This paper discusses the problem of lexical choice in text generation, suggesting that it has to be viewed as part of the problem of lexicogrammatical choice instead of being isolated. First, the importance of the problem and the need for a general survey are noted. Next, in order to interpret the contributions these approaches have made and to identify the full spectrum of factors that have to be considered, an abstract model of lexis within lexicogrammar is presented. Then, existing approaches are discussed and located in relation to the abstract model. This paper is a shorter version of a longer treatment that also goes into the abstract model presented here in more detail.


Lexical Item Lexical Entry Text Generation Lexical Semantic Lexical Resource 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Amsler, R. 1981. A Taxonomy for English Nouns and Verbs. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  2. Apresyan, Y. I. Mel’cuk, A. Zholkovsky. 1970. Semantics and lexicography, toward a new type of unilingual dictionary. In F. Kiefer (ed.), Studies in Syntax and Semantics. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  3. Bateman, J., Gen-ichirou, and Atsuchi Tabuchi. 1987. Designing a computational systemic grammar for text generation: a progress report. Department of Electrical Engineering, Kyoto University.Google Scholar
  4. Bateman, J. and C. Paris. 1989. Constraining the development of lexicogrammatical resources during text generation: towards a computational instantiation of register theory. Paper presented at ISC 16. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  5. Bazell, C., I. Catford and M.A.K. Halliday (eds). 1966. In Memory of J.R. Firth. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  6. Becker, J. 1975. The Phrasal Lexicon. In Schank, R. and B. Webber (eds.), Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing. Cambridge:.Google Scholar
  7. Benson, J., M. Cummings and W. Greaves (eds). 1988. Linguistics in a systemic perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  8. Berlin, B., D. Breedlove, and P. Raven. 1973. General Principles of Classifica- tion and Nomenclature in Folk Biology. American Anthropologist, 75: 214–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Berry, M. 1977. Introduction to Systemic Linguistics II: levels and links. London: Batsford.Google Scholar
  10. Brachman, R. 1978. A Structural Paradigm for Representing Knowledge. BBN Report No. 3605, Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, R. and A. Gilman. 1960. The pronouns of power and solidarity. In T. Sebeok (ed), Style in language. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. CEC = A Corpus of English Conversation, ed. by R. Quirk and J. Svartvik. 1980. Lund: C W K Gleerup.Google Scholar
  13. Cruse, D. 1986. Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Cumming, S. 1986. The Lexicon in Text Generation.Google Scholar
  15. USC/Information Sciences Institute, ISI/RR-86–168.Google Scholar
  16. Cumming, S., R. Albano, and N. Sondheimer. 1988. [Paper presented at lex. semantics workshop]Google Scholar
  17. Danlos, L. 1984. Conceptual and linguistic decisions in generation. In Proceedings of Coling 84, Stanford University. Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  18. Dik, S. 1978. Functional Grammar. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  19. Dik, S. 1987. Generating answers from a linguistically coded knowledge base. In Kempen (ed.). Natural Language Generation. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Dinosaurs = Zallinger, P. 1977. Dinosaurs. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  21. 100.
    Dinosaurs = Wilson, R. 100 Dinosaurs from A to Z. New York: Grosset and Dunlap.Google Scholar
  22. Downing, P. 1981. [Lexical choice paper in Pear Stories Volume] In W. Chafe (ed), The Pear Stories. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  23. Emblen, D. 1970. Peter Mark Roget. The word and the man. New York: Crowell.Google Scholar
  24. Ervin-Tripp, S. 1969. Sociolinguistics. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 4.Google Scholar
  25. Evens, M., B. Litowitz, J. Markowitz, R. Smith, and O. Werner. 1980. Lexical-Semantic Relations: A Comparative Survey. Edmonton: Linguistic Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  26. Fawcett, R. 1980. Cognitive Linguistics and Social Interaction: Towards an Integrated Model of a Systemic Functional Grammar and the other Components of a Communicating Mind. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag, and Exeter: University of Exeter.Google Scholar
  27. Fries, P. 1982. On Repetition and Interpretation. Forum Linguisticum 7 (1): 50–64.Google Scholar
  28. Givn, T. (ed.). 1983. Topic Continuity in Language. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  29. Goldman, N. 1974. Computer Generation of Natural-Language from a Deep Conceptual Base. Yale University Dissertation.Google Scholar
  30. Granville, R. 1983. Cohesion in Computer Text Generation: Lexical Substitution. MIT/LCS/TR-310.Google Scholar
  31. Halliday, M.A.K. 1956. The linguistic basis of a mechanical thesaurus. Mechanical Translation 3.3: 81–8.Google Scholar
  32. Halliday, M.A.K. 1961. Scales and categories of the theory of grammar. Word 17.3, 241–92.Google Scholar
  33. Halliday, M.A.K. 1964. Syntax and the consumer. Monograph Series in Languages and Linguistics 17: pp. 14–23. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Halliday, M.A.K. 1966. Lexis as a linguistic level. In Baze11 et al.Google Scholar
  35. Halliday, M.A.K. 1967/8. Notes on transitivity and theme in English. Journal of Linguistics. V. 3.1, 3.2, and 4. 2.Google Scholar
  36. Halliday, M.A.K. 1973. Explorations in the functions of language. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  37. Halliday, M.A.K. 1978. Language as social semiotic. The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  38. Halliday, M.A.K. 1985. Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  39. Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  40. Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan. 1985. Language, context, and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective. Deakin University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Halliday, M.A.K. 1985b. Spoken and written language. Geelong, Vic: Deakin University Press. (Republished in 1988 by Oxford University Press.)Google Scholar
  42. Hasan, R. 1987. The grammarian’s dream. In M.A.K. Halliday and R. Fawcett (eds). New Developments in Systemic Linguistics. London: Frances Pinter.Google Scholar
  43. Hinds, J. 1977. Paragraph Structure and Pronominalization. Papers in Linguistics 10: 77–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hovy, E. 1987a. Generating Language with a Phrasal Lexicon. In McDonald, D. and Bolc. (eds.). Papers in Natural Language Generation. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  45. Hovy, E. 1987b. Generating Natural Language under Pragmatic Constraints. YALEU/CSD/RR#521. Yale University, Ph.D. Dissertation.Google Scholar
  46. Hovy, E. and R. Schank. 1984. Language Generation. In Bara and Guida (eds.), Computational Models of Natural Language Processing. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  47. Ingria, R. 1986. [ACL Tutorial]Google Scholar
  48. Jacobs, P. 1985. PHRED: A Generator for Natural Language Interfaces. Computational Linguistics. Volume 11, 4.Google Scholar
  49. Jacobs, P. 1987. KING: A knowledge-intensive natural language generator. In Kempen (ed).Google Scholar
  50. Kasper, R. 1988. Systemic Grammar and Functional Uvnification Grammar. In Benson, J. and W. Greaves (eds), Systemic Functional Approaches to Discourse: Selected Papers from the 12th International Systemic Workshop. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  51. Kay, M. 1979. Functional Grammar. In Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
  52. Kempen, G. (ed.). 1987. Natural Language Generation. Dordrecht: Martinus Nij hoff.Google Scholar
  53. Kittredge, R. and I. Mel’cuk. 1983. Towards a computable model of meaning-text relations within a natural sublanguage. IJCAI.Google Scholar
  54. Kukich, K. 1983. Design of a Knowledge-Based Report Generator. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the ACL.Google Scholar
  55. Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson. 1980. Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Leech, G. 1974. Semantics. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. Lehrer, A. 1967. Semantic Cuisine. Journal of Linguistics.Google Scholar
  57. Lodwick, F. 1652. The Ground-Work, or foundation laid (or so intended) for the Framing of a New Perfect Language: And an Universali or Common Writing.Google Scholar
  58. Lyne, A. 1988. Systemic syntax from a lexical point of view. In Benson et al. Lyons, J. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  59. McArthur, T. 1986. Worlds of Reference. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  60. McDonald, D. 1980. Language Production as a Process of Decision-making under Constraints. MIT Ph.D. Dissertation, 1980. MIT Report.Google Scholar
  61. McDonald, D. 1981. Language Production: the Source of the Dictionary. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  62. McKeown, K. 1982. Generating Natural Language Text in Response to Questions about Database Structure. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  63. Mann, W. 1983. Inquiry semantics: a functional semantics of natural language. In Proceedings of the First Annual Conference of the Association for Computational Linguistics, European Chapter. Pisa.Google Scholar
  64. Marcus, M. 1987. Generation Systems Should Choose Their Words. In Y. Wilks (ed.), TINLAP-3. Theoretical Issues in Natural Language Processing-3. Memoranda in Computer and Cognitive Science. New Mexico State University.Google Scholar
  65. Martin, J.R. 1989. Life as a noun. Arresting the universe. Paper presented at ISC 16, 1989. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
  66. Martin, J.R. 1990. English Text:system and structure. Benjamins.Google Scholar
  67. Martin, J.R., P. Wignell, S. Eggins and J. Rothery. 1988. Secret English: Discourse Technology in a Junior Secondary School. In L. Gerot, J. Oldenburg, T. Van Leeuwen (eds), Language and socialisation: home and school. Proceedings from the Working Conference on Language in Education. Macquarie University, 1988.Google Scholar
  68. Matthiessen, C. 1981. A Grammar and a Lexicon for a Text-Production System. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  69. Matthiessen, C. 1988. A systemic semantics: the chooser and inquiry framework. In Benson, Cummings and Greaves (eds.). Also as ISI/RS-87–189.Google Scholar
  70. Matthiessen, C. 1989. Lexicogrammatical cartography: English systems. Department of Linguistics, Sydney University. MS.Google Scholar
  71. Mel’cuk, I. 1982. Lexical Functions in Lexicographic Description. In Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistic Society.Google Scholar
  72. Mel’cuk, I. 1986. Semantic Bases of Linguistic Description (Meaning-Text Linguistic Theory). In M. Marino and L. Prez (eds.). The Twelfth Lacus Forum, 1985. Lake Bluff: LACUS.Google Scholar
  73. Nebel, B. and N. Sondheimer. 1986. A Logical-Form and Knowledge-Based Design for Natural Language Generation. In Proceedings of AAAI-86, Vol. 1.Google Scholar
  74. Patten, T. 1988. Systemic text generation as problem solving. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Poynton, C. 1984. Names as vocatives: forms and functions. Nottingham Linguistic Circular 13 (Special Issue on Systemic Linguistics).Google Scholar
  76. Poynton, C. 1985. Language and gender: making the difference. Geelong, Vic.: Deakin University Press. (Republished by London: Oxford University Press, 1988.)Google Scholar
  77. Pustejovsky, J. and S. Nirenburg. 1987. Lexical Selection in the Process of Language Generation. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
  78. Quillian, R. 1967. Word Concepts: A Theory and Simulation of Some Basic Semantic Capabilities. Behavioral Science 12: 410–30. Reprinted in Brachman and Levesque (eds.).Google Scholar
  79. Roget, M. 1852. A Thesaurus of English Words and Phrases, Classified and Arranged so as to facilitate the Expression of Ideas and assist in Literary Composition. Many editions.Google Scholar
  80. Sigurd, B. 1987. Meta-comments in text-generation. In Kempen (ed.). Sinclair, J. 1966. Beginning the study of lexis. In Bazell et al.Google Scholar
  81. Sinclair, J. 1987. Collocation: a progress report. In R. Steele and T. Threadgold (eds), Language Topics. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
  82. Sinclair, J. 1988. Sense and structure in lexis. In Benson et al.Google Scholar
  83. Sparck-Jones, K. 1964. Synonymy and Semantic Classification. University of Cambridge Ph.D. thesis. Printed in 1986, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  84. Trier, J. 1931. Der deutsche Wortschatz im Sinnbezirk des Verstandes. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
  85. Ure, J. 1971. Lexical density and register differentiation. In G.E. Perren and J.L.M Tim (eds), Applications of linguistics: selected papers of the 2nd International Congress of Applied Linguistics, Cambridge 1969. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  86. Whorf, B.L. 1956. Language Thought and Reality. Selected Writing of Benjamin Lee Whorf, edited by J. Carroll. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  87. Wignell, P., J. R. Martin and S. Eggins. 1987. The discourse of geography: ordering and explaining the experiential world. In Suzanne Eggins, James R. Martin and Peter Wignell (eds), Writing Project Report 1987. Sydney: University of Sydney Linguistics Department (Working Papers in Linguistics, 5: 25–65 )Google Scholar
  88. Wilkins, J. 1668. An Essay Towards a Real Character and a Philosophical Language. London.Google Scholar
  89. Winograd, T. 1983. Language as a cognitive process. Syntax. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Matthiessen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations