A Multilingual/Multimedia Lexicon Model for Ontologies

  • Paul Buitelaar
  • Michael Sintek
  • Malte Kiesel
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4011)


Ontology development is mostly directed at the representation of domain knowledge and much less at the representation of textual or image-based symbols for this knowledge, i.e., the multilingual and multimedia lexicon. To allow for automatic multilingual and multimedia knowledge markup, a richer representation of text and image features is needed. At present, such information is mostly missing or represented only in a very impoverished way. In this paper we propose an RDF/S-based lexicon model, which in itself is an ontology that allows for the integrated representation of domain knowledge and corresponding multilingual and multimedia features.


Domain Ontology Linguistic Information Ontology Development Rich Representation Ontology Class 


  1. Alexa, M., Kreissig, B., Liepert, M., Reichenberger, K., Rostek, L., Rautmann, K., Scholze-Stubenrecht, W., Stoye, S.: The Duden Ontology: an Integrated Representation of Lexical and Ontological Information. In: Proc. of the OntoLex Workshop at LREC, Spain (May 2002)Google Scholar
  2. Bateman, J.A., Henschel, R., Rinaldi, F.: Generalized Upper Model 2.0: documentation Report of GMD/Institut für Integrierte Publikations- und Informationssysteme. Darmstadt, Germany (1995)Google Scholar
  3. Brickley, D., Guha, R.V. (eds.): RDF Vocabulary Description Language 1.0: RDF Schema. World Wide Web Consortium (2004)Google Scholar
  4. Buitelaar, P., Eigner, T., Declerck, T.: OntoSelect: A Dynamic Ontology Library with Support for Ontology Selection. In: Proc. of the Demo Session at the International Semantic Web Conference, Hiroshima, Japan (November 2004)Google Scholar
  5. Buitelaar, P., Cimiano, P., Racioppa, S., Siegel, M.: Ontology-based Information Extraction with SOBA. In: Proc. of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) (2006)Google Scholar
  6. Drozdzynski, W., Krieger, H.-U., Piskorski, J., Schäfer, U., Xu, F.: Shallow Processing with Unification and Typed Feature Structures - Foundations and Applications. In: Künstliche Intelligenz (January 2004)Google Scholar
  7. Francopoulo, G., George, M., Calzolari, N., Monachini, M., Bel, N., Pet, M., Soria, C.: Lexical Markup Framework (LMF). In: Proc. of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC) (2006)Google Scholar
  8. Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari, A., Schneider, L.: Sweetening Ontologies with DOLCE. In: Gómez-Pérez, A., Benjamins, V.R. (eds.) EKAW 2002. LNCS, vol. 2473, p. 166. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gangemi, A., Navigli, R., Velardi, P.: The ontoWordNet project: Extension and axiomatization of conceptual relations in wordNet. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z., Schmidt, D.C. (eds.) CoopIS 2003, DOA 2003, and ODBASE 2003. LNCS, vol. 2888, pp. 820–838. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hayes, P. (ed.): RDF Semantics. World Wide Web Consortium (2004)Google Scholar
  11. Krieger, H.-U., Schafer, U.: TDL—a type description language for constraint-based grammars. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), pp. 893–899 (1994)Google Scholar
  12. McGuinness, D.L., van Harmelen, F. (eds.): OWL Web Ontology Language Overview. W3C Recommendation (February 10, 2004)Google Scholar
  13. Miles, A., Brickley, D. (eds.): SKOS Core Vocabulary Specification. W3C Working Draft (May 10, 2005a)Google Scholar
  14. Miles, A., Brickley, D. (eds.): SKOS Core Guide. W3C Working Draft (May 10, 2005b)Google Scholar
  15. Miller, G.A.: WORDNET: A Lexical Database for English. Communications of ACM (11), 39–41 (1995)Google Scholar
  16. Niles, I., Pease, A.: Towards a standard upper ontology. In: FOIS 2001: Proceedings of the international conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems. ACM Press, New York (2001)Google Scholar
  17. Noy, N.F., Sintek, M., Decker, S., Crubezy, M., Fergerson, R.W., Musen, M.A.: Creating Semantic Web Contents with Protege-2000. IEEE Intelligent Systems 16(2), 60–71 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Oberle, D., Ankolekar, A., Hitzler, P., Cimiano, P., Schmidt, C., Weiten, M., Loos, B., Porzel, R., Zorn, H.-P., Micelli, M., Sintek, M., Kiesel, M., Mougouie, B., Vembu, S., Baumann, S., Romanelli, M., Buitelaar, P., Engel, R., Sonntag, D., Reithinger, N., Burkhardt, F., Zhou, J.: DOLCE ergo SUMO: On Foundational and Domain Models in SWIntO (SmartWeb Integrated Ontology) (in preparation)Google Scholar
  19. Ogden, C.K., Richards, I.A.: The meaning of meaning - A study of the influence of language upon thought and of the science of symbolism. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co., London (1923)Google Scholar
  20. Petridis, K., Kompatsiaris, I., Strintzis, M.G., Bloehdorn, S., Handschuh, S., Staab, S., Simou, N.: Knowledge Representation for Semantic Multimedia Content Analysis and Reasoning. In: Proc. of the European Workshop on the Integration of Knowledge, Semantics and Digital Media Technology, Royal Statistical Society, London, November 25-26 (2004)Google Scholar
  21. Vossen, P. (ed.): EuroWordNet: A Multilingual Database with Lexical Semantic Networks. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1998)MATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Buitelaar
    • 1
  • Michael Sintek
    • 2
  • Malte Kiesel
    • 2
  1. 1.DFKI GmbHLanguage TechnologySaarbrueckenGermany
  2. 2.DFKI GmbHKnowledge ManagementKaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations