Advertisement

Two Path Preposition: Along and Past

  • Christian Kray
  • Jörg Baus
  • Hubert Zimmer
  • Harry Speiser
  • Antonio Krüger
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2205)

Abstract

We present results from a series of experiments, where relevant factors for theuse of path prepositions were examined. We were especially interested in the concepts behind the German prepositions “entlang” and “vorbei” (similar to “along” and “past”). After exploring the basic properties human beings attribute to these prepositions, we systematically varied those properties to investigate their impact on the selection process and the corresponding speech production latency. The results indicate that parallelism and distance between the outline of a reference object and a trajectory are key concepts in this context.

Key Words

communication of spatial information spatial reasoning empirical studies path prepositions 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    A. Blocher, F. Essig, A. Krüger, and W. Maaβ. Towards a computational semantics of path relations. In P. Olivier, editor, Spatial language: cognitive and computational perspectives. Kluwer Academic Publishers, to appear.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    A. G. Cohn. Calculi for qualitative spatial reasoning. In J. Calmet, J. A. Campbell, and J. Pfalzgrasf, editors, Artificial Intelligence and Symbolic Mathematical Computation (LNCS 1138), pages 124–143. Springer, Berlin, 1996.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    M. J. Egenhofer and J. R. Herring. A mathematical framework for the definition of topological relations. In K. Brassel and H. Kishimoto, editors, Fourth International Symposium on Spatial Data Hadling, Zürich, Switzerland, 1990.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Frank and M. Raubal. Formal specifications of image schemata–step to interoperability in geographic informations systems. Spatial Cognition and Computation 1, pages 67–101, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    K.-P. Gapp. Basic meanings of spatial relations: Computation and evaluation in 3d space. In Proceedings of AAAI-94, Seattle, WA, 1994.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    W. G. Hayward and M. J. Tarr. Spatial language and spatial representation. Cognition, 55, pages 39–84, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    A. Herskovits. Language and Spatial Cognition–An Interdisciplinary Study of the prepositions in English. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1986.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    C. Kray and A. Blocher. Modeling the basic meanings of path relations. In Proceedings of the 16th IJCAI. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA, pages 384–389, 1999.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    A. Krüger and W. Maaβ. Towards a computational semantics of path relations. In Workshop on Language and space at the 14th National Conference on Artifical Intelligence (AAAI 97), 1997.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    G. D. Logan. Linguistic and conceptual control of visual spatial attention. Cognitive Psychology, 28, pages 103–174, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    G. D. Logan and D. D. Sadler. A computational analysis of the apprehension of spatial relations. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, and M. F. Garrett, editors, Language and space. Language, speech, and communications. MIT Press, Cambridge, MS, 1996.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    C.D. Meola. Semantisch relevante und semantisch irrelevante Kasusalternation am Beispiel von entlang. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 17.2 pages 204–235, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    B. Tversky and P. U. Lee. How space structures language. In C. Freksa, C. Habel, and K. F. Wender, editors, Spatial Cognition. Springer, Berlin, 1998.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    B. Tversky and P. U. Lee. Pictorial and verbal tools for conveying routes. In Spatial Information Theory (Proceedings of COSIT 99). Springer, Berlin, pages 51–64, 1999.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    H. Zimmer, H. Speiser, J. Baus, and A. Kruger. Critical features for the selection of verbal descriptions for path relations (in press). Cognitive Processing, 2001.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    H. D. Zimmer, H. R. Spesier, J. Baus, A. Blocher, and E. Stopp. The use of locative expressions in dependence of the spatial relation between target and reference object in two-dimensional layouts. In C. Freksa, C. Habel, and K. F. Wender, editors, Spatial cognition. An interdisciplinary approach to representing and processing spatial Knowledge. Springer, Berlin, 1998.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Kray
    • 1
  • Jörg Baus
    • 3
  • Hubert Zimmer
    • 2
  • Harry Speiser
    • 2
  • Antonio Krüger
    • 3
  1. 1.German Research Center for Artificial Intelligence (DFKI)Germany
  2. 2.Dept. of PsychologySaarland UniversitySaarland
  3. 3.Dept. of Computer ScienceSaarland UniversitySaarland

Personalised recommendations