Semantic Features and Selection Restrictions

Mai multe ca aceasta

OTD - Chapter 11 Org. Transformation

după Sander van der Kolk

Sentence

după David Barrera

uglies book

după Jalan Vristti

LitDevices

după Colleen Hogan

Semantic Features and Selection Restrictions

LEXICAL DATABASE OF THE SYSTEM

Designed, for natural language processing purposes.

bibliographical database (BBD)

In each lexeme all documents that contain some useful lexicographic information about that lexeme or characteristic are mentioned.

Contains bibliographic information on individual lexemes, cf. Krylov 198~).

The vocabulary consists of about 12,500 words. The morphological information is extracted from the Zalizniak 1977 dictionary.

lexical database (LBD)

vocabulary presented in a machine-readable format and consisting of several domains.

Semantic features

[ + speech act verb], [ + performative verb], [ + movement verb], [ + kinship term], ]+Body Part], [+Person (as opposed to a physical body)], [+Parameter], etc.

SEMANTIC FEATURE ACCORDING TO U.WEINREICH

purposes

3) adds provisional semantic contents to a potentially ambiguous word to impose a semantic agreement.

2) it explains deviant and metaphorical readings (as in a grief ago, before the wall etc.)

1) is considered as a basis for semantic agreement (example- pretty girl versus *pretty man).

U. Weinreich (1967), who proposed a useful distinction between a paradigmatic semantic feature.

(TG), where semantic features are strictly opposed to syntactic ones.

In TG, semantic features do not participate in the formulation of grammatical rules.

SEMANTIC FEATURES IN SYSTEMS OF NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING (NLP)

NLP resources have no equivalents in existing dictionaries.

1. Reveal predicate-argument relationships in analysis algorithms:

The categorical characteristics of the argument must agree with the transitive characteristic predicted for this argument by the predicate.

Semantic features can make a substantial contribution. In syntactic analysis.

The proper identification of a syntactic construction depends on the semantic agreement of the words.

2. Disambiguation of a lexicon homonymous preached word:

categorical feature of a The argument can help choose the correct lexical meaning of the predicate.

3.

b. l']eTfl BblXO,I~HT Ha ay~xafiKy.

Ma.ab'mK 'boy' has the feature [+Movable] and the verb ~h~xg.&~.Tb has its usual meaning of a verb of motion.

a.Oxna rocTan~ttbt BHXOj~$1T Ha ~or;

the word .rocT~HX_U~a 'hotel' has a categorial feature [-Movable]; hence the stative meaning of the verb n_~xoztnr~ 'go out'

Disambiguation of a lexically homonymous noun by addressing transfer features of the predicate.

Thus, semantic features are usable for disambignation of words in context.

4. Combinability of verbs with adverbials designating time, place, reason, purpose, instrument etc

semantic agreement.

The adverbial of purpose is only possible in the context of a verb.

Denotes controlled action and, consequently, having an agent endowed with free will.

5. During the analysis of coordinate constructions, it is necessary to perform a transformation.

opposite to the reduction of conjunctions, and semantic agreement is what gives an idea of how this transformation is going to be carried out.

6. Semantic features may be useful in the procedure of revealing anaphoric relations in the text, cf.

Dahlgren, McDowell 1986: example The cat did not drink the milk. It spilled.

As the verb to spill presupposes a subject which is a liquid, the pronoun may be unambiguously associated with the milk and not with the cat.

7. Semantic features of transfer- distinguish texts that allow literal interpretations deviant or metaphorical

(as in the sea he smiled).

SEMANTIC FEATURES AND SELECTION RESTRICTIONS IN LEXICON AND GRAMMAR

Anna Wierzbicka "Semantics of grammar" selection restrictions in grammar.

1988b the semantic invariant

predicates capable of introducing indirect question or its equivalent - parameter word; cf.

I know why he arrived; I know the reason of his arriva! , on the one hand, and *!. believe why h~ ca_me, *.I believe the reason of his arrival - on the other.

1988

Was shown that the Russian conjunctions qTo 'that' and KaK 'as' obey semantic distribution: qTO after verbs with the semantic component 'know/believe' (cf. similar considerations on English in Wierzbicka 1988) and Kag - after words with the 'perceive' component, cf. I;1 noMam, '~TO M~ TaM Kyna.al4Cb y fl noMmo, KaK MU TaM Kynam4cb.

1987.

the kind of predicates that allow Neg-Raising. Negative predicates such as believing that semantic features: [+Incompatibility of opposites] (You cannot believe that P and at the same time believe that not-P, although, for example, you can assume that P and simultaneously assume that not-P) and [+ Excluded neutrality] (I don't think P is out of place in the context I never thought about it, whether P or not-P).

ON SEMANTIC IN-VARIANT OF THE CLASS OF WORDS WITH GENITIVE SUBJECT

1985 states that the choice of the subject is a determinate syntactic feature of a verb, and that this syntactic feature must be attributed to the corresponding group of verbs.

(cf. npoaaoATa]; verb forms - mainly, passive forms.

(cf. Ha6.am~aTbCg, qynCTnonarbc~) or predicatives (cf. na~xo, c.nNmno)