Advertisement

WordNet: Ein semantisches Netz als Bedeutungstheorie

  • Christiane Fellbaum
Part of the Psycholinguistische Studien book series

Zusammenfassung

Semantische Netze sind eine von mehreren Möglichkeiten, intensionale Bedeutungen darzustellen. Daher können sie als eine konkurrierende Theorie zu Prototyp-Analysen, Merkmals- und Komponentenanalysen sowie zu mentalen Modellen und traditionellen Wörterbüchern angesehen werden. Im folgenden werden an Hand der lexikalischen Datenbank “WordNet” die Grundidee und das Design eines semantischen Netzes erläutert, wobei eine kritische Auseinandersetzung mit den Kategorien “Wort”, “Begriff” und “Bedeutung” erfolgt. Dabei wird die Rolle dieser Kategorien in einem semantischen Netz mit ihrer Behandlung in anderen Begriffs- und Bedeutungsanalysen verglichen.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  1. Amsler, R (1980). The structure of the Merriam-Webster Pocket Dictionary. Unveröffentlichte Ph. D. Dissertation in Computer Science, University of Texas, Austin, TX.Google Scholar
  2. Apresjan, J. D. (1974). Regular polysemy. Linguistics, 142,5–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bierwisch, M. (1983). Semantische und konzeptuelle Repräsentation lexikalischer Einheiten. In R. Ruzicka & W. Motsch (Hrsg.), Untersuchungen zur Semantik (S. 611–699) (= Studia Grammatica XXII). Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
  4. Chaffin, R. (1992). The concept of a semantic relation. In A. Lehrer & E. F. Kittay (Hrsg.), Frames, fields, and contrasts (S. 253–288). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. Chaffin, R, Herrmann, D. J. & Winston, M. (1988). An empirical taxonomy of part-whole relations: Effects of part-whole relation type on relation identification. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3,17–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chodorow, M., Byrd, R & Heidorn, G. (1985). Extracting semantic hierarchies from a large online dictionary. In Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (S. 299–304).Google Scholar
  7. Chomsky, N. (1972). Studies on semantics in Generative Grammar. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
  8. Cruse, D. A. (1986). Lexical semantics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Cruse, D. A. (1992). Antonymy revisited: Some thoughts on the relationship between words and concepts. In A. Lehrer & E. F. Kittay (Hrsg.), Frames, fields, and concepts (S. 289–306). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Deese, J. (1964). The associative structure of some English adjectives. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 3, 347–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deese, J. (1965). The structure of associations in language and thought. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.Google Scholar
  12. Evens, M. (Hrsg.). (1988). Relational models of the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Fellbaum, C. (1990). The English verb lexicon as a semantic net. International Journal of Lexicography, 3,278–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fellbaum, C. (1995). Cooccurrence and antonymy. International Journal of Lexicography, 8, 281–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fellbaum, C. (in Druck). A semantic network of English verbs. In C. Fellbaum (Hrsg.), WordNet: An on-line lexical reference system and some of its applications. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Fellbaum, C. & Kegl, J. (1988). Taxonomic hierarchies in the verb lexicon. Vortrag, gehalten auf dem EURALEX Third International Congress, Budapest.Google Scholar
  17. Fellbaum, C. & Kegl, J. (1989). Taxonomic structures and cross-category linking in the lexicon. In K. de Jong & Y. No (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the Sixth Eastern State Conference on Linguistics (S. 94–103). Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  18. Fellbaum, C. & Miller, G. A. (1990). Folk psychology or semantic entailment? A reply to Rips and Conrad. Psychological Review, 97,565–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fisher, C. H., Gleitman, H. & Gleitman, L. R. (1991). On the semantic content of subcategorization frames. Cognitive Psychology, 23,331–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gleitman, L. R. (1990). The structural sources of verb meaning. Language Acquisition, 1, 3–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gross, D., Fischer, U. & Miller, G. A. (1989). The organization of adjectival meanings. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 92–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gross, D. & Miller, K. J. (1990). Adjectives in Word Net. International Journal of Lexicography, 3, 265–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gruber, J. (1976). Lexical structures in syntax and semantics. New York: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  24. Hale, K. & Keyser, S. (1987). A view from the middle (Lexicon Project Working Papers 10). Cambridge, MA: Center for Cognitive Science, MIT. Hale, K. & Laughren, M. (1983). The structure of verbal entries: Preface to dictionary entries of verbs. Cambridge, MA: Warlpiri Lexicon Project, MIT.Google Scholar
  25. Horn, L. (1989). Morphology, pragmatics, and the un-verb. In J. Powers & K de Jong (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the Fifth Eastern State Conference on Linguistics (S. 210–233). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.Google Scholar
  26. Jackendoff, R. S. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Justeson J. S. & Katz S. M. 1991a. Co-occurrences of antonymous adjectives and their contexts. Computational Linguistics 17,1–19Google Scholar
  28. Justeson, J. S. & Katz, S. M. (1991b). Redefining antonymy: The textual structure of a semantic relation. In Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Conference of the UW Centre for the New OED (S. 138–154). Waterloo, Canada.Google Scholar
  29. Katz, J. J. (1972). Semantic theory. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  30. Katz, J. J. & Fodor, J. (1963). The structure of a semantic theory. Language, 39,170–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Lakoff, G. (1970). Irregularity in syntax. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.Google Scholar
  32. Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Levin, B. & Rapoport, T. (1988). Lexical subordination. In L. MacLeod et al. (Hrsg.), Proceedings of the 24 Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society (S. 275–289).Google Scholar
  34. Melcuk, I. & Zholkovsky, A. (1988). Explanatory combinatorial dictionary of modern Russian. Wiener Slawistischer Almanach, Sonderband 14.Google Scholar
  35. Miller, G. A. (1995). Wörter — Streifzüge durch die Psycholinguistik. Frankfurt: Zweitausendeins.Google Scholar
  36. Nunberg, G. (1978). The pragmatics of reference. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
  37. Ostler, N. & Atkins, B. T. (1991). Predictable meaning shifts: Some linguistic properties of lexical implication rules. In J. Pustejovski & S. Bergler (Hrsg.), Lexical semantics and knowledge representation (ACL SIGLEX Workshop) (S. 76–87). University of California at Berkeley.Google Scholar
  38. Pinker, S. (1989). Learnability and cognition: The acquisition of argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  39. Pinker, S. (1994). How could a child use verb syntax to learn verb semantics? Lingua, 92,377–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Pustejovski, J. (1991). The generative lexicon. Computational Linguistics, 17,409–441.Google Scholar
  41. Pustejovski, J. (1995). The generative lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  42. Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In T. Shopen (Hrsg.), Language typology and syntactic description (Vol. 3) (S. 57–149). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Wierzbicka, A. (1985). Lexicography and conceptual analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: Karoma.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Westdeutscher Verlag GmbH, Opladen 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christiane Fellbaum

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations