Linguistic Modifiers: An Overview
- 199 Downloads
The power of approximate reasoning is based upon the use of linguistic variables. A variable (e.g. price)is called numeric if its values are numbers (e.g. 5.000 yuan, BEF 100.000, £20.000, 15 Euro,...)and is called linguistic when its values are linguistic terms (e.g. cheap, rather expensive, not expensive but not very cheap either,...). The set of values of a linguistic variable contains at least one primary term (expensive)and most often its antonym or polar opposite (cheap). All the other terms are constructed from these base terms using logical connectives (and, or), negation (not)and linguistic modifiers (rather, fairly, slightly, very,...). The meaning of every term is represented by a Zadeh fuzzy set and can be derived from the fuzzy sets associated with the base terms (i.e. their meaning).
During the last two decades several authors developed techniques for computing the meaning of modified terms. First we will give an overview of these representations of linguistic modifiers and their main properties. Then we will go into their usefulness and state their pro’;s and contra’;s, in a search for the “ideal” representation of some frequently used adverbs like “very” and “more or less”. Finally we shall demonstrate how the best representations can be applied in approximate reasoning with Zadeh’;s compositional rule of inference and the generalized modus ponens.
KeywordsLinguistic modifier approximate reasoning linguistic variable
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Bolinger, D. Degree Words. The Hague, Netherlands, 1972.Google Scholar
- Bouchon-Meunier, B. La Logique Floue Que sais-je?, 2702. Parijs, 1993.Google Scholar
- Cleeren, R. Modelling linguistic expressions by means of fuzzy set theory. Master Thesis (in Dutch) Gent, 1992Google Scholar
- Després, S. Un apport à la conception de systèmes à base de connaissances: les op#x00E9;rations de d#x00E9;duction floues. Thèse de doctorat de l’Université Pierre et Marie Curie (Paris VI), 1988.Google Scholar
- Devos, F. Still Fuzzy After All These Years. A linguistic evaluation of the fuzzy set approach to semantic vagueness. Quaderni di Semantica, 1995, 16–21.Google Scholar
- Grice, H. P. Further notes on logic and conversation P. Cole (ed.). In Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, New York: Academic Press 1978}, 113–1Google Scholar
- Hellendoorn, H. Reasoning with fuzzy logic. Ph. D. thesis, T. U. Delft, 1990.Google Scholar
- Holmes, J. Hedging Your Bets and Sitting on the Fence: Some Evidence for Hedges as Support Structures. Te Reo, 1984; 27: 47–62.Google Scholar
- HüCbler, A. Understatements and Hedges in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1983.Google Scholar
- Kerre, E. E. Introduction to the Basic Principles of Fuzzy Set Theory and Some of its Applications. Gent: Communication and Cognition, 1993.Google Scholar
- Kohler, K. Adaptive fuzzy modifiers. EUFIT’ 94, 1994.Google Scholar
- Mattila, J. K. Calculus of modifier operators in fuzzy logic. University of Turku, Finland: Publications of the Institute for Applied Mathematics, 14, 1989.Google Scholar
- Novak, V. The alternative mathematical model of linguistic semantics and pragmatics. International Series on Systems Science and Engineering Volume 8; Plenum Press New York and London, 1992.Google Scholar
- Vanden Eynde, C. A very difficult problem: modelling modification using VERY. A semantic-pragmatic approach. (in Dutch) FKFO-project, private communication.Google Scholar