Abstract
The paper contrasts three approaches to the extension of lexical sense: what we shall call, respectively, lexical tuning; another based on lexical closeness and relaxation; and a third known as underspecification, or the use of lexical rules. These approaches have quite different origins in artificial intelligence(AI) and linguistics, and involve corpus input, lexicons and knowledge bases in quite different ways. Moreover, the types of sense extension they claim to deal with in their principal examples are actually quite different. The purpose of these contrasts in the paper is the possibility of evaluating their differing claims by means of the current markup and test paradigm that has been recently successful in the closely related task of word sense discrimination (WSD). The key question in the paper is what the relationship of sense extension to WSD is, and its conclusion is that, at the moment, not all types of sense extension heuristic can be evaluated within the current paradigm requiring markup and test.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Bruce, R. and Wiebe, J. (1994) Word-sense disambiguation using decomposable models, Proc. ACL-94.
Dini, L., di Tommaso, V. and Segond, F. (1998) Error-driven word sense disambiguation. In Proc. COLING-ACL98, Montreal.
Fodor, J. and Lepore E. (2000). The emptiness of the Lexicon: critical reflections on J. Pustejovsky’s The Generative Lexicon. In Bouillon and Busa (eds.) Meaning and the Lexicon. New York: Crowell.
Givon, T. (1967) Transformations of Ellipsis, Sense Development and Rules of Lexical Derivation. SP-2896, Systems Development Corp., Sta. Monica, CA.
Green, G. (1989) Pragmatics and Natural Language Understanding. Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ.
Hirst, G. (1987) Semantic Interpretation and the Resolution of Ambiguity, CUP, Cambridge, England.
Jorgensen, J. (1990) The psychological reality of word senses, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, vol 19.
Kilgarriff, A. (1993) Dictionary word-sense distinctions: an enquiry into their nature, Computers and the Humanities, vol 26.
Knight, K. and Luk, S. (1994) Building a Large Knowledge Base for Machine Tanslation, Proceedings of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence Conference AAAI-94, pp. 185–109, Seattle, WA.
Mellish, C. (1983) Incremental semantic interpretation in a modular parsing system. In Karen Sparck-Jones and Yorick A. Wilks (eds.) Automatic Natural Language Parsing, Ellis Horwood/Wiley, Chichester/NYC.
Nirenburg, S. and Raskin., V. (1997) Ten choices for lexical semantics. Research Memorandum, Computing Research Laboratory, Las Cruces, NM.
Pedersen, T. and Bruce, R. (1997) Distinguishing Word Senses in Untagged Text, Proceedings of the Second Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pp. 197–207, Providence, RI.
Pustejovsky, J. (1995) The Generative Lexicon, MIT Press: Cambridge, MA.
Resnik, P. and Yarowsky, D. (1997) A Perspective on Word Sense Disambiguation Techniques and their Evaluation, Proceedings of the SIGLEX Workshop “Tagging Text with Lexical Semantics: What, why and how?”, pp. 79–86, Washington, D.C.
Schank, R. and Abelson R.P. (1977). Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding, Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Schutze, H. (1992) Dimensions of Meaning, Proceedings of Supercomputing’ 92, pp. 787–796, Minneapolis, MN.
Schutze, H. and Pederson, J. (1995) Information Retrieval based on Word Sense, Proc. Fourth Annual Symposium on Document Analysis and Information Retrieval. Las Vegas, NV.
Small, S., Cottrell, G., and Tanenhaus, M. (Eds.) (1988) Lexical Ambiguity Resolution, Morgan Kaufmann: San Mateo, CA.
Sparck Jones, K. (1964/1986) Synonymy and Semantic Classification. Edinburgh UP: Edinburgh.
Wilks, Y. (1968) Argument and Proof. Cambridge University PhD thesis.
Wilks, Y. (1980) Frames, Semantics and Novelty. In D. Metzing (ed.), Frame Conceptions and Text Understanding, Berlin: de Gruyter.
Wilks, Y. (1997) Senses and Texts. Computers and the Humanities.
Wilks, Y. and Stevenson, M. (1998a) The Grammar of Sense: Using part-of-speech tags as a first step in semantic disambiguation, Journal of Natural Language Engineering, 4(1), pp. 1–9.
Wilks, Y. and Stevenson, M. (1998b) Optimising Combinations of Knowledge Sources for Word Sense Disambiguation, Proceedings of the 36th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING-ACL-98), Montreal
Wilks, Y. and Stevenson, M. (2001) Word sense disambiguation using multiple methods. Computational Linguistics.
Yarowsky, D. (1995) Unsupervised Word-Sense Disambiguation Rivaling Supervised Methods, Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-95), pp. 189–196, Cambridge, MA
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Wilks, Y., Catizone, R. (2002). Lexical Tuning. In: Gelbukh, A. (eds) Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing. CICLing 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2276. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45715-1_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45715-1_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-43219-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45715-2
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive