Compositional Semantics and Concept Representation

  • G. Rahmstorf
Part of the Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization book series (STUDIES CLASS)


Concept systems are not only used in the sciences, but also in secondary supporting fields, e. g. in libraries, in documentation, in terminology and increasingly also in knowledge representation. It is suggested that the development of concept systems be based on semantic analysis. Methodical steps are described. The principle of morpho-syntactic composition in semantics will serve as a theoretical basis for the suggested method. The implications and limitations of this principle will be demonstrated.


Knowledge Representation Noun Phrase Semantic Relation Complex Expression Direct Component 
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. Allen, J.: Natural Language Understanding. Menlo Park 1987.Google Scholar
  2. Brachman, R. J.; J. G. Schmolze: An Overview of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System. In: Cognitive Science 9 (1985), 171–216.Google Scholar
  3. Chomsky, N.: Knowledge of Language. Its Nature, Origin and Use. New York, Westport, London 1986.Google Scholar
  4. Gazdar, G.; E. Klein; G. Pullum; I. Sag: Generalized Phrase Structure Grammar. Oxford 1985.Google Scholar
  5. KTS (Ed.): Terminologie der Information und Dokumentation. Herausgegeben vom Komitee Terminologie und Sprachfragen (KTS) der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Dokumentation e. V. (DGD) Frankfurt/Main. Red.: U. Neveling, G. Wersig. München 1975.Google Scholar
  6. Ladusaw, W. A.: Semantic Theory. In: Newmeyer, Frederick J. (ed.): Linguistics. The Cambridge Survey. Vol.I: Linguistic Theory: Foundations. Cambridge 1988.Google Scholar
  7. von Luck, K.; B. Owsnicki-Klewe: KL-ONE: Eine Einführung. IBM IWBS Report 106 (1990)Google Scholar
  8. Nebel, B.: Terminological Reasoning is Inherently Intractable. (Research Note). In: Artificial Intelligence 43 (1990), 235–249.CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Partee B. II: Compositionality. In: Landman, F.; Veltman, F. (ed.): Varieties of Formal Semantics. Proc. Fourth Amsterdam Colloquium, Sept. 1982, Foris Publications, Dordrecht, 1984, 281–312.Google Scholar
  10. Rahmstorf, G.: Die semantischen Relationen in nominalen Ausdrücken des Deutschen. Diss. Universität Mainz. 1983.Google Scholar
  11. Uszkoreit, II.: From Feature Bundles to Abstract Data Types: New Directions in the Representation and Processing of Linguistic Knowledge. In: Blaser A. (ed.): Natural Language at the Computer. IBM Report TR 88.02.002, Heidelberg, 1987.Google Scholar
  12. Wierzbicka, A.: Lexicography and Conceptual Analysis. Ann Arbor 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin · Heidelberg 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Rahmstorf
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Wissensbasierte SystemeIBM Deutschland GmbHHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations