Abstract
This article provides a preliminary semantic framework for Dependency Grammar in which lexical words are semantically defined as contextual distributions (sets of contexts) while syntactic dependencies are compositional operations on word distributions. More precisely, any syntactic dependency uses the contextual distribution of the dependent word to restrict the distribution of the head, and makes use of the contextual distribution of the head to restrict that of the dependent word. The interpretation of composite expressions and sentences, which are analyzed as a tree of binary dependencies, is performed by restricting the contexts of words dependency by dependency in a left-to-right incremental way. Consequently, the meaning of the whole composite expression or sentence is not a single representation, but a list of contextualized senses, namely the restricted distributions of its constituent (lexical) words. We report the results of two large-scale corpus-based experiments on two different natural language processing applications: paraphrasing and compositional translation.
Funding statement: This work is funded by Project TELPARES, Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (FFI2014-51978-C2-1-R), and the program “Ayuda Fundación BBVA a Investigadores y Creadores Culturales 2016”.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and suggestions.
References
Baroni, Marco. 2013. Composition in distributional semantics. Language and Linguistics Compass 7. 511–522.10.1111/lnc3.12050Suche in Google Scholar
Baroni, Marco, Raffaella Bernardi & Roberto Zamparelli. 2014. Frege in space: A program for compositional distributional semantics. LiLT 9. 241–346.10.33011/lilt.v9i.1321Suche in Google Scholar
Baroni, Marco, Silvia Bernardini, Adriano Ferraresi & Eros Zanchetta. 2009. The wacky wide web: A collection of very large linguistically processed webcrawled corpora. Language Resources and Evaluation 43(3). 209–226.10.1007/s10579-009-9081-4Suche in Google Scholar
Baroni, Marco & Roberto Zamparelli. 2010. Nouns are vectors, adjectives are matrices: Representing adjective-noun constructions in semantic space. In Proceedings of the 2010 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, EMNLP’10, 1183–1193. Stroudsburg, PA, USA.Suche in Google Scholar
Barwise, Jon. 1987. Recent developments in situation semantics. Language and Artificial Intelligence. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Suche in Google Scholar
Coecke, B., M. Sadrzadeh & S. Clark. 2010. Mathematical foundations for a compositional distributional model of meaning. Linguistic Analysis 36(1–4). 345–384.Suche in Google Scholar
Copestake, Ann & Aurelie Herbelot. 2012. Lexicalised compositionality. In http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/ah433/lc-semprag.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar
Costa, F., V. Lombardo, P. Frasconi & G. Soda. 2001. Wide coverage incremental parsing by learning attachment preferences. In Conference of the Italian Association for Artificial Intelligence (AIIA).10.1007/3-540-45411-X_30Suche in Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1969. The individuation of events, 216–234. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. ISBN 978-94-017-1466–2.10.1007/978-94-017-1466-2_11Suche in Google Scholar
Delpech, Estelle, Béatrice Daille, Emmanuel Morin & Claire Lemaire. 2012. Extraction of domain-specific bilingual lexicon from comparable corpora: Compositional translation and ranking. In COLING2012, 24th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Mumbai, India, 745–762.Suche in Google Scholar
Dinu, G., N. Pham & M. Baroni. 2013a. Dissect: Distributional semantics composition toolkit. In ACL 2013 Workshop on Continuous Vector Space Models and their Compositionality (CVSC 2013), 31–36. East Stroudsburg, PA.Suche in Google Scholar
Dinu, G., N. Pham & M. Baroni. 2013b. General estimation and evaluation of compositional distributional semantic models. In ACL 2013 Workshop on Continuous Vector Space Models and their Compositionality (CVSC 2013), 50–58. East Stroudsburg, PA.Suche in Google Scholar
Erk, Katrin. 2013. Towards a semantics for distributional representations. In IWCS-2013.Suche in Google Scholar
Erk, Katrin & Sebastian Padó. 2008. A structured vector space model for word meaning in context. In Proceedings of EMNLP. Honolulu, HI.10.3115/1613715.1613831Suche in Google Scholar
Fellbaum, C. 1998. A semantic network of English: The mother of all WordNets. Computer and the Humanities 32. 209–220.10.1023/A:1001181927857Suche in Google Scholar
Fung, Pascale & Lo Yuen Yee. 1998. An IR approach for translating new words from nonparallel, comparable texts. In Coling’98, 414–420. Montreal, Canada.10.3115/980451.980916Suche in Google Scholar
Gamallo, Pablo. 2003. Cognitive characterisation of basic grammatical structures. Pragmatics and Cognition 11(2). 209–240.10.1075/pc.11.2.03oteSuche in Google Scholar
Gamallo, Pablo. 2007. Learning bilingual lexicons from comparable English and Spanish Corpora. In Machine Translation SUMMIT XI. Copenhagen, Denmark.Suche in Google Scholar
Gamallo, Pablo. 2008. The meaning of syntactic dependencies. Linguistik OnLine 35(3). 33–53.10.13092/lo.35.522Suche in Google Scholar
Gamallo, Pablo, Alexandre Agustini & Gabriel Lopes. 2005. Clustering syntactic positions with similar semantic requirements. Computational Linguistics 31(1). 107–146.10.1162/0891201053630318Suche in Google Scholar
Gamallo, Pablo & Isaac González. 2011. A grammatical formalism based on patterns of part-of-speech tags. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 16(1). 45–71.10.1075/ijcl.16.1.03gamSuche in Google Scholar
Gamallo, Pablo & José Ramom Pichel. 2008. Learning Spanish-Galician translation equivalents using a comparable corpus and a bilingual dictionary. LNCS 4919. 413–423.10.1007/978-3-540-78135-6_36Suche in Google Scholar
Grefenstette, Gregory. 1996. Evaluation techniques for automatic semantic extraction: Comparing syntactic and window based approaches. In B. Boguraev & J. Pustejovsky (eds.), Corpus processing for lexical acquisition, 205–216. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Grefenstette, Gregory. 1999. The World Wide Web as a resource for example-based machine translation tasks. In Translating and the Computer 21: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Translating and the Computer.Suche in Google Scholar
Grefenstette, Edward, Mehrnoosh Sadrzadeh, Stephen Clark, Bob Coecke & Stephen Pulman. 2011. Concrete sentence spaces for compositional distributional models of meaning. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Computational Semantics, IWCS ’11, 125–134.Suche in Google Scholar
Groenendijk, J. & M. Stokhof. 1991. Dynamic predicate logic. Linguistics and Philosophy 14. 39–100.10.1007/BF00628304Suche in Google Scholar
Guevara, Emiliano. 2010. A regression model of adjective-noun compositionality in distributional semantics. In Proceedings of the 2010 Workshop on GEometrical Models of Natural Language Semantics, GEMS ’10.Suche in Google Scholar
Hanks, Patrick. 2013. Lexical analysis: Norms and exploitations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262018579.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar
Harris, Zellig. 1954. Distributional structure. Word 10(23). 146–162.10.1080/00437956.1954.11659520Suche in Google Scholar
Hudson, Richard. 2003. The psychological reality of syntactic dependency relations. In MTT 2003. Paris.Suche in Google Scholar
Jezek, Elisabetta & Patrick Hanks. 2010. What lexical sets tell us about conceptual categories. Lexis [Online], 4 | 2010, Online since 14 April 2010. http://lexis.revues.org/555 (accessed 16 January 2017), DOI: 10.4000/lexis.555.10.4000/lexis.555Suche in Google Scholar
Kahane, Sylvain. 2003. Meaning-text theory. In V. Ágel et al. (eds.), Dependency and valency: An international handbook of contemporary research. Berlin: De Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar
Kamp, H. & U. Reyle. 1993. From discourse to logic: Introduction to model-theoretic semantics of natural language. Formal logic and discourse representation theory. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher.Suche in Google Scholar
Kempson, R., W. Meyer-Viol & D. Gabbay. 1997. Language understanding: A procedural perspective. In C. Retore (ed.), First international conference on logical aspects of computational linguistics, 228–247. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence Vol. 1328. Springer Verlag.10.1007/BFb0052160Suche in Google Scholar
Kempson, R., W. Meyer-Viol & D. Gabbay. 2001. Dynamic syntax: The flow of language understanding. Oxford: Blackwell.Suche in Google Scholar
Koehn, Philipp. 2009. Statistical machine translation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511815829Suche in Google Scholar
Krishnamurthy, Jayant & Tom Mitchell. 2013. Proceedings of the workshop on continuous vector space models and their compositionality, chap. Vector Space Semantic Parsing: A Framework for Compositional Vector Space Models, 1–10. Association for Computational Linguistics.Suche in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1991. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Descriptive applications, vol. 2. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
McRae, K., T.R. Ferreti & L. Amoyte. 1997. Thematic roles as verb-specific concepts. In M. MacDonald (ed.), Lexical representations and sentence processing, 137–176. Sussex, UK: Psychology Press.10.1080/016909697386835Suche in Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1921. Linguistique historique et linguistique générale. Paris: La Société Linguistique de Paris.Suche in Google Scholar
Milward, David. 1992. Dynamics, dependency grammar and incremental interpretation. In 14th Conference on Computational Linguistics (Coling92), 1095–1099. Nantes.10.3115/992424.992430Suche in Google Scholar
Mitchell, Jeff & Mirella Lapata. 2008. Vector-based models of semantic composition. In Proceedings of ACL-08: HLT, 236–244.Suche in Google Scholar
Mitchell, Jeff & Mirella Lapata. 2009. Language models based on semantic composition. In Proceedings of EMNLP, 430–439.Suche in Google Scholar
Mitchell, Jeff & Mirella Lapata. 2010. Composition in distributional models of semantics. Cognitive Science 34(8). 1388–1439.10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01106.xSuche in Google Scholar PubMed
Montague, Richard. 1970. Universal grammar. theoria. Theoria 36. 373–398.10.1111/j.1755-2567.1970.tb00434.xSuche in Google Scholar
Morin, Emmanuel & Béatrice Daille. 2012. Revising the compositional method for terminology acquisition from comparable corpora. In COLING2012, 24th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Mumbai, India, 1797–1810.Suche in Google Scholar
Navigli, Roberto. 2009. Word sense disambiguation: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys 41(2). 1–69.10.1145/1459352.1459355Suche in Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara. 2007. Private adjectives: Subsective plus coercion. In R. Bäuerle, U. Reyle & T. E. Zimmermann (eds.), Presuppositions and discourse. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Suche in Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1995. The generative lexicon. Cambridge: MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Rapp, Reinhard. 1999. Automatic identification of word translations from unrelated English and German Corpora. In ACL’99, 519–526.Suche in Google Scholar
Schlesewsky, M. & I. Bornkessel. 2004. On incremental interpretation: Degrees of meaning accessed during sentence comprehension. Lingua 114. 1213–1234.10.1016/j.lingua.2003.07.006Suche in Google Scholar
Schütze, Hinrich. 1998. Automatic word sense discrimination. Computational Linguistics 24(1). 97–124.Suche in Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Suche in Google Scholar
Steedman, Mark. 1996. Surface structure and interpretation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Studtmann, Paul. 2014. Aristotle’s categories. In E. N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Summer 2014 edn.Suche in Google Scholar
Tanaka, Takaaki & Timothy Baldwin. 2003. Noun-noun compound machine translation a feasibility study on shallow processing. In Proceedings of the ACL 2003 Workshop on Multiword Expressions: Analysis, Acquisition and Treatment, 17–24. Sapporo, Japan.10.3115/1119282.1119285Suche in Google Scholar
Tanenhaus, M.K. & G.N. Carlson. 1989. Lexical structure and language comprehension. In W. Marslen-Wilson (ed.), Lexical representation and process, 530–561. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Tesniére, Lucien. 1959. Eléments de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.Suche in Google Scholar
Thater, Stefan, Hagen Fürstenau & Manfred Pinkal. 2010. Contextualizing semantic representations using syntactically enriched vector models. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 948–957. Stroudsburg, PA, USA.Suche in Google Scholar
Truswell, J.C., M.K. Tanenhaus & S.M. Garnsey. 1994. Semantic influences on parsing: use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language 33. 285–318.10.1006/jmla.1994.1014Suche in Google Scholar
Turney, Peter D. 2013. Domain and function: A dual-space model of semantic relations and compositions. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 44. 533–585.10.1613/jair.3640Suche in Google Scholar
Zanzotto, Fabio Massimo, Ioannis Korkontzelos, Francesca Fallucchi & Suresh Manandhar. 2010. Estimating linear models for compositional distributional semantics. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, COLING ’10, 1263–1271.Suche in Google Scholar
Supplemental Material
The online version of this article offers supplementary material (https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0038).
© 2017 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- A multimodel inference approach to categorical variant choice: construction, priming and frequency effects on the choice between full and contracted forms of am, are and is
- The role of syntactic dependencies in compositional distributional semantics
- Topic marking in a Shanghainese corpus: from observation to prediction
- The meaning of intonation in yes-no questions in American English: A corpus study
- Where to place inaccessible subjects in Dutch: The role of definiteness and animacy
- Annotating the meaning of discourse connectives in multilingual corpora
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Frontmatter
- A multimodel inference approach to categorical variant choice: construction, priming and frequency effects on the choice between full and contracted forms of am, are and is
- The role of syntactic dependencies in compositional distributional semantics
- Topic marking in a Shanghainese corpus: from observation to prediction
- The meaning of intonation in yes-no questions in American English: A corpus study
- Where to place inaccessible subjects in Dutch: The role of definiteness and animacy
- Annotating the meaning of discourse connectives in multilingual corpora