Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ontologies of Language and Language Processing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications

Abstract

In this chapter we discuss approaches to natural language processing where there is a strong interaction with ontological engineering. Due to the breadth of knowledge required for language processing, many of the knowledge sources developed in the area are also being considered ready-made candidates for domain ontologies. This practice needs to be tempered by a more detailed consideration of their ontological import and their relationships with existing foundational and other ontologies. Nevertheless, accounts of linguistic phenomena are commonly used to motivate ontological distinctions. Uncovering what can be contributed by each area is therefore an important theoretical goal in its own right with considerable practical implications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Asher, N. 1993. Reference to abstract objects in discourse. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, C.F., C.J. Fillmore, and J.B. Lowe. 1998. The berkeley FrameNet project. In Proceedings of the ACL/COLING-98, 86–90. Montreal, Quebec.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker, C.F., and J. Ruppenhofer. 2002. FrameNet’s frames vs. Levin’s verb classes. In eds. J. Larson, and M. Paster. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 27–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, J.A. 1990. Upper modeling: Organizing knowledge for natural language processing. In Proceedings of the 5th International Natural Language Generation Workshop, Pittsburgh, PA, 54−60. Organized by Kathleen R. McKeown (Columbia University), Johanna D. Moore (University of Pittsburgh) and Sergei Nirenburg (Carnegie Mellon University). Held 3–6 June 1990, Dawson, PA. http://acl.ldc.upenn.edu/W/W90/W90-0108.pdf.

  • Bateman, J.A. 2004. The place of language within a foundational ontology. In eds. A.C. Varzi, and L. Vieu. Formal Ontology in Information Systems: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS-2004), 222–233. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, J.A. 2010. Language and space: A two-level semantic approach based on principles of ontological engineering. International Journal of Speech Technology 13(1):29–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, J.A., R. Henschel, and F. Rinaldi. 1995a. Generalized upper model 2.0: Documentation, Technical report, GMD/Institut für Integrierte Publikations- und Informationssysteme, Darmstadt, Germany. http://purl.org/net/gum2.

  • Bateman, J.A., B. Magnini, and G. Fabris. 1995b. The generalized upper model knowledge base: Organization and use. In ed. N.J.I. Mars. Towards very large knowledge bases: Knowledge building and knowledge sharing. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, J., J. Hois, R. Ross, T. Tenbrink, and S. Farrar. 2008. The generalized upper model 3.0: Documentation, SFB/TR8 internal report. Germany: Collaborative Research Center for Spatial Cognition, University of Bremen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bierwisch, M., and E. Lang, eds. 1989. Dimensional adjectives. Grammatical structure and conceptual interpretation. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buitelaar, P., T. Declerck, A. Frank, S. Racioppa, M. Kiesel, M. Sintek, R. Engel, M. Romanelli, D. Sonntag, B. Loos, V. Micelli, R. Porzel, and P. Cimiano. 2006. LingInfo: Design and applications of a model for the integration of linguistic information in ontologies. In Proceedings of the OntoLexWorkshop at LREC, 28–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunt, H., and Y. Girard. 2005. Designing an open, multidimensional dialogue act taxonomy. In Proceedings of DIALOR 05’, Nancy, 37–44. http://dialor05.loria.fr/Papers/05-harryann.pdf

  • Burchardt, A., A. Frank, and M. Pinkal. 2005. Building text meaning representations from contextually related frames – A case study. In Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Computational Semantics, IWCS-6’, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cimiano, P., and U. Reyle. 2006. Towards foundational semantics – Ontological semantics revisited. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS). IOS Press. http://www.aifb.uni-karlsruhe.de/WBS/pci/Publications/fois06.pdf

  • Cruse, D.A. 1986. Lexical semantics. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahlgren, K. 1995. A linguistic ontology. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43(5/6):809–818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dale, R., H. Moisl, and H. Somers, eds. 2000. A handbook of natural language processing: Techniques and applications for the processing of language as text. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson, D. 1967. The logical form of action sentences. In The logic of decision and action, ed. N. Rescher, 81–95. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doran, C., D. Egedi, B.A. Hockey, B. Srinivas, and M. Zaidel. 1994. XTAG system – A wide coverage grammar for English. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 94), Kyoto, Japan, vol. II, 922–928.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrar, S. 2003. An ontology for linguistics: Extending SUMO with GOLD. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE International Conference on Natural Language Processing and Knowledge Engineering, IEEE, Beijing, PRC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farrar, S., W.D. Lewis, and D.T. Langendoen. 2002. A common ontology for linguistic concepts. In Proceedings of the Knowledge Technologies Conference, Seattle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fillmore, C., and B. Atkins. 1998. FrameNet and lexicographic relevance. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), Granada, Spain.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fillmore, C.J. 1976. Frame semantics and the nature of language. In Origins and evolution of language and speech, ed. S. Harnad, 155–202. New York, NY: Academy of Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gangemi, A., N. Guarino, A. Oltramari, and S. Borgo. 2002. Cleaning-up WordNet’s top-level. In Proceedings of the 1st International WordNet Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gangemi, A., and P. Mika. 2003. Understanding the semantic web through descriptions and situations. In Proceedings of ODBASE 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guarino, N. 1998. Some ontological principles for designing upper level lexical resources. In eds. A. Rubio, N. Gallardo, R. Castro, and A. Tejada. Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), Granada, Spain, 527–534.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M.A.K., and C.M.I.M. Matthiessen. 1999. Construing experience through meaning: A language-based approach to cognition. London: Cassell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M.A.K., and C.M.I.M. Matthiessen. 2004. An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edition. London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang, C., N. Calzolari, A. Gangemi, A. Lenci, A. Oltramari, and L. Prevot, eds. 2008. Ontologies and the lexicon. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ide, N., L. Romary, and E. de la Clergerie. 2003. International standard for a linguistic annotation framework. In Proceedings of the HLT-NAACL’03 Workshop on the Software Engineering and Architecture of Language Technology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, R. 1983. Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Kipper-Schuler, K. 2005. VerbNet: A broad-coverage, comprehensive verb lexicon, PhD thesis, Philadelphia, PA: Computer and Information Science Department, Universiy of Pennsylvania. http://repository.upenn.edu/dissertations/AAI3179808/.

  • Kuhn, W. 2001. Ontologies in support of activities in geographical space. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 15(7):613–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langacker, R.W. 1987. Foundations in cognitive grammar. Vol. 1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, B. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loebe, F. 2003. An analysis of roles: Towards ontology-based modelling, OntoMed Report 6, Institute for Medical Informatics, Statistics and Epidemiology (IMISE). Germany: University of Leipzig. http://www.onto-med.de.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, W.C., Y. Arens, C.M.I.M. Matthiessen, S. Naberschnig and N.K. Sondheimer. 1985. Janus abstraction structure – draft 2. Technical report, Marina del Rey, CA: USC/Information Sciences Institute. (Circulated in draft form only.)

    Google Scholar 

  • Minsky, M. 1975. A framework for representing knowledge. In The psychology of computer vision, ed. P.H. Winston, 211–277. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Reprinted in eds. R.J. Brachman, and H.J. Levesque. 1985. Readings in knowledge representation, Los Altos, CA: Kaufman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niekrasz, J., and M. Purver. 2006. A multimodal discourse ontology for meeting understanding. In eds. S. Renals, and S. Bengio. Proceedings of MLMI 2005, LNCS 3869, 162–173. Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niles, I., and A. Pease. 2003. Linking lexicons and ontologies: Mapping wordnet to the suggested upper merged ontology. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Information and Knowledge Engineering, IEEE, 412–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nirenburg, S., and V. Raskin. 2001. Ontological semantics, formal ontology, and ambiguity. In eds. C. Welty, and B. Smith. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems, 151–161. New York, NY: ACM Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Oberle, D., A. Ankolekar, P. Hitzler, P. Cimiano, M. Sintek, M. Kiesel, B. Mougouie, S. Baumann, S. Vembu, M. Romanelli, P. Buitelaar, R. Engel, D. Sonntag, N. Reithinger, B. Loos, et al. 2007. DOLCE ergo SUMO: On foundational and domain models in the SmartWeb integrated ontology (SWIntO). Journal of Web Semantics 5:156–174.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, B. 1995. A language for ontologies based on objects and events. In Proceedings of the IJCAI’95 Workshop on Basic Ontologicial Issues in Knowledge Sharing. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons, T. 1990. Events in the semantics of english: A study in subatomic semantics. Cambridge, MA/London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pease, A., and I. Niles. 2002. Practical semiotics: A formal theory. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information and Knowledge Engineering (IKE ’02), Las Vegas, NV.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sowa, J.F. 1995. Top-level ontological categories. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43(5/6):669–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stone, M. 2003a. Knowledge representation for language engineering. In A handbook for language engineers, CSLI Lecture Notes 164, ed. A. Faghaly, 299–366. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, M. 2003b. Ontology and description in computational semantics. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Knowledge and Reasoning in Practical Dialogue Systems at the 18th IJCAI. http://www.ida.liu.se/labs/nlplab/ijcai-ws-03/papers/stone.pdf.

  • Talmy, L. 1987. Figure and ground in complex sentences. In Universals of human language, ed. J.H. Greenberg, 625–649. Stanford, CA:University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talmy, L. 2000. Towards a cognitive semantics, A Bradford Book. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Talmy, L. 2006, The fundamental system of spatial schemas in language. In ed. B. Hampe, From perception to meaning: Image schemas in cognitive linguistics, 37–47. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter

    Google Scholar 

  • Trautwein, M., and P. Grenon. 2004. Roles: one dead armadillo on WordNet’s speedway to ontology. In Proceedings of the 2nd Global WordNet Conference, 341–346. Brno, Czech Republic. http://www.fi.muni.cz/gwc2004/proc/118.pdf.

  • van Deemter, K., and S. Peters, eds. 1996. Semantic ambiguity and underspecification. Stanford, CA: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Diggelen, J., R. Beun, F. Dignum, R. van Eijk, and J.-J. Meyer. 2007. Ontology negotiation: Goals, requirements and implementation. International Journal of Agent-Oriented Software Engineering 1(1):63–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vendler, Z. 1957. Verbs and times. Philosophical Review 66:143–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vossen, P., P. Diez-Orzas, and W. Peters. 1997. The multilingual design of EuroWordNet. In Proceedings of the ACL/EACL-97 Workshop on Automatic Information Extraction and Building Lexical Semantic Resources for NLP applications, Madrid: Association for Computational Linguistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wierzbicka, A. 1988. The semantics of grammar, Studies in Language Companion Series 18, Amsterdam/ Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zarri, G.P. 2005. An n-ary language for representing narrative information on the web. In eds. P. Bouquet, and G. Tummarello. Proceedings of SWAP 2005 – Semantic Web Applications and Perspectives, Proceedings of the 2nd Italian Semantic Web Workshop, Trento, Italy: University of Trento, 14–16 December 2005, vol. 166 of CEUR Workshop Proceedings, CEUR-WS.org. http://www.ceur-ws.org/Vol-166/63.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany

    John A. Bateman

Authors
  1. John A. Bateman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John A. Bateman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dipto. Sociologia e Ricerca Sociale, Universita di Trento, Via Verdi 26, Trento, 38100, Italy

    Roberto Poli

  2. 23rd Place NE., 13544, Seattle, 98125-3325, Washington, USA

    Michael Healy

  3. Computer Technology Institute, Hellenic Open University &, N. Kazantzaki Str., Patras, 265 00, Greece

    Achilles Kameas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer Netherlands

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Bateman, J.A. (2010). Ontologies of Language and Language Processing. In: Poli, R., Healy, M., Kameas, A. (eds) Theory and Applications of Ontology: Computer Applications. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-8847-5_17

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation