Advertisement

A Glimpse Under the Surface: Language Understanding May Need Deep Syntactic Structure

  • Eva HajičováEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10415)

Abstract

Language understanding is one of the crucial issues both for the theoretical study of language as well as for applications developed in the domain of natural language processing. As Katz (1969, p. 100) puts it “to understand the ability of natural languages to serve as instrument to the communication of thoughts and ideas we must understand what it is that permits those who speak them consistently to connect the right sounds with the right meanings.” The proper task of linguistics consists then in the description (and) explanation of the relation between the set of the semantic representations and that of the phonetic forms of utterances; at the same time, among the principal difficulties there belongs “a specification of the set of semantic representations” (Sgall and Hajičová 1970, p. 5). In our contribution, we present arguments for the approach that follows the tradition of European structuralism which attempted at an account of linguistic meaning the elements of which are understood as “points of intersection” of conceptual contents (as a reflection of reality) and the organizing principle of the grammar of the individual language (Dokulil and Daneš 1958). In other words, we examine how “deep” the sematic representations have to be in order (i) to give an appropriate account of synonymy, and (ii) to help to distinguish semantic differences in cases of ambiguity (homonymy).

Notes

Acknowledgement

This work has been supported by the LINDAT/CLARIN project of the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic (project LM2015071) and by the project No. GA17-07313S of the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic.

References

  1. Bejček, E., et al.: Prague Dependency Treebank 3.0. Data/Software (2013)Google Scholar
  2. Dokulil, M., Daneš, F.: K tzv. významové a mluvnickě stavbě věty [On the so-called semantic, grammatical structure of the sentence]. In: O vědeckém poznání soudobých jazyků, Praha: Nakladatelství Československé akademie věd, pp. 231–246 (1958)Google Scholar
  3. Hajič, J.: Building a syntactically annotated corpus: the Prague dependency treebank. In: Hajičová, E. (ed.) Issues of Valency and Meaning. Studies in Honour of Jarmila Panevová, pp. 106–132. Karolinum, Prague (1998)Google Scholar
  4. Hajič, J., Hajičová, E., Mírovský, J., Panevová, J.: Linguistically annotated corpus as an invaluable resource for advancements in linguistic research: a case study. Prague Bull. Math. Linguist. 106, 69–124 (2016)Google Scholar
  5. Hajič, J., Hajičová, E., Mikulová, M., Mírovský, J., Panevová, J., Zeman, D.: Deletions and node reconstructions in a dependency-based multilevel annotation scheme. In: Gelbukh, A. (ed.) CICLing 2015. LNCS, vol. 9041, pp. 17–31. Springer, Cham (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-18111-0_2 Google Scholar
  6. Hajič, J., Hajičová, E., Panevová, J., et al.: Prague Czech-English Dependency Treebank 2.0 (2011)Google Scholar
  7. Hajičová, E.: What we have learned from complex annotation of topic-focus articulation in a large Czech corpus. Echo des Etudes Romanes 8(1), 51–64 (2012)Google Scholar
  8. Hajičová, E., Mikulová, M., Panevová, J.: Reconstructions of deletions in a dependency-based description of Czech: selected issues. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Dependency Linguistics, Uppsala, pp. 131–140 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. Hajičová, E., Partee, B., Sgall, P.: Topic-Focus Articulation, Tripartite Structures and Semantic Content. Kluwer, Dordrecht (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Katz, J.J.: The Philosophy of Language. Harper, New York (1969)Google Scholar
  11. Lopatková, M., Kettnerová, V., Bejček, E., Vernerová, A., Žabokrtský, Z.: Valenční slovník českých sloves VALLEX. [Valency Dictionary of Czech Verbs]. Karolinum, Praha (2016)Google Scholar
  12. Panevová, J.: Formy a funkce ve stavbě české věty [Forms and Functions in the Structure of Czech Sentence]. Academia, Praha (1980)Google Scholar
  13. Panevová, J., et al.: Mluvnice současné češtiny 2. Syntax češtiny na základě anotovaného korpusu. [Syntax of Czech on the Basis of an Annotated Corpus]. Karolinum, Prague (2014)Google Scholar
  14. Popel, M., Mareček, D., Štěpánek, D., Zeman, D., Žabokrtský, Z.: Coordination Structures in dependency treebanks. In: Proceedings of the 51st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 517–527. Association for Computational Linguistics, Sofija (2013)Google Scholar
  15. Sgall, P., Hajičová, E.: A “functional” generative description (background and framework). Prague Bull. Math. Linguist. 14, 3–38 (1970). Revue roumaine de linguistique 16, 9–37 (1971)Google Scholar
  16. Sgall, P., Hajičová, E., Panevová, J.: The Meaning of the Sentence in Its Semantic and Pragmatic Aspect. Reidel Publishing Company and Academia, Dordrecht and Prague (1986)Google Scholar
  17. Urešová, Z.: Valence sloves v Pražském závislostním korpusu [Valency of verbs in the Prague Dependency Treebank]. UFAL, Prague (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Mathematics and Physics Institute of Formal and Applied LinguisticsCharles University in PraguePraha 1Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations