Advertisement

Linguistic Modifiers: An Overview

  • Etienne E. Kerre
  • Martine De Cock
Chapter
Part of the The International Series on Asian Studies in Computer and Information Science book series (ASIS, volume 6)

Abstract

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.

Keywords

Linguistic modifier approximate reasoning linguistic variable 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bolinger, D. Degree Words. The Hague, Netherlands, 1972.Google Scholar
  2. Bouchon-Meunier, B. La Logique Floue Que sais-je?, 2702. Parijs, 1993.Google Scholar
  3. Bouchon-Meunier, B.; Jia, Y. Linguistic Modifiers and Imprecise Categories. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 1992; 7: 25–36.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cat, Ho N.; Wechler, W. Hedge algebras: an algebraic approach to structure of sets of linguistic truth values. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1990; 33: 281–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cleeren, R. Modelling linguistic expressions by means of fuzzy set theory. Master Thesis (in Dutch) Gent, 1992Google Scholar
  6. 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
  7. 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
  8. Di Lascio, L.; Gisolfi, A.; Loia, V. A New Model for Linguistic Modifiers. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 1996; 15: 25–47.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 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
  10. Hellendoorn, H. Reasoning with fuzzy logic. Ph. D. thesis, T. U. Delft, 1990.Google Scholar
  11. Hellendoorn, H. The generalized modus ponens considered as a fuzzy relation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1992, 46: 29–48.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hersh, H. M.; Caramazza, A. A Fuzzy Set Approach to Modifiers and Vagueness in Natural Language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1976; 105(3), 254–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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
  14. HüCbler, A. Understatements and Hedges in English. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1983.Google Scholar
  15. Kerre, E. E. Introduction to the Basic Principles of Fuzzy Set Theory and Some of its Applications. Gent: Communication and Cognition, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. Kohler, K. Adaptive fuzzy modifiers. EUFIT’ 94, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. Kuzmin, V. B. A Parametric Approach to Description of Linguistic Values of Variables and Hedges. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1981; 6: 27–41.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lakoff, G. Hedges: a Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 1973; 2: 458–508.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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
  20. 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
  21. Vanden Eynde, C. A very difficult problem: modelling modification using VERY. A semantic-pragmatic approach. (in Dutch) FKFO-project, private communication.Google Scholar
  22. Zadeh, L. A. A Fuzzy-Set-Theoretic Interpretation of Linguistic Hedges. Journal of Cybernetics, 1972; 2,3: 4–34.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Zadeh, L.A. The Concept of a Linguistic Variable and its Application to Approximate Reasoning I, II, III. Information Sciences, 1975; 8: 199–249, 301-357; 9: 43-80.MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Etienne E. Kerre
    • 1
  • Martine De Cock
    • 1
  1. 1.University of GentFuzziness and Uncertainty Modelling Department of Applied Mathematics and Computer ScienceKrijgslaanBelgium

Personalised recommendations