the discussion of which exceeds the purview of the present survey.*
With respect to parsing (recognition) algorithms we consider only one problem, which is the most
significant from the ~eoretical standpoint, namely the formulation of estimates of the complexity of the
recognition of languages by various types of automata.
A C F language recognition algorithm that operates far more rapidly than the traditionaltree-scan-
ning algorithm ~which has exponential time complexity) has been proposed by Cook. Younger [220] has
shown that this algorithm can be implemented on a three-tape Turing machine or on a single-tape three-
head Turing machine with time complexity of order n3. The same algorithm can be implemented on an or-
dinary single-tape Turing machine with a time complexity measure of order n 4 (Taniguchi and Kasami [200]).
Kasami and Torii [133] have obtained a significantlylower (in order) estimate of the recognition time for
so-called random-access machines, whose elementary operations can include, for example, the addition of
numbers contained in cells with specified order numbers or the transfer of control on a given address i';
this estimate is nqogn, which refers, however, to "more powerful" machines.
Kasami [132] has also established the fact that linear languages can be recognized on a single-tape
single-head Turing machine in a time of order n 2 (this estimate is unimprovable, because, as proved by
Barzdin' [I], linear languages exist that are not recognized more rapidly). Lomkovskaya [27] later ex-
tended this result to metalinear languages.
Lewis, Stearns, and Hartmanis [153] have shown that any function of the form nP/q, where p < q, is
an exact (in order) tape complexity measure for the recognition of a certain C F language on a single-tape
Turing machine with input (off-line Turing machine). Exact (in order) time complexity measures for the
recognition of linear languages on ordinary single-tape Turing machines have been investigated by Valley
and Dikovskii [I0]. They p.rove that these complexity measures include, for example, all possible functions
of the form u2P/q" (log2n)Z/k, where either 0 < q < 2p < 2q or 2p = q and Z/k ~- I, as well as funcGons "ar-
bitrarily close TM to the function n log2n (which is the lower bound for these complexity measures); the ~ v e n
class of complexity measures is closed under a number of operations. Similar results are obtained for one
version of a Turlng machine with input.
Weicker [213] has obtained estimarms of the time complexity for the recognition of C F languages on
so-called tabulator Turing machines (which differ from ordinary Turing machines by the inclusion of the
instruction, ~Move from left to right to a prescribed mark."
Kosaraju [144] has investigated the complexity of the recoguitionofvarious languages on iteratlve
nets. W e note the following results: Any C F language is recognized on a two-dimensional iterative net
( " t e s s e l a t i o n s p a c e " ) i n t i m e (1 + a)n for a n y ~ > 0 (this e s t i m a t e c a n n o t be i m p r o v e d ; s e e [68]) and on a
one-dimensional iterative net in time n2.
*This particular subject is treated in [37j 46, 47, 61, 67, 135, 158, 169, 174, !85, 193, 205, 217]. Many ar-
ticles on parsingthaz have appeared in special computer-oriented publications are decidedly beyond the
~Jae scope of our survey.
tSee, e.g., [78] concerning these machines.

547
 We also mention the w o r k of Rosendahl [181] on e s t i m a t i n g the r e c o g n i t i o n time for " m u l t i d i m e n s i o n a l
languages."
The language r e c o g n i t i o n c o m p l e x i t y has a l s o been studied by G a l l a i r e [86], Kozhevnikova [21], Smith
[1971, and Kuich [150].
A n a t u r a l adjunct to the p r o b l e m s r e v i e w e d above is found in p r o b l e m s b e a r i n g on the c o m p l e x i t y of
d e r i v a t i o n s in g r a m m a r s . R e l a t i v e l y few p a p e r s a r e devoted to this topic. E s t i m a t e s of the t i m e c o m p l e x i -
ty of a d e r i v a t i o n have been i n v e s t i g a t e d by Book [63]. The following " s p e e d - u p " t h e o r e m is p r o v e d in p a r -
t i c u l a r : F o r any g r a m m a r F and any n a t u r a l n u m b e r k it is possible to c o n s t r u c t a g r a m m a r F ' equivalent
to r such that its time c o m p l e x i t y is a t l e a s t 1/k s m a l l e r than the time c o m p l e x i t y of r . S e v e r a l other r e -
sults a r e obtained, of which we cite the following. Let f ( n ) be a n u m e r i c function, and let T ( f ) be the c l a s s
of all p o s s i b l e languages g e n e r a t e d by CS g r a m m a r s whose t i m e c o m p l e x i t i e s a r e m a j o r i z e d a l m o s t e v e r y -
where b y functions of the type f ( k n ) , where k is a suitable constant. If in this c a s e f is such t h a t f ( m + n ) -~
f ( m ) + f ( n ) , then T ( f ) is an a b s t r a c t family (see Sec. 5, below) c l o s e d under substitution and i n v e r s i o n but
is not a full a b s t r a c t farnily.* See also [62].
Other p a p e r s on the c o m p l e x i t y of d e r i v a t i o n s a r e c o n c e r n e d with the index of a g r a m m a r , t B. B r a i -
herd [64] p r o p o s e s that d e r i v a t i o n s in CF g r a m m a r s (and m a t r i x g r a m m a r s ) be c h a r a c t e r i z e d by t h e i r in-
dex, i.e., by the l a r g e s t n u m b e r of o c c u r r e n c e s of n o n t e r m i n a l s y m b o l s in i n t e r m e d i a t e s t r i n g s , t He shows
that if t h e r e e x i s t s f o r a m a t r i x g r a m m a r F a n u m b e r k such that for e a c h s t r i n g of the language L (I~ t h e r e
is a d e r i v a t i o n whose index is not g r e a t e r than k, then the set of s t r i n g lengths of L (F) contains an a r i t h -
m e t i c p r o g r e s s i o n . This t h e o r e m was l a t e r s t r e n g t h e n e d by Stotskii [41]; s p e c i f i c a l l y , for e v e r y language
g e n e r a t e d by a g r a m m a r with the given p r o p e r t i e s t h e r e is an A language ( r e g u l a r set) having the s a m e
c o m p o s i t i o n (two languages have the s a m e c o m p o s i t i o n if for e v e r y s t r i n g of one of them t h e r e is a s t r i n g
of the o t h e r one with the s a m e n u m b e r of o c c u r r e n c e s of e a c h symbol). In the s a m e p a p e r Stotskii introduces
a m o r e g e n e r a l concept of the index of a g r a m m a r * " [which he defines as a function that a s s o c i a t e s with
e a c h natural n u m b e r n such that the language L ( F ) contains a s t r i n g of length ~- n the s m a l l e s t n u m b e r k
such that any s t r i n g of L (1") of length not g r e a t e r than n has a d e r i v a t i o n of index -~ k] and shows that the
o r d e r of growth of the index of an a r b i t r a r y CF g r a m m a r is of o r d e r not g r e a t e r than log2n.
Ginsburg and Spanier [100] have shown that for any g r a m m a r F, the left s i d e s of whose r u l e s do not
contain t e r m i n a l s y m b o l s , the set of s t r i n g s of a language L (1") such that d e r i v a t i o n s e x i s t in F with an in-
dex not g r e a t e r than k, where k is any fixed constant, is a CF language, and that the c l a s s of s e t s of the
given type coincides with the c l a s s of language of finite index (i.e., languages g e n e r a t e d by CF g r a m m a r s
of finite index) as welt as with the c l o s u r e of the c l a s s of linear languages under substilmtion; this r e s u l t in
conjunction with Y n t e m a ' s r e s u l t [219] a s s e r t i n g that the indicated c l o s u r e does not include the s e t of aII
" r e g u l a r b r a c k e t e d s e q u e n c e s " i m p l i e s the e x i s t e n c e of CF languages that a r e not languages of finite index.
Salomaa [188] has a l s o p r o v e d that a s e t of r e g u l a r b r a c k e t e d s e q u e n c e s is not a language of finite
index; however, t h e r e a r e l a p s e s in the proof.
The index concept has also b e e n studied by Dikovskii [18, 19], who obtains the following p a r t i c u l a r
r e s u l t . E x a m p l e s a r e given of CF languages not g e n e r a t e d by any CF g r a m m a r s whose index is of o r d e r
s m a l l e r than a l o g a r i t h m i c function (one such examp|e IS the s e t of all possible ~binary b r a c k e t e d s e -
quences"); it is shown that for any n a t u r a l n u m b e r k it is possible to c o n s t r u c t a language g e n e r a t e d by a
CF g r a m m a r of index k 1 but not g e n e r a t e d by any CF g r a m m a r of index ~ k. Dikovskit a l s o p r o p o s e s an
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the index in t e r m s of d e r i v a t i o n t r e e s .
See also J o n e s [1271.

*We o f f e r the following r e m a r k in connection with [83]. It is stated in that p a p e r that G l a d k i i ' s t h e o r e m
[11] on the existence of C$ languages not g e n e r a t e d b y CS g r a m m a r s with a time c o m p l e x i t y of o r d e r l e s s
than a quadratic fimctiou can he extended, together with the p r o o f in [11], to a r b i t r a r y g r a m m a r s . It is not
c l e a r to us, however, how this extension is to be r e a l i z e d .
t C e r t a i n facts p e r t a i n i n g to o t h e r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the complexity" of a d e r i v a t i o n in CF g r a m r n a r s , such
as the depth, d i s p e r s i o n , d e g r e e of nesting, and degree of s e r f - c o n t a i n m e n t , a r e s e t forth in a f o r t h c o m i n g
book by A. V. Gladkii " F o r m a l G r a m m a r s and L a n g u a g e s " (in p r e s s ) .
~Some R u s s i a n authors r e f e r to the index as the ~active c a p a c i t y . "
*~'~u StotskiUs t e r m i n o l o g y , the index function.

548
 ~. ALGORITHMIC PROBLE~[S
Comparatively few papers have been published on the algorithmic aspects of the theory of ~oTammars.
Foremost among them is an article by Greibaoh [I03], in which the following fundamental result is obtained.
Lez i be the class of =o'rammars having the property that for any g T a m m a r s i~, F~E~ and any A ~ r a m m a r
F 3 it is possible to construct .QTammers 1~, 1~', i~"~~9-,such that s {E)= s (F~)~s (P~), s = s (I~)s (F3), s (i~')
= s (!~3)L(F0. Iftheproperty that a language coincides with V* is undecidable in the class i" for a certain
alphabet V, then every nontrivial property that is valid for any A language and is preserved under intersec-
tion with an A language, union with {~}, and the inverse of the so-called "generalized finitetransformation"
(Le., a transformation representing a deterministic finite-state automaton tha~ can write in one step a cer-
tain string of finite length, the empty strin~ in particular) is also undecldable in this class. F r o m this
(ra~her easily proved) theorem several well-known results are deduced concerning the unsolvability of al-
gorithmic problems for C F ~ a m m a r s , including the (essential)unambiguity and determinism problems.
Hartmanis and [-Iopcrof%[I16] have found certain "small" families of C F languages that preserve the
"ordinary" theorems of algorithmic undecidability; they also consider the devotees of unsolvability of s/go-
rithmic problems for C F languages. See also [71] concerning the latter problem.
A paper by Hopcroft [120] is devoted to the equivalence and containment problems for C F lan~o~/a~es.
The follow-{ngresults are noteworthy: The problem of recognizing for a C F g T a m m a r F whether s (Fo)CL (F),
where F o is a fixed C F ~rammar, is solvable if and only if the lang.aage L (F 0) is bounded. A n algorithm
does not exist by which it possible to decide for an arbitrary C F =oTammar whether the problem of deter-
minin~ the relation L (F)_cL (P0) for a C F ~oTammar F is solvable.
Kobayashi [139] has verified the unsolvability in the class of C F ~ T a m m a r s of certain problems as-
sociated with the operation of (left)division of a lang,/age by a string. For example, al~orithms do not
exist for deciding, given a g'rammar 1~ and strings x i and x2, whether the languages x,\L(r) and x~\i(F)
coincide and whether the intersection (x~\ L (F)),~(x=\ L (F)) is empty~
Griffiths [110] has proved the unsolvability of the functional equivalence problem for noncontracting
(i.e., s nondeterministie finite transducers (see [87] for the definition),as well as the equivalence
problem stated in [87] for a special type of C F ~ a m m a r .
See also Hartmanis IllS].
A m o n g the papers containing positive results we note especially an article by Beletskii [3] (which,
incidentally, does not fit into the time period covered by our survey), in which algorithms are given for the
solution of several problems relat/ng to systems of constituents assigned to strings by their derivations in
C F ~ T a m m a r s and relating to dominancy g r a m m a r s (which are introduced in the same paper; for more
about them, see Sec. V, below). For example, an algorithm making it possible to decide whether two C F
~<rammars are strongly equivalent T is constructed. Some of these problems were solved independently at
a somewhat later data by Paull and Unger [I~I] (cf. also the work of Ginsburg and Harrison [94]).
in addition, see [83, 34]. Also, results pertaining to algorithmic problems m a y be found in certain
papers cited earlier (see, e.~., [14S]).

5. ABSTRACT FAMILIES OF LANGUAGES; OPERATIONS ON LANGUAGES

In m a n y problems one cont/nually encounters families of lan%~ages closed under certain simple oper-
ations. It seemed logical, therefore, to investig'atesuch families in a more abstracted form; thus moti-
vated, Ginsburg and Greibach [88, 89] devised the follow/ng definition.
A n abstract family of languages (AFL)$ is a pair (.~,~) (or, if Z is understood, simply Z), where:
(I) ~ is an infinite set of symbols; (2) ~ is a set of languages, each of which is contained in an iteration of
a suitable finite subset of Z; (3) Z is closed under union, multiplication, delimited iteration, z-freehomo-
morphic mappings, and intersections with A languages (regular sets); (4) at least one language in S is
nonempty.
'Two C F ~oTRmmarS are strongly equivalent if they are equivalent in the usual sense ~nd assign the same
systems of constituents (in other words, the same derivation trees correct to labeling) to the same strings.
++This term was proposed by .~[.D. Greendlin~r.
*~'Delimited iterationis an operation associating with each fan,rage L a language s ljL'UL'U ....

549
 If an a b s t r a c t f a m i l y is closed under a r b i t r a r y h o m o m o r p h i c m a p p i n g s , it is said to be full.
A b s t r a c t f a m i l i e s of languages have been investigated in p a p e r s by G r e i b a c h , Ginsburg, H a r r i s o n ,
Hopcroft, Rose, and S p a n i e r [88, 89, 90, 91, 95, 98, 101, 104, 105, 106, 107, 109]. The following p r o b l e m s
a r e brought into focus in p a r t i c u l a r . The c l o s u r e of an A F L under v a r i o u s o p e r a t i o n s is studied. It is
shown that A F L a r e closed not only under the o p e r a t i o n s included in the definition, but also under s e v e r a l
o t h e r s , such as t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s r e a l i z e d by z - f r e e g e n e r a l i z e d finite t r a n s d u c e r s t (in the c a s e of full A F L
z - f r e e t r a n s d u c e r s c a n be r e p l a c e d by a r b i t r a r y ~ a n s d u c e r s ) as well as under the i n v e r s e s of the l a ~ e r
t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s [89]. The independence of the o p e r a t i o n s involved in the A F L definition has also b e e n in-
investigated [109]. Special attention is ~ v e n to o n e - g e n e r a t o r A F L (principal families) [90] (an e x a m p l e of
this type of f a m i l y is the c l a s s of all CF Iangmages, due to the well-known Chomsky-Sch~itzenber~er " c a -
n o n i c a l r e p r e s e n m t i o n ' ~ t h e o r e m ) . It turns out, in p a r t i c u l a r , that for any language L the full A F L g e n e r a t e d
by it coincides with the set of all possible languages of the t y p e M ((Lc)*), where c is a s y m b o l that is not a
m e m b e r of the alphabet of L and M is a finite t r a n s d u c e r that r e a d s and w r i t e s s e v e r a l s y m b o l s s i m u l -
taneously in one step; the A F L =omnerated by the language L@ (a} is s i m i l a r l y r e p r e s e n t e d . M o r e o v e r , the
full A F L g e n e r a t e d by L coincides with the set of languages of the f o r m h~(h,-'.{(ic)*CiR)), where R is an
A lan~omage, ht and h~ a r e h o m o m o r p h i s m s such that lhi(x) l - lxI, and c is the s a m e as above; an analogous
r e s u l t is obtained for the A F L g e n e r a t e d by the language t U (eL
F a m i l i e s of pushdowu a u t o m a t a Mum defined by the following conditions have been investigated in
[104]: a) All s t r i n g s o c c u r r i n g in the computation p r o c e s s on the working tape a r e contained in the s e t
Z o A ~ . . . A n , w h e r e Z 0 is an e n d m a r k e r ( s o m e t i m e s n o n e r a s a b l e ) and A t . . . . . A n a r e e l e m e n t a r y s y m b o l s ;
b) in the i n t e r v a l between two consecutive " m e m o r y c l e a r i n g t i m e s " (i.e., t i m e s at which only the s y m b o l
Z 0 is w r i t t e n on the w o r k i r ~ tape) the n u m b e r of w r i t e - t o - e r a s e t r a n s i t i o n s is not ==reater than m. It is
shown that for any m, n z 1 the family of l a n = ~ g e s a c c e p t e d by a u t o m a t a of the c l a s s Mnm is a full A F L .
F o r e a c h of t h e s e A F L there is a valid analog of the C h o m s k y - S c h t i t z e n b e r g e r canonical r e p r e s e n t a t i o n
t h e o r e m , so that all of the indicated f a m i l i e s a r e p r i n c i p a l AFL. F o r distinct m and n the c o r r e s p o n d i n g
A F L a r e distinct; thus, an infinite h i e r a r c h y of full p r i n c i p a l a b s t r a c t f a m i l i e s of C F languages exists.
The concept of an a b s t r a c t f a m i l y of a u t o m a t a (AFA) is also introduced In [88, 89], and its r e l a t i o n -
ship with the A F L concept is d e s c r i b e d . A n u m b e r of other r e s u l t s a r e obtained with r e s p e c t to both the
"innate p r o b l e m s " of A F L t h e o r y and its applications.
A l a r g e =o-roup of p a p e r s is devoted to s y n t a x - d i r e c t e d t r a n s l a t i o n s (or s y n t a x - d i r e c t e d transductions).
A s y n t a x - d i r e c t e d t r a n s l a t i o n is specified by a p a i r of CF =oTammars F, F', which have a c o m m o n n o n t e r -
m i n a l v o c a b u l a r y and whose s c h e m a t a ~ a r e joined by a o n e - t o - o n e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e ~ such that the left
sides of r u l e s r and ~ (r) coincide and the n u m b e r of o c c u r r e n c e s of each n o n t e r m i n a l s y m b o l on the right
sides of r and ~ (r) is the s a m e . B e s i d e s that, for e a c h rule r of the ~o,r a m m a r F a o n e - t o - o n e m a p p i n g Cr
of the set of o c c u r r e n c e s of n o n t e r m i n a l s y m b o l s on the r i g h t side of r onto the c o r r e s p o n d i n g set for ~(r)
is specified such that ot and r (cO a r e always o c c u r r e n c e s of the s a m e s y m b o l .
The mappings V and Cr induce in an obvious way a o n e - t o - o n e c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between the s e t s of
d e r i v a t i o n t r e e s in F and F ' and thus a c o r r e s p o n d e n c e (in g e n e r a l , m a n y - t o - m a n y ) between the languages
L (I~ and L (F'). The l a t t e r c o r r e s p o n d e n c e is then what we call a s y n t a x - d i r e c t e d t r a n s l a t i o n . If e v e r y $
p r e s e r v e s o r d e r , we speak of a s i m p l e s y n t a x - d i r e c t e d t r a n s l a t i o n ; these t r a n s l a t i o n s a r e exactly the c o r -
r e s p o n d e n c e s s p e c i f i e d by (nondeterministic) pushdown a u t o m a t a with output (pushdown t r a n s d u c e r s } [25,
1521.
The concept of syntax-directed translation was introduced (in a somewhat different form) by Culic
[72]. it has been investigated in the period surveyed by Aho and Ullman [56, 58, 59], [~op~iva [142], Let/-
chevskii [25], and Lewis and Stearns [152].
Papers dealing with operations on languages have also been published by [Q)bay~shi [140], Nivat [167],
and Rose [177]; correspondences between languages have been anRlyzed by K1tomyakov [50, 51] (for details,
see Sec. 7, below).

tSee [87] for the c o r r e s p o n d i n g definition.

Sin other words, their s e t s of r u l e s .

550
 6. AUTOMATON CHARACTERISTICS OF LANGUAGES
Of the papers devoted to the specification of languages by automata, we consider only those which have
immediate bearing on the theory of g T a m m a r s or, m o r e specifically, those in which either automata re-
lated to the most important types of g r a m m a r s (pushdown automata and linear bounded Turing machines)
are involved or the relationship between automata and g-rammars are directly investi~o~ated. The latter cri-
terlon, of course, is not too precise and is in fact largely conditional, but if w e sought to characterize any
m o r e fully the state of the art in the description of languages by automata we would have to write a survey
of at least the s a m e length over again.
"We give our first attention to papers on so-called "stack automata,"* which differ from the pushdown
type only to the extent that the "head" can m o v e freely inside a "filled" zone on the working tape and read
the contents of any cell without altering it (so that the variation of the contents of the working tape is exactly
+_he s a m e as in a pushdown automaton). Stack automata were originated by Ginsburg, Greibach, and Harri-
son [92]; Harrison and Schkolnik [114] later indicated a class of g r a m m a r s ("general two-type bracketed
grammars") that are equivalent in their "generative power" to (nondetermlnistic) stack automata. A rather
comprehensive literature has been written on these automata to date; of the m a n y results that they contain
w e discuss only those which concern the interrelationships between "stack languages" and "traditional"
classes of languages.

First of all, the closure properties of the class of stack languages under various operations has been
investigated in [92], in which it is proved, in particular, that this class is closed under h o m o m o r p h i c m a p -
pings and so under projection; the latter results imply nonclosure under intersection and complementatlon,
and even the intersection of two deterministic C F languages and the complement to a C F language can
prove not to be stack languages,T so that a C S language (and even a deterministic CS language, i.e., a lan-
guage accepted by a deterministic linear bounded Turing machine) can prove not to be a stack language. It
is also established in the s a m e paper that the class of deterministic stack languages (i.e., languages ac-
cepted by deterministic stack automata) is closed under intersection and complementation. This fact, along
with the results formulated above, guarantees the existence of C F l a n ~ g e s and, m o r e particularly, of
"stack lang,.rages" that are not "deterministic stack languages."
Hopcroft and Ullman [121] subsequently showed that any stack language is a deterministic CS lan-
guage.
The stack automata with which w e are now concerned are often referred to in the literature as one-
way stack automata, as opposed to two-way stack automata, which differ from the former in that the head [s
free to m o v e in both directions on the input tape (without changing the cell contents). T w o - w a y stack auto-
mata were conceived prior to the one-way type in a paper by GinsburD Breibach, and Harrison [91]. The
relationship between "two-way stack languages" and CS languages has been studied by Mager [156]. He
shows, in particular, that the class of two-way stack languages is not more r e s t r i c t e d than the class of
languages accepted by linear bounded Turing machines equipped with an additional tape pushdown store and
is certainly not more r e s t r i c t e d than the class of CS languages. The same result was later subtended b y
Cook's work [69]. Analyzing the complexity of compur~ations on Turing machines equipped with an addition-
al tape pushdown store, Cook proved a general theorem, from which it follows, in particular, that the class
of t~,o-way stack languages and the class of deterministic two-way stack languages coincide with the class
of languages recognizable by machines of the given type with an expenditure on the main tape of at most,
respectively, n 2 and n l o g n cells, as well as with the class of languages recognizable by the same machines
in at most, respectively 2 cn2 and u cn cycles, where c is any constant. It follows at once from this result
that the class of CS languages is a proper subclass of the class of deterministic two-way stack languages
while the latter is a proper subclass of the class of all two-way stack languages.
W e now cite certain studies on pushdown automata. Stearns [198] has shown that if a finite automaton
exists that is equivalent to a deterministic pushdown automaton having q states and t "pushdown" symbols,
qq
then the n u m b e r of states of that automaton can be m a d e not greater than tq ; this result implies the ex-
istence of an algorithm for the recognition of re~o-ularity of deterministic C F languages. Dikovskii [16] has
*The borrowing of this term in Russian ("st~kovyi avtornat") seems rather inappropriate to us, but unfor-
tunately, for the time being at any rate, we know of no better counterpart.
TBecause any recursively enumerable set can be represented as the projection of the intersection of two
deterministic C F (and even linear) ].anguages or the complemment to a C F (and even a linear) language.

551
deduced a n e c e s s a r y condition for the d e t e r m i n i s m of a CF language, making it e a s y to f o r m u l a t e e x a m p l e s
of n o n d e t e r m i n i s t i c CF languages. Rovan [187] has d e s c r i b e d a c l a s s of pushdown a u t o m a t a that e x a c t l y
a c c e p t bounded CF languages, thus solving one of the p r o b l e m s s t a r e d by Ginsburg in [87].* Pushdown
a u t o m a t a have also been t r e a t e d by Wang [212] and Kaich [149].
Finally, we mention the work of H i b b a r d [119]. The concept of a k - s c a n - l l m i t e d automaton is in-
troduced; it is a s i n g l e - t a p e T u r i n g machine having the p r o p e r t y that the contents of a ceil a r e left unchanged
a f t e r the head has m a d e k p a s s a g e s o v e r that cell. it is e s t a b l i s h e d that such a u t o m a t a exactly recognize
all CF languages and that d e t e r m i n i s t i c 2-1hnited a u t o m a t a exactly r e c o g n i z e all d e t e r m i n i s t i c CF languages;
the c l a s s e s of d e t e r m i n i s t i c k - l i m i t e d languages f o r m a h i e r a r c h y .
See also Dikovskit [17] and G. F i s h e r and R a n e y [79].

7. OTHER SCHEMES FOR THE SPECIFICATION

AND DESCRIPTION OF SETS OF STRINGS
Besides conventional generative g r a m m a r s (Chomsky grammars) there are other schemes for zhe
specification of languages, where the latter are interpreted as sets of strings; some of these schemes rep-
resent calculi with rules different from those in C h o m s k y g r a m m a r s (for example, categorical gTammars),
while others are not even calculi (neighborhood grammars). Furthermore, m a n y "grammatical schemes"
make it possible not only to generate strings, but also to invest them with certain structures (in particular,
CS g r a m m a r s make it possible to introduce systems of constituents, dependency grammars, of which more
will be said later, and "subordination" trees t) or, say, to associate certain probability distribution func-
tions with the descriptive sets of strings. The present section is concerned with systems of this nature
(besides the CS g r a m m a r s reviewed above).
W e begin with neighborhood grammars, which comprise a scheme for the topological description of a
languag~ ~in the linguistic interpretation, the description of a language by the distributive attributes of its
strings). The idea of this mode of description is attributable to Shreider, who has also proposed [52] the
first concrete realization of the idea, namely simple neighborhood (SmpN) grammars, which m a y be in-
formally characterized as follows. A (finite)alphabet V is ~ven, and there is associated with each symbol
a 6 V a finite tuple of neighborhoods, i.e., pairs of the form (x, y), where x and y are strings in V; literally,
the neighborhood represents the "context" in which the symbol a can occur in strings of the language de-
scribed. The neighborhood can also be supplied with an indicator that the start (or end) of its corresponding
occurrence of the string xa,/in a string of the language must coincide with the start (or end, respectively)
of the latter string. The language defined by a S m p N g r a m m a r is the set of strings in V in which each oc-
currence of each symbol is situated in one of the contexts "acceptable" to it, with allowance for the require-
ments on the starts and ends (with regard to those neighborhoods for which such requirements exist). The
class of languages generated by S m p N g r a m m a r s coincides with a well-known special class of A languages,
namely the so-called k-deflnite A langnages.$ This fact has been demonstrated by Borshchev [8]. A more
general class of neighborhood g r a m m a r s is also introduced in the latter paper, namely "si~ned neighbor-
hood" (SgnN) grammars, which make it possible to specify all C F languages, though not those languages ex-
clusively. Sg'nN g r a m m a r s were subsequently investigated by Gladkii [13] (who showed that the "SgmN lan-
~aages" form a subclass, which is a proper subclass, of the class of CS languages) and Lomkovskaya [26]
(who established, in particular, that the class of "SgTKW languages" contains all complements to C F lan-
g-uages and is closed under intersection; she also indicated a canonical representation of a S~mN language
as the result of a systematic execution of several operations on the appropriate C F languages).
Somewhat later Borshchev and Khomyakov [9] generalized the concept of a neighborhood g r a m m a r to
entities of a more general nature, i.e., "texts" described in terms of model theory. The resulting concept
of a "general neighborhood g r a m m a r 9 encompasses almost all the known conceptualizations of formal
g r a m m a r s as special cases. Finally, Khomyakov [50, 51] has used neighborhood g r a m m a r s to formalize a
certain very general concept of translation, from which various more specific concepts are obtained by the
imposition of constraints.

*Page 320 of the R u s s i a n edition.

tThis situation can be t r e a t e d in an a l t e r n a t i v e way; see [2].
+*For zhe definitionsee, e.g., Jill].

552
 Next we c o n s i d e r ~ r a m m a r s that p e r m i t the s y n t a c t i c a l s t r u c t u r e of s t r i n g s to be d e s c r i b e d in t e r m s
of "subordination" t r e e s . T h e s e g r a m m a r s have powerful significance for linguistic applications, b e c a u s e
subordination t r e e s together with constituent s y s t e m s a r e a m o n g the m a i n tools for the f o r m a l d e s c r i p t i o n
of the syntax of natural lan~o~ages.* One modification of g r a m m a r s of this type has been known for s o m e
time now, namely the dependency ~-rammars devised by Hays [I!S]. They are essentially a special Wpe of
C F grammars equipped with a certain auxiliary "device" permitting strings to be identified with subordina-
tion trees. However, the situation "encompassed" by dependency ~ r a m m a r s is rather special; the general
situation involved in the juxtaposition of dependency trees with strings generated by arbitrary C F ~oTam-
mars is more comprehensively described by the dominancy ~oTammars recently conceived by Beletskii [3].
In another paper [5] the same author investigates various types of equivalence between dominancy ~o-ram-
mars: control equivalence, constituent equivalence, control and constituent equivalence, etc.
The technique of associating dependency trees with strings by means of categorical ~oTammars has
been known for quite some time. I" One is naturally curious, therefore, about the interrelationship between
dominancy and categorical ~o'rammars. This problem has been investigated by Beletskii [4, 6, 7], who ob-
tains conditions for the existence of a categorical g r a m m a r equivalent (in one of the above-mentioned
senses) to a particular dominancy grammar.
"Traditional" dependency g r a m m a r s have been studied by Fitialov [44].
Categorical g r a m m a r s are treated in a paper by Dikovskii and Modina [20], who give a new proof of
the celebrated theorem of Gaifman or, the equivalence of categorical g r a m m a r s and C F grammars.
Joshi [128], formalizing the tenets of the string analysis theory developed by Harrison, has introduced
a new modification of generative ~ ' a m m a r s known as "adjunct grammars," in which the elementary step of
a derivation entails the insertion of several (indicated in the appropriate rule) strings into definite locations
of the initialstring (where a finite number of axioms is specified, and there is no nonterminal alphabet).
Also considered in this paper are "grammars of mixed type," which include in addition to "adjunct" rules
a special type of C F rules; various classes of "adjunct" and "mLxed-type" g r a m m a r s are introduced, and
their comparative "generative power" is analyzed.
Stearns and Lewis [199] have generalized the concept of C F g r a m m a r s in such a way that the set of
rules becomes essentially infinite. The concept of a pushdown automaton is similarly generalized.
Several papers also draw on probability-theoretic and Information-theoretic notions. Thus, problems
related to the computation of the "channel capacity" and entropy of languages ~enerated by certain types of
unambiguous g r a m m a r s have been solved in [49, 130, 148, 196]; probabilistic g r a m m a r s and automata, i.e.,
g r a m m a r s and automata for which certain distribution functions are specified on the rule/command sets
(and so on the corresponding lang%lages) have been studied in [84, 136, 157, 190, 203]. V~reelect not to delve
further into the content of these papers, because the topic is to a certain exT~nt peripheral to the theory of
grammars and, more important, far too much space would be required to give it fair coverage.

8. TREE-PROCESSING GRAMMARS
R e c e n t a t t e m p t s have been m a d e to develop a f o r m a l a p p a r a t u s for the p r o c e s s i n g of t r e e s or r e l a t e d
s t r u c t u r e s , by analogy with the way. in which conventional g r a m m a r s work with s t r i n g s . This kind of an a p -
p a r a t u s is needed to d e s c r i b e the s t r u c t u r e of natural languages, b e c a u s e linguistic entities (such as, for
e x a m p l e , sentences) a r e too c o m p l i c a t e d to c o n s t r u c t so that their s t r u c ~ t r e could be s y s t e m a t i c a l ! y and
n a t u r a l l y d e s c r i b e d solely by m e a n s of l i n e a r s e q u e n c e s of s y m b o l s , w h e r e a s " t r e e s t r u c t u r e s , " on the
other hand, p e r m i t the s y n t h e s i s of f a r m o r e r e a l i s t i c m o d e l s . S e v e r a l v e r s i o n s of s o - c a l l e d " t r e e g r a m -
m a r s " have been p r o p o s e d to date; they can be c l a s s i f i e d a c c o r d i n g to two types on the b a s i s of the objects
to be t r a n s f o r m e d ; one type deals with constituent s y s t e m s , and the other with subordination t r e e s .
R e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the f i r s t Wpe a r e the g r a m m a r s d e s c r i b e d by Ginsburg and P ~ r t e e [96]. T h e i r con-
ception r e p r e s e n t s a f o r m a l i z a t i o n of the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n a l g r a m m a r defined (at the i n f o r m a l level) by
C h o m s k y in his time. The definition of a t r a n s f o r m a t i o r m l g r a m m a r (TG) given in [96] can be s u m m e d up

*With r e g a r d to dependency t r e e s , constituent s y s t e m s , and their i n t e r r e l a t i o n s h i p see, for e x a m p l e , A. V.

Gladkii, " F o r m a l G r a m m a r s and L a n g u a g e s " [in Russian] (in p r e s s ) .
~Vith r e g a r d to c a t e g o r i c a l =oTammars, see, for e x a m p l e , A. V. Gladkii, " F o r m a l G r a m m a r s and Lan-
g u a g e s " [in Russian] (,in p r e s s ) .

553
as follows. The entities dealt with by TO are t r e e s with labeled nodes (the labels a r e s y m b o l s in a finite
alphabet W partitioned into a t e r m i n a l and a nonterminal subalphabet), at which linear o r d e r is defined for
each pendant node on the set of nodes i m m e d i a t e l y dependent on (subordinate to) the given node (the deriv-a-
lion t r e e s in CS g r a m m a r s a r e typical); h e r e i n a f t e r we call these entities simply " t r e e s . " The main c o m -
ponen~ofa TG is a finite s e t o f t r a n s f o r m a t i o n r u l e s (Tit). Each TR c o m p r i s e s an applicability condition (AC)
and a t r a n s f o r m a t i o n d e s c r i p t i o n (TD). The AC is a conjunction of two p r e d i c a t e s defined on the t r e e s , one
"main" and one " s u b s i d i a r y " predicate. The main predicate P (T) has the following form. A string OJp is
specified in the alphabet ~zU {X}, where X E W, and P (T) denotes: "There is a cut* a 1. . . . . a s of the tree
T (a ' P - a c c e p t a b l e cut') such that the s t r i n g A 1 . .. A s ' i n s c r i b e d ' on it ('left to right') is t r a n s f o r m e d to ~ p
under some substitution of the symbol X for c e r t a i n o c c u r r e n c e s of s u b s t r i n g s ('acceptable substitution')."
The s u b s i d i a r y predicate is a Boolean e x p r e s s i o n of c e r t a i n p r e d i c a t e s of the same type as the main p r e d i -
cate [conceptually, the main predicate r e p r e s e n t s a kind of t r a n s f o r m a t i o n "stencH" o r "traffic pattern"
(see below), while the s u b s i d i a r y predicate is a c e r t a i n r e q u i r e m e n t that is imposed on the tree to be t r a n s -
f o r m e d and is unrelated to the "nature" of the t r a n s f o r m a t i o n ] . The TD is an instruction of the following
type: "In a tree T satisfying the c o r r e s p o n d i n g AC s e l e c t a c e r t a i n P - a c c e p t a b l e cut (where P is the ' m a i n
p r e d i c a t e ' of the given AC), inspect a c e r t a i n acceptable substitution for that cut, and if ;9~. . . . . ~k are all
the nodes of the cut that do not o c c u r under this substitution in s u b s t r i n g s r e p l a c e d by X and if T 1, . . . . T k
are the r e m a i n i n g s u b t r e e s of T induced by them, then it is r e q u i r e d to r e p l a c e each T i by 'suspending'
from its ' g o v e r n o r ' a definite finite sequence of t r e e s f r o m the set {T 1, . . . . T k, Ut, . . . . UZ}, where UI . . . . ,
U~ form a set of constant t r e e s (possibly including the e m p t y tree) a s s o c i a t e d with the given TD." Also, the
TG includes a base component, i.e., a c e r t a i n set of t r e e s (which in a special c a s e can be the set of all p o s -
sible derivation t r e e s in a p a r t i c u l a r CS g r a m m a r ) , and a " c o n t r o l " component, which c o n s i s t s of a finite
set {F~} of g r a m m a r s with o r d e r (in the sense of the definition given in Sec. 2, case C2), where all r u l e s
for each Fa a r e taken from among the TR of the given TG, plus a finite automaton, which decides in each
step which of the g r a m m a r s Fez is to be operative. The language generated by a given TG is the i n t e r s e c -
tion of the set of strings tn the t e r m i n a l alphabet with the set of t e r m i n a l s t r i n g s of the t r e e s derivable (un-
der a given control) from the base t r e e s . E x a m p l e s of the d e s c r i p t i o n of v~rious v e r s i o n s of TG in the in-
dicated t e r m s are given in the paper; c l e a r l y , the given definition is b r o a d enoug~h to span all known v e r s i o n s .
Salomaa [192] has shown that the TG defined in [96] can gener'ate a n y r e c u r s i v e l y e n u m e r a b t e ~ n -
g~ages even under the condition that the b a s e s are sets of d e r i w t i o n t r e e s in A g r a m m a r s , the TR depend
only on the alphabet, and there is no control component.
Other variants of the formalization of the T G concept in the sense of C h o m s k y have been proposed by
Kimball [134] and Peters and Ritchie [173]. In these papers and in [172] a number of results are obtained
with regard to the generative power of the corresponding T G versions; as in the case of the Ginsburg-Par-
tee definition, here it is possible to obtain all recursively enumerable languages with adequate restrictions
on the T G that are used.
Another system for the transformation of constituent trees has been formulated by Veillon, Veyrunes,
and Vauquois [206].
A m o n g the papers devoted to transformations of subordination trees we examine an ~ I c l e by Gladkli
and Mel'chuk [15] (see also [102]). I-lerewe find so-ca!led A - g r a m m a r s , which are designed for the pro-
cessing of trees with labeled arcs and nodes (the labels axe taken from certain finite alphabets) and with-
out linear order on the set of nodes (the authors proceed from the assertion that the effective description
of the syntactic structure of a sentence requires the rejection of linear order, because the syntactic rela-
tionships and order of words in natural languages are controlled by different mechanisms). The construc-
tion of a A - g r a m m a r is similar to tha~ of a C h o m s k y grammar; its rules are substitution (rewriting) rules. For
the special case in which the nodes do not have labe Is each rule (or elementary transformatton-ET) has the form
t~=~t,If, where tI and ~ are trees (of the type indicated above) and f is a mapping of the set of nodes of tI
into the set of nodes of t~. The application of this type of E T to a tree T denotes the following: Find in T
a certain occurrence of ta (more precisely, of a tree isomorphic to ~), "extract" it from T together with
all other subtrees induced by its nodes, then "suspend n ~ in place of the extracted subtree, and finally
"suspend" at the nodes ~ al! subtrees of T "external" to h that were previously "suspended" at the nodes
of t~, where for each node ~z of t~ whatever was "suspended" from it is now "suspended" from the node f(c~)
of ~. The definition of the E T in the general case is somewhat m o r e intricate. C e r t a i n special c l a s s e s of
*A tree cut is a set of nodes such that e v e r y path from the root to ~ pendant node contains exactly one m e r e -
b e t of the indicated sequence.

554
~ - ~ r a m m a r s a r e introduced that a r e analogous in s o m e m e a s u r e , to the principal c l a s s e s of Chomsk7 ~ s _ m -
ms~rs; it is also e s t a b l i s h e d that d e r i v a t i v e E T can in a c e r t a i n s e n s e be modeled by a s m a l l n u m b e r of E T
of a s p e c i a l ~VPe (which s_re deduced f r o m linguistic c o n s i d e r a t i o n s ) .
In g e n e r a l , l - o o T a m m a r s a r e designed for the transforn~_ation, r a t h e r than the ~eneration, of t r e e s ;
h o w e v e r , it is also possible to define a g e n e r a t i v e ~-~oTammar. F o r this p u r p o s e it sufficient (a) to differ-
entiate between t e r m i n a l and nonr2rminal label s y m b o l s at nodes and on a r c s and (b) to introduce an axiom,
i.e., the unit t r e e with a ~nonterminal" label at its s m g l e node. The t r e e s e t ("~-Language") g e n e r a t e d by
such a ~ r a m m a r is defined in the usual way.
P a p e r s on ~ e t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s of subordination t r e e s have a l s o b e e n published by Kulagina [23] and
by K o r e l ' s k a y a and P a d u c h e v a [22] (actl~,-~lly, the Latter p a p e r deals with m o r e c o m p l e x objects containing
subordination t r e e s as c o m p o n e n t s ) .
We now e x a m i n e s o m e p a p e r s o f a m o r e s p e c i a l i z e d c h 2 r a c t e r .
Modina [31] has introduced the following r e s t r i c t i o n on the mode of application of r u l e s in a g e n e r a t i v e
~-~rammar: If a rule ~21f is applied to an o c c u r r e n c e ~ of a t r e e ti in a t r e e T, then all paths of T
e m a n a t i n g f r o m the r o o t of ~ belong to t~. Special c l a s s e s of ~ - g r a m m a r s having the indicated r e s t r i c t i o n
and o p e r a t i n g with t r e e s of finite v a l e n c y and without a r c labels a r e investigated, including: a) s i m p l e e x -
tensive ~ - ~ m m a r s (SEG), for which e a c h rule h~-t21f is such that: (i) t 1 is a t r e e of height 1, (ii) if
~1 . . . . . ~ k a r e all pendant nodes of t1, then f((~l) . . . . . f ( ~ ) a r e p a i r w i s e - d i s t i n c t pendant nodes of ~, and
for e a c h i the l a b e l s a s s o c i a t e d with ~ i and f ( ~ i ) coincide (thus, in an application of the ~ v e n rule only the
r o o t of t~ is a c t u a l l y r e p l a c e d , and the nodes ~ l , . . . . a k f o r m a "context"); b) c o n t 2 x t - f r e e s i m p l e e x t e n s i v e
~ - ~ r a m m a r s (CFSEG); a SEG is a CFSEG if im s c h e m e t o g e t h e r with e a c h r u l e r contains all possible r u l e s
differing f r o m r only in the f o r m of the ~context ~ and the mode of " s u s p e n s i o n " of the c o n t e x t - f o r m i n g nodes
on the r i g h t side of the r u l e ; c) a u t o m a t o n SEG (ASEG), whose r u l e s have the f o r m ~-~, w h e r e ~" is the unit
t r e e whose single node is labeled with a n o n t e r m i n a l s y m b o l and t can have ~nonterminal" labels only at
pend~nt nodes (here the function f Ks c l e a r l y u n n e c e s s a r y ) . Also, it is a s s u m e d above and beyond the f o r e -
~oing that for e a c h nonpendant node l i n e a r o r d e r is defined on the s e t of nodes i m m e d i a t e l y subordinate to
the ~ v e n node. A c e r t a i n s c h e m e is designated for the ~linearization" of t r e e s , i.e., the identification of
t r e e s with s t r i n g s ( s o - c a l l e d e x t e n s i o n s of those t r e e s ) with the p r e s e r v a t i o n of p r o j e c t i v ! t y ( r e p r e s e n t a t i v e
of this kind of s c h e m e is the b r a c k e t - f r e e notation of Lukasiewicz). The s e t of extensions for e l e m e n t s of
a s e t of t r e e s M ~s called an extension of M. tt is shown in the cited p a p e r that the c l a s s e s of e ~ e n s i o n s of
" s i m p l e extended (SE) langtmges" and "ASE languages 9 coincide with the c l a s s e s of CS languages and CF
languages, r e s p e c t i v e l y (the second Of these r e s u l t s has also been obtained, in a slightly different f o r m , by
V~r. B r a i n e r d [~6]), while the c l a s s of extensions of ~CFSE l a n ~ m g e s " is s t r i c t l y i n t e r m e d i a t e to the c l a s s e s
of CS and CF languages. M o r e o v e r , for e v e r y CF g r a m m a r F and for e v e r y control p r e d i c a t e P defined on
the s e t of its m a p s (see Sec. 2, above, second p a r a g r a p h ) it is p o s s i b l e to c o n s t r u c t an ASEG ~ such that
the extension of the s e t L p (~) coincides with the s e t L p (i~; the c o n v e r s e is also t r u e .
T h a t c h e r [201] has introduced the concept of a "finit2 t r e e a u t o m a t o n , " which is analogous to an o r -
dinary finite a u t o m a t o n and r e a d s labels at the nodes of the t r e e in the d i r e c t i o n f r o m pendant nodes to the
root; e a c h node in this c a s e is a s s i g n e d a state, which f o r a pendant node depends only on the label at that
node and for a nonpendant node also depends on the s t a t e s a s s i g n e d to the d i r e c t l y subordinate nodes, it is
shown that (for one s p e c i a l l i n e a r i z a t i o n s c h e m e ) the c l a s s of e x t e n s i o n s of ~ - l ~ n ~ - ~ a ~ s " a c c e p t e d by such
a u t o m a t a coincides with the c l a s s of e x t e n s i o n s of d e r i v a t i o n t r e e s in CF ~ T a m m a r s . It has b e e n e s t a b -
lished in the p r e v i o u s l y cited work of W. B r a i n e r d [66] that the c l a s s of A - f a n , a g e s a c c e p t e d by finite ~ -
a u t o m a t a is e x a c t l y the c l a s s of languages g e n e r a t e d in c o r r e s p o n d i n g fashion by the g e n e r a l i z e d r e g u l a r
s y s t e m s of Bf~chi.
In another p a p e r T h a t c h e r [2021 has introduced the concept of a finite state ~ - ) t r a n s f o r m a t i o n . A
finite A - t r a n s f o r m a t i o n is specified b y a finite alphs~bet ~, a finite s e t of s t a t e s S, a list of v a r i a b l e s X =
(x~ . . . . . Xn~, an initial state q0 ~ S, and a finite table R, which places in c o r r e s p o n d e n c e with e v e r y natural
n u m b e r k - n, e v e r y s y m b o l ~ ~ ~, and e v e r y state q ~ S a t r e e (of the type d i s c u s s e d above in connection
with Modiua's work [31]) T (a, q, k); all nodes of ~ i s ~ree Rre Labeled with s y m b o l s f r o m ~ i l k = 0, and
o t h e r w i s e cer*~in pendant nodes can be Labeled with p a i r s of the type {xi, q~), i ~ k, qj E S. If a node ~ of
the t r e e T is d i r e c t l y subordinate to nodes G1 . . . . . ~ k (and only those nodes) and if a is labeled with 9 s y m -
hot ~ ~ S and a state q ~ $, ~hen the table R designar2s the following t r a n s f o r m a t i o n of T: In place of ~ e
node ~ in T ~s ~suspeuded" ~he LTee T ' obtained f r o m T (a, q, k) by ~he r e p t a c e m e n ~ of e a c h pendant node

DOO
carrying a label (x i, qj> (ff the latter exists} with the remaining subtree T i of T induced by the node c~i; in
this case the root of T i is labeled with the state q~. Thus, the table R designates a "derivatton relation"
~-~ on the class of t r ees with labels from ~ and S of valency <- n. A properly finite A-transformation A
is a set of pairs of t r e e s (T1, T 2) such that: a5 T 1 is a ~ree, all nodes of which except the root are labeled
only with symbols from ~ and the root of which is also labeled with the state q0; b) T~-AT2 ; c) all nodes of
T 2 are labeled with symbols from ~.. The designation of specific ltnearization schemes makes it possible
to obtain different types of language transformations by means of different types of finite A-transformations.
We close with the mention of two papers devoted to transformations of graphs'of a more general type
than t r e e s : P a i r and Quere [170] and Montanari [165].

LITERATURE CITED
I. Ya. M. Barzdin', "Complexity of ~-Tmmetry recognition on Taring machines," in: Problems in Cyber-
netics [in Russian], No. 15, Nauka, Moscow (1965), pp. 245-248.
2. L . A . Bassalygo and E. V. Paducheva, "Structural functionals of a context-free gram m ar and estima-
tion of the complexity of a derivation," Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. Sborra Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauctu i Tekh.
Inform., Set. 2, No. 2, 28-32 (1970).
3. M . I . Betetskii, "Context-free and dominancy g r a m m a r s and related algorithmic problems," Kiber-
nettka, No. 4, 90-97 (1967).
4. M. I, Beletskii, "Strong equivalence of categorical and dominancy g r a m m a r s , ~ Kibernetika, No. 3,
92-93 (1968).
5. M . I . Beletskii, "On the various types of equivalence between dominancy g r a m m a r s , " Kibernetika,
No. 4, 91-95 (1968).
6. M. L Beletskii, eRelationship between categorical and dominancy g r a m m a r s (I)," ICAbernetika, No. 4,
129-135 (1969).
7. M. L Beletskii, "Relationship between categorical and dominancy g r a m m a r s (ID, ~ Kibernetika, No. 5,
10-14 {1969).
8. V . B . Borshchev, "Neighborhood g r a m m a r s , " Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. Sborn., Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauch. i
Tekh. Inform., Ser. 2, No. 11, 39-41 (1967).
9. V . B . Borshchev and M. V. Khomyakov, "Neighborhood g r a m m a r s and translation models. P a r t I:
Neighborhood g r a m m a r s , " Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. Shorn. Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauch. i Tekh. Inform., Ser.
2, No. 3, 39-44 (1970).
10. M.K. Valley and A. Ya. Dikovskii, "Hierarchies of CF languages according to their recognition
times," Abstracts of All-Union Sci. Conf. Structuromatbematical Methods for the Modeling of Lan-
~lages [in Russian], P a r t I, Kiev (1970), pp. 25-26.
11. A . V . Gladkii, "On the complexity of derivations in immediate-constituent g r a m m a r s , " Algebra i
Logika, 3, Nos. 5-6, 29-44 (1964).
12. A.V. Gladkii, Lectures in Mathematical Linguistics for University Students [in Russian], Novosibirsk
(1966).
13. .%. V. Gladkii, "Signed neighborhood g r a m m a r s and CS g r a m m a r s , 9 l~auch.-Tekh. Inform. Shorn.
Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauch. i Tekh. Inform., Ser. 2, No. 5, 22-24 (1969).
14, A.V. Gladkii and A. Ya. Dikovskii, "Theory of formal g r a m m a r s and languages," Proc. Second All-
Union Conf. Programming [in Russian], Sec. K, Novosibirsk (1970), pp. 43-70.
15. A . V . Glad<ii and I. A. MeUchuk, "Tree g r a m m a r s . P a r t I: An experiment in the formalization of
transformations of the syntactical structures of natural language," in: Informational Aspects of
Semiotics, Linguistics, and Automatic Translation [in Russian], No. 1, Moscow (1971), pp. 16-41.
16. A. Ya. Dikovskii, "R.etationship between tbe class of all context-free languages and the class of de-
terministic context-free ~anguages," Algebra i Log~.ka, _8, No. 1, 44-64 (19695.
17. A. Ya. Dikovskii, ~Remark on deterministic linear languages," in: Problems in Cybernetics [in
Russian], No. 23, Nauka, Moscow (19705, pp. 281-286.
18. A. Ya. Dikovskii, "Languages of finite index," Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 192, No. 5, 966-968 (1970).
19. A. Ya. Dikovskii, "Density: a measure of derivation complexity in a context-free ~oTammar," Probl.
Peredachi Inform., 8, No. 2, 90-102 (19725.
20. A. Ya. Dikovskii and L. S. Modina, "~rIinimization of a particular complexity function in the class of
pushdown automam~ categorical g r a m m a r s of complexity t h r e e , " Algebra i Logika, 7, No. 3, 23-37
(19685.
21. G . P . Kozhevuikova, "Computational complexity of the syntax-directed translations of a certain gram-
m a r , " in: Automata Theory (Seminar Proceedings) [in Russian], No. 5, Kiev (1969), pp. 67-84.

556
22. T . D . Korel~skaya and E. V. Paducheva, Formal Apparatus of Syntax-Directed Transductions, PG]~:PL
Prepublications [in Russian], No. 10, Moscow (1970).
23. O.S. Kulagina, Problems in the Transformation of Subordination Trees, Preprint No. 12 [in Russian],
Inst. Prikl. Matem. Akad. Nauk SSSR, Moscow (1969).
24. A.A. Letichevskii, "Syntax and semantics of formal languages," Kibernetika, No. 4, 1-9 (1968).
25. A.A. Letichevskii, ~Relatious representable in pushdown automata," Kibernetika, No. 1, 1-7 (1969).
26. M.V. Lomkovskaya, "Signed neighborhood and context-free languages," Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. Shorn.
Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauch. i Tekh. Inform., Set. 2, No. 6, 2!-24 (1969).
27. M.V. Lomkovskaya, "Recognition of metalinear languages by the method of T. [r in: Problems
in Mathematical L o ~ c [in Russian], Mir, Moscow (1970), pp. 369-371.
28. M.V. Lomkovskaya, "Certain properties of k-conditional g r a m m a r s , " Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. 5born.
Vsesoyuz. Inst. Naueh. i Tekh; Inform., Set. 2, No. 1, 1-21 (1972).
29. M.V. Lomkovskaya, "On k-conditional and other commutative g r a m m a r s , " Nauch.-Tekh. Inform.
5born. Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauch. i Tekh. Inform., Set. 2, No. 2, 28-31 (1972).
30. V~ Yu. Meitus, "Properties of synchronized grammars (D," in: Theory. of Cybernetics [in Russian],
No. 1, K.iev (1970), pp. 30-43.
31. L . S . Modina, "Extended tree languages," Abstracts All-Union SOi. Conf. Strucmromathematical
Methods for the Modeling of Languages [in Russian], P a r t II, Ktev (1970), pp. 91-92.
32. V.A. Nepomnyashchii, "Rudimentary interpretation of two-tape Turing computations," Klbernetika,
No. 2, 29-35 (1970).
33. V.N. Porshneva, "A class of deterministic automata, 9 in: Automata Theory (Seminar Proceedings)
[in Russian], No. 5, K2ev (1969), pp. 40-50.
34. V.N. Porshneva, "Unambiguous g r a m m a r s , " in: Automata Theory (Seminar Proceedings) [in Rus-
sian], No. 5, Kiev (1969), pp. 51-66.
35. V.N. Red'ko, "On the language parsing problem (D," Kibernetika, No. 1, 61-67 (1969).
36. Vo N. Red"~o, "On the language parsing problem (ID," Kibernetika, No. 3, 52-57 (1969).
37. V.N. Red'ko, "Parametric grammars and the language parsing problem," Proc. Second All-Union
C o a l Programming [in Russian], Sec. K, Novosibirsk (1970), pp. 3-19.
38. L . G . Samoilenko, "A class of immediate-constituent g r a m m a r s , " Kibernetika, No. 2, 102-103
1968).
39. ~. D. Stotskii, "Restrictions on the derivation scheme in immediate-constituent g r a m m a r s , " Nauch.-
Tekh. Inform. Sborn. Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauch. i Tekh. Inform., Set. 2, No. 7, 35-38 (1967).
40. ~. D. Stotskii, "Generative grammars and derivation control," Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. Sborm Vsesoyuz.
Inst. Naueh. i Tekh. Inform., Set. 2, No. 10, 28-31 (1968).
41. ~. D. Stotskii, "The index concept in generalized g r a m m a r s , " Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. Sborn. Vsesoyuz.
Inst. Nauch. [ Tekh. Inform., Ser. 2, No. 5, 16-17 (1969).
42. ~. D. Stotskii, "Formal g r a m m a r s and derivation restrictions," Probl. Peredachi Inform., 7, No. 1,
87-101 (1971).
43. ~. D. Stotskii~ "Derivation control in formal g r a m m a r s , " Probl. Peredachi Inform., 7, No. 3, 87-102
(1971).
44. S. Ya. Fitialov, "Equivalence of CS grammars and dependency grammars," in: Problems in Struc-
tural Linguistics 1967 [in Russian], Nauk~, M o s c o w (1968), pp. 71-102.
45. A.L. Fuksman, "Certain gl-ammars for the description of context-free languages," First A!l-Union
Conf. Programming. A: Aspects of Programming Theory [in Russian], Klev (1968), pp. 135-143.
46. A.L. Fuksman, "Parsing algorithms for certain classes of languages," in: Application of Computer
Mathematical and Computer Engineering Methods for the Solution of ScientifIc-Research and National-
Economic Problems [in Russian], No. 4, Voronezh (1969), pp. 61-64.
47. A.L. Fuksman, "Grammars for the description of context-free languages," in: Programming Auto-
mation (Seminar Proceedings) [in Russian], No. I, Kiev (!969), pp. 36-70.
48. A . L . Fuksman, "Some properties of formal g r a m m a r s , " Proc. Second All-Union Conf. Programming
[in Russian], Sec. K, Novosibirsk (1970), pp. 21-31.
49. M.M. Kherts, "Entropy of languages generated by automaton or oontex-free grammars with unam-
biguous derivation, ~ Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. Sborn. Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauch. i Tekh. Inform., Set. 2,
No. 1, 29-34 (1968).
50. M.V. Khomyakov, "Neighborhood Trammars and translation models," Nauch.-Tekh. Inform. Shorn.
Vsesoyuz. Inst. Nauch. i Tekh. Inform., Set. 2, No. 4, 38-40 (1970).
51. M.V. Khomyakov, ~Neighborhood translations ~nd invuriant relations, ~ Nauch.-Tekh. ~nform. Shorn.
Vsesoyuz. Tnst. Nauch. i Tekh, Inform., Set. 2, No. S, 38-40 (1970).

557
52. Yu. A. Shrelder, "A neighborhood model of language,' Uch. Zap. Tarra. Univ., No. 226, 129-142
(1969).
53. S. Abraham, "Some questions of phrase structure grammars (D," Comput. Lingust., _4, 61-70 (1965).
54. A.V. Aho, "Indexed ~o-rammars-an extension of context-free =oTammars," J. Assoc. Computing Mach.,
I_.55,No. 4, 647-671 (!968).
55. A.V. Aho, "Nested stack automata," J. Assoc, Computing Mach., I__66,No. 3, 383-406 (1969).
56. A.V. Aho and J. D. Ullman, "Automaton analogs of syntax-directed translation schemata," Proc.
Ninth Ann. Syrapos. Switching and Automata Theory (1968).
57. A.V. Aho and J. D. Ullman, "The theory of languages," Math. Syst. Theory, 2, No. 2, 97-125 (1968).
58. A.V. Aho and J. D. Ullman, "Syntax-directed translations and the pushdown assembler," J. Comput.
Syst. Sci., 3, No. I, 37-56 (1969).
59. A.V. Aho and J. D. Ullman, "Properties of syntax-directed translations," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 3,
No. 3, 319-334 (1969).
60. Setsuo Arikawa, "Elementary formal systems and formal languages; simple formal systems," Mere.
Fac. Sei. Kyushu Univ., A.24, No. I, 47-75 (1970).
61. A. Birman and J. D. Ullman, "Parsing algorithms with backtrack," IEEE Conf. Rec. Eleventh Ann.
Sympos. Switching and Automata Theory, N e w York (1970), pp. 153-174.
62. R.V. Book, "On the notion of the bounding functions for grammars," Mathematical Lingustics and
Automatic Translation, Harvard Univ. Comput. Lab. Rep. NSF-1S, Cambridge, Mass (1967), (III-1)-
(in- 15).
63. R.V. Book, "Grammars with time functions," Mathematical Linguistics and Automatic Translation,
Harvard Univ. Comput. Lab. Rep. NSF-23, Cambridge, Mass. (1969),
64. B. Brainerd, "An analog of a theorem about context-free languages," Information and Control, 1_.!1,
Nos. 5-6, 561-567 (1967-68).
65. W.S. Brainerd, Tree-Generating Systems and Tree Automata (Doctoral Dissertation) Purdue Univ.
(1967), 76 pages; Dissert. Abstr., B28, No. 6, 2511 (1967).
66. W.S. Brainerd, "Tree-generating regular systems," Information and Control, !__44,No. 2, 217-231
(1969).
67. B.A. Chartres and J. J. Florentin, "A universal syntax-directed top-down analyzer," J. Assoc. Com-
puting Math., I_55,No. 3, 447-464 (1968).
68. S.N. Cole, "Real-time computation by n-dimensional iterative arrays of flnite-state machines,"
IEEE Trans. Computers, C-!8, No. 4, 349-365 (1969).
69. S.A. Cook, "Characterizations of pushdown machines in terms of time-bounded computers," J.
Assoc. Computing Mach., I__88,No. I, 4-18 (1971).
70. J.P. Crestin,"Quasi-rational languages," Mitt. C-es. Math. und Datenverarb., No. 8, 13-17 (1970).
71. D.F. Cudia and W. E. Singletary, "De~o-rees of unsolvability in formal gTammars," J. Assoc. C o m -
puting Math., i_~5,No. 4, 680-692 (1968).
72. ~ Culik, "Well-translatable languages and ALGOL-like languages," in: Formal Lan~age Descrip-
tion Languages, North-Holland, Amsterdam (1966), pp. 76-85.
73. K. ~ulik, "Languages represented by n-tape automata," Information Processing Machines, No. 14,
63-100 (1968).
74. K. Culik, "n-Ary gTammars and the description of mappings of formal languages," Kibernetika, 6,
No. 2, 99-117 (1970).
75. A. Dinc~, "Ecuatii diofantice si limbaje context-free," Stud. si Cerc. Mat., 22, No. 8, 1159-1171
(1970).
76. B. Drieux, ~Une classe de C-langages non ambigus etnon d~terministes," Compt. Rend. 94 e Congr.
Nat. Soc. Savant. Pau, 1969, See. Sci. T. 2, Paris (1971), pp. 47-52.
77. J. Earley, "An efficient context-free parsing algorithm. Commun. Assoc. Computing Mach., 1_.33,No. 2,
94--102 (1970).
78. C.C. Elgot and A. l~obinson, "Random-access stored-program machines, an approach to program-
ruing languages," J. Assoc. Computing Mach., l.!l,No. 4, 364-399 (1964).
79. G.A. Fisher and G. N. Raney, "On the representation of formal languages using automata on net-
works," IEEE Conf. Rec. Tenth Ann. Sympos. Switching and Automata Theory, N e w York (1969), pp.
157-165.
$0. P.C. Fisher, A. R. Meyer, and A. L. Rosenberg, "Counter machines and counter lan~Taages," Math.
Svst. Theory, ~ No. 3, 265-283 (1968).
~I. J. Friant, Grammaires Ordonnees--Grammaires MazTicielles, Rapport ~IA-!01, C E T A D O L , Univ.
~[ontreal (1968).

558
 82. J. Friant, Lan~o"ages Ultralineares et Superlineares; Nouvelles Caracterisations, Rapport MA-102,
C E T A D O L , Univ. Montreal (1968).
83. L Fris, "Grammars with partial ordering of the rules," Information and Control, 12, Nos. 5-6, 415-
42S (1968).
84. E. S. Fu and T. J. Li, "On stochastic automata and languages," Inform. Sci., I. No. 4, 403-419 (1969).
35. H. Gaifman, "Dependency systems and phrase-structure systems," Information and Control, _8, No. 3,
304-337 (1965).
86, H. Gallaire, ~Reco~ition time of context-free lan~mges by on-line Turing machines," Information
and Control, 16, No. 3, 288-295 (1969).
87. S. Ginsburg, The Mathematical Theory of Context-Free Languages, McGraw-Hill, New York (1966),
xii + 232 pages.
88. S. Ginsburg and S. Greibach, ,Abstract families of languages," IEEE Conf. Rec. Eighth Ann. Sympos.
Switching and Automata Theory, New York (1967), pp. 128-!39.
89. S. Ginsburg and S. Greibach, "Abstract families of languages," Mere. Amer. Math. Soc., No. 87, 1-32
(1969).
90. S. Ginsburg and S. Greibach, "Principal AFL," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., -4, No. 4, 308-338 (1970).
91. S. Glnsburg, S. Greibaeh, and M. A. Harrison, "Stack automata and compiling," J. Assoc. Computing
Mach., 14, No. 1, 172-201 (1967).
92. S. Ginsburg, S. Greibach, and M. A, Harrison, "One-way stack automata," J. Assoc. Computing Mach.,
14, No. 2, 389-418 (1967).
93, S. Ginsburg, S. Greibach, and J. Hopcroft, " P r e - A F L , " Mere. Amer. Math. Soc., No. 87, 41~51
(1969).
94. S. Ginsburg and M. A. Harrison, "Bracketed context-free languages," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., ! , No. I,
1-23 (1967).
95, S. Ginsburg and M. A. Harrison, "On the closure of AFL under r e v e r s a l , " Information and Control,
17, No. 4, 395-409 (1970).
96. S. Glnsburg and B. Partee, "A mathematical model of transformational ~o-rammars," Information and
Control, 15, No. 4, 297-334 (1969).
97. S. Ginsburg and G. F. Rose, "A note on preservation of languages by transducers," Information and
Control, 1.2 o, Nos. 5-6, 549-552 (1968).
98. S. Ginsburg and G. F. Rose, "On the existence of generators for certain AFL," inform. Sci., 2, No. 4,
431-446 (1970).
99. S. Gfnsburg and E. H. Spanier, "Control sets on g r a m m a r s , " Math. Syst. Theory, 2, No. 2, 159-177
(1968).
I00. S. Ginsburg and E. H. Spanier, "Derivation-bounded languages," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 2, No. 3, 228-
250 (1968).
I01. S. Ginsburg and E. H. Spanier, "Substitution in families of languages," Inform. Sci., 2, No. 1, 83-110
(1970).
102. A. V. Gladkii [Gladky] and L A. MeI'chuk [Mel'cuk], "Tree grammars (A-grammars)," [nternat. Conf.
Computational Lingustics (COLING), No. 1, Sanga-S~iby (I969), 7 pages.
103. S. A. Greibach, "A note on undecidable properties of formal languages," Math. Syst. Theory, 2, No. 1
1-6 (1968).
104. S. A. Greibach, "An infinite hierarchy of context-free languages," J. Assoc. Computing Mach., 16,
No. I, 91-106 (1969).
105. S. A. Greibach, "Checking automata and one-way stack languages," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 3, No. 2,
196-217 (1969).
106. S. A. Greibach, "Chains of full A F L ' s , " Math. Syst. Theory, 4, No. 3, 231-242 (!970).
107. S. A. Greibach, "Futl AFL's and nested iterated substitution," Information and Control, 16, No. 1,
7-35 (1970).
108. S. A. Greibach and J. E. Hopcroft, "Scattered-context grammars," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 3, No. 3,
233-247 (1969).
!09. S. A. Greibach and J. E. Hopcroft, "Independence of AFL operations," Mere. Amer. Math. Sot., No.
87, 33-40 (1969).
!I0. T. V. Grif~ths, 'The unsolvability of the equivalence problem for ,k-free nondeterministic general-
ized machines," J. Assoc. Computing .%Inch.,15, No. 3, 409-413 (1968).
!!!. M. Gross and A. Lentin, Notions sur les Grs~maires Formelles (Publ. Inst. ProErammation Fac.
Sci. Paris), Paris (1967), 197 pages.

559
112. J. Gruska, "Some classifications of context-free lang,/ages," Information and Control I__44,No. 2, 152-
179 (1969).
113. L. H. Haines, "Representation ~heorems for context-sensitive languages," Notices Amer. Math. Soc.,
i__66,No. 3, 527 (1969).
114. ~I. A. Ha~rrlson and ~I. Sohkolnik, "A grammatical characterization of one-way nondeterministic stack
languages," J. Assoc. Computing Iv[ach., i__88,No. 2, 148-172 (1971).
115. J. Hartmanis, "On m e m o r y requirements for context-free language reco=o'nition," J. Assoc. C o m -
puting Mach., i/, No. 4, 663-6~5 (1967).
116. J. Hartmanis and J. E. Hopcroft, "Whatmakes some language theory problems undecidable," J.
Comput. Syst. Sci., _4, No. 4, 368-376 (1970).
117. I. Havel, "A note on one-sided context~sensitive gTammars," Kybernetika,5, No. 3, 186-189 (1969).
118. D. G. Hays, "Grouping and dependency theories," Proc. Nat. Sympos. Machine Translation (Los An-
geles, 1960), Englewood Cliffs, N. J. (1961), pp. 258-266.
119. T. N. Hibbard, "A generalization of context-free determinism," Information and Control, l_!,Nos.
1-2, 196-238 (19655.
120. J. E. Hopcroft, nOn the equivalence and containment problems for context-free languages," Math.
Syst. Theory., 3, No. 2, 119-124 (1969).
121. J. E. Hopcroft and J. D. Ullrnan~ "Sets accepted by one-way stack automata are context sensitive,"
Information and Control, i_.33,No. 2, 114-133 (1968).
122. J. E. Hopcroft and J. D. Ullman, Formal Languages and Their Relation to Automata, Addison-
Wesley, Menlo Park, Calif. (1969), x + 242 pages.
123. O. H. rbarra, "Simple matrix languages," Information and Control, I_.~7,No. 4, 359-394 (1970).
124. R. Ito, "Every semilinear set is a finite union of disjoint linear sets," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., _3, No. 2,
221-231 (1969).
125. T. J~rvi, "On control sets inducedby gTammars," Suomalais. Tiedeakat. Toimitnks., A_.!l,No. 480
(1970), 7 pages,
126. N. D. Jones, 'Context-free languages and rudimentary attributes," Math. Syst. Theory, _3, No. 2, 102-
109 (1969).
127. N, D. Jones, "A note on the index of a context-free language," Informationand Control, 1_66,No. 2,
201-202 (1970).
128. A. K. Joshi, "Properties of formal gTammars with mixed type of rules and their linguisticrelevance,"
!nternat. Conf. Computational Linguistics (COLING), Preprint No. 47, Sanga-S~by (1969), 30 pages.
129. T. l~meda and R. Vollmar, "Note on tape reversal complexity of languages," Information and Con-
trol, 1/7,No. 2, 203-215 (1970).
130. F. P. Kaminger, "The noncomputability of the channel capacity of context-sensitive languages," In-
formalion and Control, I_/7,No. 2, 175-182 (1970).
131. T. Kasami, "An hierarchy between context-free and context-sensitive languages," J. Comput. Syst.
Sci., _4, No. 5, 492-508 (1970).
132. T. F~sami, "A note on computingtime for recognition of languages generated by linear grammars,"
Information and Control, 10, No. 2, 209-214 (1967).
133. T. Kasami and K. Torri, "A syntax analysis procedure for unambiguous context-free grammars,"
J. Assoc. ComputingMach., 16, No. 3, 423-431 (1969).
134. J. P. Kimball, "Predicates definable over transformational derivations by intersection wlth regular
languages," Information and Control, l_!l,Nos. 1-2, 177-195 (1967),
135. A Kley and G. Meyer-Brotz, "Vergleich yon Analyseverfahren fdr kontext-freie Sprachen," Wiss.
Bet. AEG-Telefunken, 4_~I,No. 4, 205-216 (1968).
136. R. Knast, "Represenmbility of nonregular languages in finite probabilistic automata," Information
and Control, I_~6,No. 3,285-302 (1970).
137. D. E. Knuth, "A charac~rization of parenthesis languages," Information and Control, !.!l,No. 3,
269-289 (1967).
138. D. E. Knuth, "Semantics of context-free languages," Math. Syst. Theory, 2, No. 2, 127-145 (1968).
139. BLKobayashi, "Some unsolvable problems on context-free languages and their application to on-line
lan~lage recognizers," Information and Control, 1.~3,No. 3, 245-253 (1968).
140. K. Kobayashi, "Classification of formal languages by functionalbinary tTansductions," Information
and Control, 15, No. 1, 96-109 !1969).
141. J. Kop~iva, ~Push-downautomaton with two stacks as a parsing device," Z. Angew. Math. Mech., 4.88,
No. 3, Suppl., 118-119 (1968).

560
142. J. Koprlva, "Decomposition translations and syntax-directed translation schemata," Kybernetika, 6,
No. 6, 403-417 (i970).
143. A. J. Korenjak and J. E. Hopcroft, Simple Deterministic Languages, Princeton Univ. Dept. Electr.
Eng-ng. DigitalSyst. Lab. Tech. Rep. No. 51 (1966), ii pages.
144. S. I%. Kosaraju, "Recognition of context-free and stack languages," I~EE Conf. Rec. Tenth Ann.
Sympos. Switching and Automata Theory, N e w York (1969), pp. 129-132.
145. E. Kostolansk~, "Comments on effective and unambiguous context-free lang~lages," Kybernetika, 5,
No. 3, 181-185 (1969).
146. J..W~r~l, "On multiple grammars," Kybernetika, 5, No. !, 60-85 (1969).
147. J. K/~I, "A modification of a substitution theorem and some necessary and sufficient conditions for
sets to be context-free," Math. Syst. Theory, 4, No. 2, 129-139 (1970).
148. W. Kuich, "On the entropy of context-free languages," Information and Control, 16, No. 2, 173-200
(1970).
149. W, Kuich, "Systems of pushdown acceptors and context-free gTammars," Elektron. Informations~rarb.
und Kybernet., 6, No. 2, 95-I13 (1970).
150. W. Kuich, "The complexity of skew-linear tuple languages and O-regular languages," Mitt. Ges. Math.
und Datenverarb., No. 8, 24-26 (1970).
151. R. Kurki-Suonio, "Notes on top-down languages," BIT (Sweden), 9, No. 3, 225-238 (1969).
152. P. M. Lewis and R. E. Stearns, "Syntax-directed transduction," J. Assoc. Computing Mach., 15, No. 3,
465-488 (1968).
153. P. M. Lewis, R. E. Stearns, and J. Hartmanis, ~"Memory bounds for recognition of contex-free and
context-sensitive languages," IEEE Conf. Rec. Switching Circui~ Theory and Logical Design, New
York (!965), pp. 191-202.
154. L. Y. Liu and P. Weiner, An Infinite Hierarchy of Intersections of Context-Free Languages, Tech.
Rep. Princeton Univ., No. 65 (1968), 13 pages.
155. L. Y. Liu and P. Weiner, "A characterization of semilinear sets," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 4, No. 4,
299-307 (1970).
156. G. Mager, "Writing pushdown acceptors," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 3, No. 3, 276-318 (1969).
157. M. M a i d or and G. Moran "Probabilistic tree automata and context-free languages," Israel. J. Math.,
_8, No. 4, 340-348 (1970).
158. g. M a l u s z ~ s k i , "Analiza symtaktyczna przy u~yciu separator6w," Nauk. Probl. Maszyn. Mat. (Warsaw),
113-116 (1970).
159. H. A. Maurer, "A direct proof of the inherent ambiguity of a simple context-free language," J. Assoc.
Computing Mach., I_~6,No. 2, 256-260 (1969).
160. H. A. Maurer, "A note on the complement of inherently ambiguous context-free languages," Commun.
Assoc. ComputingMath., 13, No. 3, 194 (1970).
161. H. A. Maurer, "The solution of a problem by Ginsburg," Inform. Process. Le~., 1, No. 1, 7-10
(1971).
162. A. W. Mazurkiewicz, "A note on enumerable grammars," Information and Control, 14, No. 6, 555-558
(1969).
163. R. McNaughton, "Parenthesis grammars," J. Assoc. ComputingMach., 1_~4,No. 3, 490-500 (1967).
164. J. Mezei and J. B. Wright, "Algebraic automata and contex-free sets," Informationand Control, 1!1,
Nos. 1-2, 3-29 (1967).
165. U. G. Montanari, "Separable ~aphs, planar graphs, and web grammars," Information and Control,
16, No. 3, 243-267 (1970).
166. E. Navr~til, "Context-free grammars with regular conditions," Kybernetika,6, No. 2, 118-126 (1970).
167. M. Nivat, "Transductions des langages de Chomsky,"Ann. Inst. Fourier, 1-6, No. 1, 339-455 (1968).
168. W. Ogden, ~A helpful result for proving inherent ambiguity," Math. Syst. Theory, 2, No. 3, 191-194
(1968).
169. C. Pair "Sur des notions algebriques flees k l'analyse syntaxique," Rev. Franc. Inform. et Rech.
Ol~r., 4, No. 1~-3, 3-29 (1970).
170. C. Pair and A. Quere, "D6finitionet etude des bilangages reguliers," Information and Control, 1-6,
No. 6, 565-593 (1969).
171. M. C. Paull and S. H. Unger, "Structural equivalence of context-~ree gTammars,~ J. Comput. Syst.
Sci., ~.,
~ No. 4, 427-463 (1968).
172. P. S. Peters, Jr., and R. W. Ritchie, "On restricting the base component of transformational gTam-
mars," Information and Con~ol, 1~8, No. 5, 483-501 (1971).

56!
173. P. S. Peters, Jr., and R. W. Ritchie, "On the generative power of transformational g r a m m a r s , " In-
form. Sci. (1971).
174. G. R4v6sz, "An efficient syntactic analyser of certain formal languages," Math. Syst. Theory, 2, No.
2, 147-158 (1968).
175. G. R~vdsz, "Syntactic analysis and unilateral context-sensitive =oTammars," Studia Sci..Math. Hung.,
_4, Nos. 1-4, 267-278 (1969).
176. J. Rhodes and E. Shamir, "Complexity of g-zammars by group-theoretic methods," J. Combinat.
Theory, 4, No. 3, 222-239 (1968).
177. G. F. Rose, "Closures which preserve finiteness in families of languages," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 2,
No. 2, 148-168 (1968).
178. A. L. Rosenberg, "A machine realization of the linear context-free languages," Information and Con-
trol, 10, No. 2, 175-188 (1967).
179. A. L. Rosenber~, "On the independence of real-time definability and certain structural properties of
context-free languages," J. Assoc. Computing Mach., 15, No. 4, 672-679 (1968).
180. G. Rosenberg, "On the introduction of the orderings into the =~rammars of Chornsky's hierarchy,"
Bull. Acad. Po!on. Sci., Ser. Sci..~lath. Astron. et Phys., 17, No. 9, 559-563 (1969).
181. M. Rosendahl, "Zur Erkennung mehrdirnensionaler formaler Sprachen," Mitt. Ges. Math. und Datenver-
arb., 8, No. 8, 33-35 (1970).
182. D. J. Rosenkrantz, "Matrix equations and normal forms for context-free grammars," J. Assoc. Com-
puting Mach., 14~, No. 3, 501-507 (1967).
183. D. J. Rosenkrantz, "Programmed g r a m m a r s - a new device for generating formal languages," IEEE
Conf. Rec. Eighth Ann. Sympos. Switching and Automata Theory, New York (1967), pp. 14-20.
184. D.J. Rosenkrantz, "ProgTamrned grammars and classes of formal lan=o~ages," J. Assoc. Computing
Mach., 16, No. I, 107-131 (1969).
185. D. J. Rosenkrantz and P. M. Lewis, "Deterministic left-corner parsing," !EEE Conf. Rec. Eleventh
Ann. Sympos. Switching and Automata Theory, N e w York (1970), pp. 139-152.
186. D.J. Rosenkrantz and R. E. Stearns, "Properties of deterministic top-down grammars," Information
and Control, 17, No. 3, 226-256 (1970).
187. B. Rovan, "Bounded push-down automata," Kybernetika, 5, No. 4, 261-265 (1969).
188. A. Salornaa, "On the index of a context-free grammar and language," Information and Control, 14,
No. 5, 474-477 (1969).
189. A. Salomaa, "On grammars with restricted use of productions," Suomalais. Tiedeakat. Toimituks.
Set. AI, No. 454 (1969), 32 pages.
190. A. Salornaa, "Probabilistic and weighted gTammars," Information and Control, 15, No. 6, 529-544
(1969).
191. A. Salomaa, "Periodically time-variant context-free grammars," Information and Control, t7, No. 3,
294-311 (1970).
192. A. Salomaa, "The generative capacity of transformational grammars of Ginsburg and Partee," Infor-
mation and Control, 18, No. 3, 227-232 (1971).
193. V. Schneider, "Syntax-checking and parsing of context-free lang!mges by pashdown-store automata,'
A F ~ S Conf. Proc., Vol. 30, Spring Joint Computer Conf., Thompson, Washington, D. C.; Academic
Press, London (1967), pp. 685-690.
194. R. Siromoney, "On equal matrix languages," Information and Control, 14, No. 2, 135-15t (1969).
19S. R. Siromoney, "A characterization of semilinear sets," Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 21, No. 3, 689-694
(1969).
196. R. Siromoney, "Channel capacity of equal matrix languages," Information and Control, 14, No. 6,
507-511 (1969).
197. A . R . Smith, "Cellular automata and formal lan~omages," IEEE Conf. Rec. Eleventh Ann. Sympos.
Switching and Automata Theory, New York (1970), pp, 216-224.
198. R . E . Stearns, "A regularity test for pushdown machines," Information and Control, !1, No. 3, 323-
340 (1967).
199. R . E . Stearns and P. M. Lewis, "Property grammars and table machines," information and Control,
14, No. 6, 524-549 (1969),
200. K. Taniguchi and T. Kasami, ".% note on computing time for the recognition of context-free lan-
guages by a single-tape Turtng machine," Information and Control, 14, No. 3, 278-284 (1969).
201. J . W . Thatcher, "C,haracterizing derivation trees of context-free ~o'rammars through a generalization
of finite automata theory," J. Comput. Syst. Sci., ! , No. 4, 317-322 (1967).

562
202. J. W. Thatcher, "Generalized sequential machine maps," Comput. Syst. Sci., 4, No. 4, 339-367
(1970).
203. P. Turakainen, "On stochastic languages," Information and Control, 12, No. 4, 304-313 (1968).
204. J, S. Uuian, "Partial algorithm problems for context-free languages, 9 Information and Control, 1.!I,
Nos. 1-2, 80-101 (1967).
205. S. H. Unger, "A global parser for context-free phrase-strucDlre ~o-rammars," Commun. Assoc. Com-
puting .~'Iach.,l!!, No. 4, 240-247 (1968).
206. G. Veillon, J. Veyrunes, and B. Vauquois, "Un m4talan~o'age de ~oTammaires transformationnelles;
applications aux problemes de transferts et de generation syntaxiques, 9 Second Internat. Conf. Auto-
matic Languages, Grenoble (1967).
207. H. Walter, "Zwei Operationen zwischen Chomsky-Grammatiken," Z. Angew. Math. Mech., 50, Suppl.
i-4, 91-92 (1970).
208. H. Walter, "'v~erallgemeinerte Pullbackkonstruktionen bei Semi-Thuesystemen und Grammatiken, ~
Elektron. Informationverarb. und Kybernet., 6, Nos. 4-5, 239-254 (1970).
209. H. Walter, "%rerallgemeinerte Pullbackkonstruktionen bei Chomsky-Grammatiken," Mitt. Ges. NIath.
un Darenverarb., No. 8, 56-58 (1970).
210. D. A. Walters, "Deterministic context-sensitive languages, Part l," Information and Control, 1/7,
No. I, 14-40 (1970).
211. D. A. Walters, "Deterministic context-sensitive languages, Part II," Information and Control, 17,
No. i, 41-61 (1970).
212. Y. R. Wang, "On the formulation of normal pushdown acceptors," Proc. 23rd ACIVI Nat. Conf.,
Princeton-London (1968), pp. 605-612.
213. R. Weicker, ~rErckennung yon kontextfreten Sprachen durch Tabulator-Turingmaschinen," Arbeitsber.
Inst. ~Iath. Masch. und Datenverarb., _3, No. 5 (1970), I01 pages.
214. D. Wood, "A note on top-down deter-rninistic langtlages," BIT (Sweden), 9, No. 4, 387-399 (1969).
215. D. Wood, "Formal lan~o'uage theory and automata theory bibliography 23," Comput. Rev., l_.!,No. 7,
417-430 (1970).
216. D. Wood, "A generalized normal form theorem for cor~ext-free ~o'rammars," Comput. J., 1.33,No. 3,
272-277 (1970).
217. W. A. Woods, "Context-sensitive parsing," Commun. Assoc. Computing Math., 13, No. 7, 437-445
(1970).
218. W. A. Woods, "Transition network =o'rammars for natural lan~uage analysis," Commun. Assoc. C o m -
puting Mach., I-3, No. I0, 591-606 (1970).
219. N[. K. Yntema, "Inclusion relations among families of context-free languages," Information and Con-
troi, 10, No. 6, 572-597 (19679.
220. D. H. Younger, "Recognition and parsing of context-free languages in time n 3," Information and Con-
trol, I_00,No. 2, 189-208 (1967).

563