Advertisement

Lexical Rules for Deverbal Adjectives

  • Victor Raskin
  • Sergei Nirenburg
Chapter
Part of the Text, Speech and Language Technology book series (TLTB, volume 10)

Abstract

This paper deals with a particular microtheory developed in the framework of the Mikrokosmos computational semantic project.The microtheory of adjectival semantics is considered in one specific aspect, namely, the optimization and facilitation of the lexical entries for deverbal adjectives with the help of lexical rules deriving such entries from those of the corresponding verbs. Deverbal adjectives turn out to be the largest single subclass in the adjective lexical category. Unlike scalar and relative (or relational) adjectives, which are anchored in property and object concepts, respectively, in the underlying ontology, deverbal adjectives are based on process concepts. While acquisition with lexical rules is necessary, universal and efficient for the class of deverbal adjectives, our research shows that, often in spite of the strong appearance to the contrary, such acquisition is neither fully automatic nor cost-free. The work was based on the set of over 6,000 English and about 1,500 Spanish adjectives obtained from task-oriented corpora. The findings are largely language-independent, and only English examples are used throughout the paper.

Keywords

Machine Translation Lexical Entry Ontological Concept Property Concept Gradable Adjective 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abraham, W. 1970. Passiv und Verbableitung auf e. -able, dt. -bar. Folia Linguistica 4, pp. 38–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beale, S., S. Nirenburg and K. Mahesh. 1995. Semantic Analysis in the Mikrokosmos Machine Translation Project. In the Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Natural Language Processing (SNLP-95), August 2–4. Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
  3. Beckwith, R., C. Fellbaum, D. Gross and G. A. Miller. 1991. WordNet: A lexical database organized on psycholinguistic principles. In U. Zernik (ed.), Lexical Acquisition: Exploiting On-line Resources to Build a Lexicon. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, pp. 211–232.Google Scholar
  4. Bierwisch, M. 1967. Some semantic universals of German adjectivais. Foundations of Language 5:1, pp. 1–36.Google Scholar
  5. Bierwisch, M. 1989. Focussing on dimensional adjectives: Introductory remarks. In. M. Bierwisch and E. Lang (eds.), Dimensional Adjectives and Conceptual Interpretation. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pp. 1–11.Google Scholar
  6. Bouillon, P. and E. Viegas. 1994. A semi-polymorphic approach to the interpretation of adjectival constructions: A cross-linguistic perspective. In the Proceedings of the Sixth EURALEX International Congress. Amsterdam: Free University of Amsterdam, pp. 36–44.Google Scholar
  7. Chierchia, G. and S. McConnell-Ginet. 1990. Meaning and Grammar: An Introduction to Semantics. Cambridge, MA-London: M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
  8. Dowty, D. 1972. Temporally descriptive adjectives. In J. Kimball (ed.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. I. New York: Seminar Press.Google Scholar
  9. Frawley, W. 1992. Linguistic Semantics. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Greimas, A. J. 1966. Sémantique structurelle. Paris: Larousse.Google Scholar
  11. Hall, F. 1877. On English Adjectives in -ABLE with Special Reference to RELIABLE. London: Trübner.Google Scholar
  12. Jackendoff, R. 1983. Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, MA-London: MIT Press. Jespersen, O. 1942. A modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. Part 6: Morphology. Copenhagen: Munksgaard.Google Scholar
  13. Justeson, J. S. and S. M. Katz. 1991. Co-occurrences of antonymous adjectives and their contexts. Computational Linguistics 17:1, pp. 1–19.Google Scholar
  14. Justeson, J. S. and S. M. Katz. 1995. Principled disambiguation: Discriminating adjective senses with modified nouns. Computational Linguistics 21:1, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar
  15. Katz, J. 1972. Semantic theory and the meaning of good. Journal of Philosophy 61. pp. 736–760.Google Scholar
  16. Keenan, E. L. and L. M. Faltz. 1985. Boolean Semantics for Natural Language. Dordrecht-Boston: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  17. Kjellmer, G. 1986. Legible but not readable: On the semantics of English adjectives in-ble. Studia Neophilologica 58:1, pp. 11–38.Google Scholar
  18. Lahav, R. 1989. Against compositionality: The case of adjectives. Philosophical Studies 57, pp. 261–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mahesh, K. 1996. Ontology Development for Machine Translation: Ideology and Methodology. MCCS-96–292. Memoranda in Computer and Cognitive Science. New Mexico State University: Computing Research Laboratory.Google Scholar
  20. Mahesh, K. and S. Nirenburg. 1995. A situated ontology for practical NLP. In the Procedings of the IJ CA I `95 Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing. Montréal, August, pp. 19–21.Google Scholar
  21. Marchand, H. 1960. The Categories and Types of Present-Day English Word-Formation. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
  22. Marx, W. 1977. Die Kontextabhängigkeit der Assoziativen Bedeutung. Zeitschrift für experimentelle und angewandte Psychologie 24, pp. 455–462.Google Scholar
  23. Marx, W. 1983. The meaning-confining function of the adjective. In G. Rickheit and M. Bock (eds.), Psycholinguistic studies in language processing. Berlin: W. de Gruyter, pp. 70–81.Google Scholar
  24. McCawley, J. D. 1988. Syntactic Phenomena of English, Vol. II. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Meus, V. 1975. English adjectives in -able. Studia Germanica Gandensia 16, pp. 35–59. Nirenburg, S., T. J. M. Carbonell and K. Goodman. 1992. Machine Translation: A Knowledge-Based Approach. San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  26. Nirenburg, S., V. Raskin and B. Onyshkevych. 1995. Apologiae ontologiae. MCCS-95281. Memoranda in Computer and Cognitive Science. New Mexico State University: Computing Research Laboratory. Reprinted in J. Klavans, B. Boguraev, L. Levin, and J. Pustejovsky (eds.), Symposium: Representation and Acquisition of Lexical Knowledge: Polysemy, Ambiguity, and Generativity. Working Notes. AAAI Spring Symposium Series. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, 1995, pp. 95–107. Reprinted in a shortened version in the Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in Machine Translation. Centre for Computational Linguistics, Catholic Universities Leuven, Belgium, 1995, pp. 106–114.Google Scholar
  27. Onyshkevych, B. and S. Nirenburg. 1994. The lexicon in the scheme of KBMT things. MCCS-94–277. Memoranda in Computer and Cognitive Science. New Mexico State University: Computing Research Laboratory.Google Scholar
  28. Pustejovsky, J. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. Raskin, V. and S. Nirenburg. 1995. Lexical semantics of adjectives: A microtheory of adjectival meaning. MCCS-95–288. Memoranda in Computer and Cognitive Science. New Mexico State University: Computing Research Laboratory.Google Scholar
  30. Raskin, V. and S. Nirenburg. 1996. Adjectival modification in text meaning representation. In the Proceedings of the International Conference on Computational Linguistics `96,Copenhagen.Google Scholar
  31. Siegel, M. E. A. 1976. Capturing the Adjective. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA.Google Scholar
  32. Siegel, M. E. A. 1979. Measure adjectives in Montague grammars. In S. Davis and M. Mithun (eds.), Linguistics, Philosophy, and Montague Grammar. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press, pp. 223–261.Google Scholar
  33. Smadja, F. 1991. Macrocoding the lexicon with co-occurrence knowledge. In U. Zernik (ed.), Lexical Acquisition: Exploiting On-line Resources to Build a Lexicon. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, pp. 165–189.Google Scholar
  34. Spang-Hanssen, E. 1990. La sémantique des adjectifs spatiaux. Revue Romane 25:2, pp. 292–309.Google Scholar
  35. Spejewski, B. 1995. Two classes of frequency adverbs. Paper presented at the LSA Annual Meeting.Google Scholar
  36. Szalay, L. B. and J. Deese. 1978. Subjective Meaning and Culture: An Assessment Through Word Association. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  37. Teller, P. 1969. Some discussion and extension of M. Bierwisch’s work on German adjectivals. Foundations of Language 5, pp. 185–217.Google Scholar
  38. Viegas, E., B. Onyshkevych, V. Raskin and S. Nirenburg. 1996. From submit to submitted via submission: On lexical rules in large-scale lexicon acquisition. In the Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics. Santa Cruz, CA.Google Scholar
  39. Viegas, E. and V. Raskin. 1998. Lexical Acquisition: Guidelines and Methodology. MCCS98–315. Memoranda in Computer and Cognitive Science. New Mexico State University: Computing Research Laboratory.Google Scholar
  40. Zhurinskiy, A. N. 1971. 0 semanticheskoy strukture prostranstvennykh prilagatel’n.ykh /On the semantic structure of spatial adjectives/. Semanticheskaya struktura slova. Moscow: Nauka, pp. 196–24.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Victor Raskin
    • 1
  • Sergei Nirenburg
    • 1
  1. 1.Computing Research LaboratoryNew Mexico State UniversityLas CrucesUSA

Personalised recommendations