Artificial Intelligence Review

, Volume 8, Issue 2–3, pp 147–158 | Cite as

Quantitative perceptual representation of prepositional semantics

  • Patrick Olivier
  • Jun-Ichi Tsujii


In this paper we concentrate on spatial prepositions, more specifically we are interested here in projective prepositions (eg. “in front of”, “to the left of”) which have in the past been treated as semantically uninteresting. We demonstrate that projective prepositions are in fact problematic and demand more attention than they have so far been afforded; after summarising the important components of their meaning, we review the deficiencies of past and current approaches to the decoding problem; that is, predicting what a locative expression used in a particular situation conveys. Finally we present our own approach. Motivated by the shortcomings of contemporary work, we integrate elements of Lang's conceptual representation of objects' perceptual and dimensional characteristics, and the potential field model of object proximity that originated in manipulator and mobile robot path-finding.

Key words

Subject Areas semantics spatial prepositions visualisation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bierwisch, M. & Lang, E. (1980).Dimensional Adjectives: Grammatical Structure and Conceptual Interpretation. Springer-Verlag: Berlin-Heidelberg-New York.Google Scholar
  2. Douglas, S. & Novick, D. (1987). Consistency and Variance in Spatial Reference. In Proceedings ofThe Ninth Annual Cognitive Science Society Meeting, 417–426.Google Scholar
  3. Herskovits, A. (1985). Semantics and Pragmatics of Locative Expressions.Cognitive Science 9: 341–378.Google Scholar
  4. Herskovits, A. (1986).Language and Spatial Cognition — An Interdisciplinary Study of the Prepositions in English. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK.Google Scholar
  5. Herskovits, A. (1988). Spatial Expression and the Plasticity of Meaning. In Rudzka-Ostyn, B. (ed.)Topics in Cognitive Linguistics, 403–427. Benjamins: Amsterdam-Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  6. Kalita, J. & Badler, B. (1991). Interpreting Prepositions Physically. In Proceedings ofThe Ninth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 105–110. Anaheim, CA.Google Scholar
  7. Khatib, O. (1986). Real-Time Obstacle Avoidance for Manipulators and Modile Robots.The International Journal of Robotics Research 5(1): 90–98.Google Scholar
  8. Lang, E. (1993). A Two-Level Approach to Projective Prepositions. In Zelinsky-Wibbelt, C. (ed)Semantics of Prepositions. Mouton de Gruyter: Berlin.Google Scholar
  9. Maienborn, J. R. (ed.) (1991).Processing Spatial Knowledge in LILOG. IWBS Report 157, IBM Germany.Google Scholar
  10. Retz-Schmidt, G. (1988). Various Views on Spatial Prepositions.AI Magazine 9(2): 95–105.Google Scholar
  11. Schirra, J. R. J. & Stopp, E. (1993). ANTLIMA — A Listener Model with Mental Images. In Proceedings ofThe International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1993. Chambery, France.Google Scholar
  12. Talmy, L. (1983). How Language Structures Space. In Pick, H. & Acredolo, L. (ed.)Spatial Orientation: Theory, Research, and Application, 225–282. Plenum Press: New York.Google Scholar
  13. Yamada, A., Nishida, T. & Doshita, S. (1988). Figuring out Most Plausible Interpretation from Spatial Descriptions. In Proceedings ofThe 12th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-88), 764–769.Google Scholar
  14. Yamada, A., Yamamoto, T., Ikeda, H., Nishida, T. & Doshita, S. (1992). Reconstructing Spatial Image From Natural Language Texts. In Proceedings ofThe 16th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-92), 1279–1283. Nantes, France.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Olivier
    • 1
  • Jun-Ichi Tsujii
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Intelligent SystemsUniversity of WalesAberystwythUK
  2. 2.Centre for Computational LinguisticsUniversity of Manchester, Institute of Science and TechnologyManchesterUK

Personalised recommendations