Advertisement

Lexical Semantics

  • Pierre M. Nugues
Chapter
Part of the Cognitive Technologies book series (COGTECH)

Abstract

Formal semantics provides clean grounds and well-mastered devices for bridging language and logic. Although debated, the assumption of such a link is common sense. There is obviously a connection – at least partial – between sentences and logical representations. However, there are more controversial issues. For instance, can the whole language be handled in terms of logical forms? Language practice, psychology, or pragmatics are not taken into account. These areas pertain to cognition: processes of symbolization, conceptualization, or understanding.

Keywords

Argument Structure Word Sense Semantic Role Word Sense Disambiguation Thematic Role 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Atkins, B. T. (Ed.). (1996). Collins-Robert French-English, English-French dictionary. New York/ Paris: HarperCollins and Dictionnaires Le Robert.Google Scholar
  2. Björkelund, A., Bohnet, B., Hafdell, L., & Nugues, P. (2010). A high-performance syntactic and semantic dependency parser. In Coling 2010: Demonstration volume, Beijing, (pp. 33–36). Coling 2010 Organizing Committee.Google Scholar
  3. Björkelund, A., Hafdell, L., & Nugues, P. (2009). Multilingual semantic role labeling. In Proceedings of the thirteenth conference on computational natural language learning (CoNLL-2009), Boulder, (pp. 43–48).Google Scholar
  4. Dutoit, D. (1992). A set-theoretic approach to lexical semantics. In Proceedings of the 15th international conference on computational linguistics, COLING-92, Nantes (Vol. III, pp. 982–987).Google Scholar
  5. Fellbaum, C. (Ed.). (1998). WordNet: An electronic lexical database (language, speech and communication). Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  6. Fillmore, C. J. (1968). The case for case. In E. Bach & R. T. Harms (Eds.), Universals in linguistic theory, (pp. 1–88). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  7. Fillmore, C. J. (1976). Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences: Conference on the Origin and Development of Language and Speech, 280, 20–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Harris, R., & Taylor, T. J. (1997). Landmarks in linguistic thought, the Western tradition from Socrates to Saussure (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Hjelmslev, L. (1935–1937). La catégorie des cas. Étude de grammaire générale: Volume VII(1), IX(2) of Acta Jutlandica. Aarhus: Universitetsforlaget i Aarhus.Google Scholar
  10. Hjelmslev, L. (1943). Omkring sprogteoriens grundlæggelse. Festskrift udgivet af Københavns Universiteit, Copenhagen. English translation Prolegomena to a Theory of Language.Google Scholar
  11. Hornby, A. S. (Ed.). (1995). Oxford advanced learner’s dictionary of current English (5th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Ide, N., & Véronis, J. (1998). Introduction to the special issue on word sense disambiguation: The state of the art. Computational Linguistics, 24(1), 1–40.Google Scholar
  13. Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  14. Johansson, R., & Nugues, P. (2008a). Dependency-based semantic role labeling of PropBank. In Proceedings of the 2008 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP 2008), Honolulu (pp. 69–78).Google Scholar
  15. Johansson, R., & Nugues, P. (2008b). Dependency-based syntactic–semantic analysis with PropBank and NomBank. In Proceedings of CoNLL-2008: The twelfth conference on computational natural language learning, Manchester (pp. 183–187).Google Scholar
  16. Kingsbury, P., Palmer, M., & Marcus, M. (2002). Adding semantic annotation to the Penn Treebank. In Proceedings of the human language technology conference, San Diego.Google Scholar
  17. Landes, S., Leacock, C., & Tengi, R. (1998). Building semantic concordances. In C. Fellbaum (Ed.), WordNet: An electronic lexical database. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  18. Lesk, M. (1986). Automatic sense disambiguation using machine readable dictionaries: How to tell a pine cone from an ice cream cone. In Proceedings of the 5th annual international conference on systems documentation, Toronto (pp. 24–26).Google Scholar
  19. Mast, M., Kummert, F., Ehrlich, U., Fink, G. A., Kuhn, T., Niemann, H., & Sagerer, G. (1994). A speech understanding and dialog system with a homogeneous linguistic knowledge base. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 16(2), 179–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mel’čuk, I. A., Clas, A., & Polguère, A. (1995). Introduction à la lexicologie explicative et combinatoire. Louvain-la-Neuve: Éditions Duculot.Google Scholar
  21. Meyers, A., Reeves, R., Macleod, C., Szekely, R., Zielinska, V., Young, B., & Grishman, R. (2004). The NomBank project: An interim report. In A. Meyers (Ed.), HLT-NAACL 2004 workshop: Frontiers in corpus annotation, Boston (pp. 24–31).Google Scholar
  22. Miller, G. A. (1995). WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM, 38(11), 39–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Miller, G. A., Beckwith, R., Fellbaum, C., Gross, D., Miller, K. J., & Tangi, R. (1993). Five papers on WordNet. Technical report, Princeton University. ftp://ftp.cogsci.princeton.edu/pub/wordnet/5papers.ps. Cited October 28, 2005.
  24. Palmer, M., Gildea, D., & Kingsbury, P. (2005). The Proposition Bank: An annotated corpus of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics, 31(1), 71–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Procter, P. (Ed.). (1978). Longman dictionary of contemporary English. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  26. Procter, P. (Ed.). (1995). Cambridge international dictionary of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Pustejovsky, J. (1995). The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  28. Quillian, M. R. (1967). Word concepts: A theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. Behavioral Science, 12(5), 410–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rey, A. (Ed.). (1988). Le Robert micro. Paris: Dictionnaires Le Robert.Google Scholar
  30. Rich, E., & Knight, K. (1991). Artificial intelligence (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  31. Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M. R. L., Johnson, C. R., & Scheffczyk, J. (2010). FrameNet II: Extended theory and practice. Retrieved November 7, 2013, from https://fndrupal.icsi.berkeley.edu/fndrupal/the_book Google Scholar
  32. Sagerer, G. (1990). Automatisches Verstehen gesprochener Sprache (Reihe Informatik, Vol. 74). Mannheim: B.I. Wissenschaftsverlag.Google Scholar
  33. Saussure, F. (1916). Cours de linguistique générale. Reprinted Payot, 1995, Paris.Google Scholar
  34. Sinclair, J. (Ed.). (1987). Collins COBUILD English language dictionary. London: Collins.Google Scholar
  35. Surdeanu, M., Johansson, R., Meyers, A., Màrquez, L., & Nivre, J. (2008). The CoNLL 2008 shared task on joint parsing of syntactic and semantic dependencies. In CoNLL 2008: Proceedings of the 12th conference on computational natural language learning, Manchester (pp. 159–177).Google Scholar
  36. Tesnière, L. (1966). Éléments de syntaxe structurale (2nd ed.). Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
  37. Wahrig, G. (Ed.). (1978). dtv-Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. Munich: Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag.Google Scholar
  38. Wilks, Y. A., Slator, B. M., & Guthrie, L. M. (1996). Electric words. Dictionaries, computers, and meanings. Cambridge, MA: MIT.Google Scholar
  39. Wilks, Y., & Stevenson, M. (1997). Sense tagging: Semantic tagging with a lexicon. In Tagging text with lexical semantics: Why, what, and how? Proceedings of the workshop, Washington, DC (pp. 74–78). ACL SIGLEX.Google Scholar
  40. Yarowsky, D. (1995). Unsupervised word sense disambiguation rivaling supervised methods. In Proceedings of the 33rd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, Cambridge, MA (pp. 189–196).Google Scholar
  41. Yarowsky, D. (1996). Homograph disambiguation in speech synthesis. In J. van Santen, R. Sproat, J. P. Olive, & J. Hirschberg (Eds.), Progress in speech synthesis (pp. 159–175). Berlin/ Heidelberg/New York: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre M. Nugues
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations