Phenomena of localization

  • Simone Pribbenow
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 546)


The conceptual semantics of each localization expression, i.e., each triple consisting of a spatial relation (for example given by a preposition), a reference object (the internal argument of the prepositional expression or the origo in deictic expressions) and the entity to be located, is given by an area constituting process [Gebietskonstituierender Prozeß](see Habel/Pribbenow (1988)). The area constituting process computes the corresponding area using constraints determined by the semantics of the spatial relation, the features of the two entities involved, and available information about the spatial environment. The result is an instantiation of a LOK-fact that indicates the location of the located entity LE in the computed area G. The area object will be represented and processed on both the prepositional and the depictorial component. Note that sometimes the part or the conceptualization of the located entity has to be inferred before it is possible to assert the Lok-fact. This is especially important for dynamical localization, where an underlying (abstract) path is involved in the location.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bierwisch, M., Lang, E. (eds., 1987): Grammatische und konzeptuelle Aspekte von Dimensionsadjektiven. Akademie-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  2. Bühler, K. (1934): Sprachtheorie. Fischer, JenaGoogle Scholar
  3. Ehrich, V. (1982): Da and the system of spatial deixis in German. In: J. Weissenborn, W. Klein (eds.): Here and There. Benjamin, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 43–63Google Scholar
  4. Habel, Ch. (1986): Prinzipien der Referentialität. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  5. Habel, Ch. (1989): Propositional and Depictorial Representations of Spatial Knowledge: The Case of Path-Concepts. Report FBI-HH-M-171/89, University of HamburgGoogle Scholar
  6. Habel, Ch., Pribbenow, S. (1988): Gebietskonstituierende Prozesse. LILOG Report 18, IBM Deutschland, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  7. Hays, E. (1987): A Computational Treatment of Locative Relations in Natural Language. Report MS-CIS-87-31, LINC LAB 58, University of PennsylvaniaGoogle Scholar
  8. Herskovits, A. (1985): Semantics and pragmatics of locative expressions. Cognitive Science, 9, 341–378Google Scholar
  9. Herweg, M. (1989): Ansätze zu einer semantischen Beschreibung topologischer Präpositionen. In: Ch. Habel, M. Herweg, K. Rehkämper (eds.): Raumkonzepte in Verstehensprozessen. Niemeyer, Tübingen, pp. 99–127Google Scholar
  10. Hottenroth, P. (1986): Die Semantik lokaler Präpositionen. Ein prototypensemantisches Modell für die französische Präposition dans mit einer Analyse der Beziehungen zwischen der Präposition und den Objektbezeichnungen in den Präpositionalsyntagmen. Habilitation thesis, University of KonstanzGoogle Scholar
  11. Lang, E., Carstensen, K.-U. (1990): OSKAR — A Prolog Program for Modelling Dimensional Designation and Positional Variation of Objects in Space. IWBS Report 109, IBM Deutschland, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  12. Lang, E., Carstensen, K.-U., Simmons, G. (1991): Modelling Spatial Knowledge on a Linguistic Basis: Theory-Prototype-Integration. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  13. Lindsay, R. (1988): Image and inference. Cognition, 29, 229–250PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Maienborn, C. (1990): Lokale Verben und Präpositionen: Semantische und konzeptuelle Verarbeitung in LEU II. IWBS Report 119, IBM Deutschland, StuttgartGoogle Scholar
  15. Miller, G., Johnson-Laird, P. (1976): Language and Perception. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  16. Pribbenow, S. (1988): Verträglichkeitsprüfungen für die Verarbeitung räumlichen Wissens. In: W. Hoeppner (ed.): Proc. GWAI-88, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Pribbenow, S. (1990): Interaktion von propositionalen und bildhaften Repräsentationen. In: Ch. Preksa, Ch. Habel (eds.): Repräsentation und Verarbeitung räumlichen Wissens. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. Retz-Schmidt, G. (1988): Various views on spatial prepositions. AI Magazine, 9/2, 95–105Google Scholar
  19. Wunderlich, D. (1982): Sprache und Raum. Studium Linguistik, 12, 1–19 and 13, 37–59Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Simone Pribbenow

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations