Enhancing a Role and Reference Grammar approach to English motion constructions in a Natural Language Processing environment

  1. Luzondo-Oyón, Alba 1
  2. Jiménez-Briones, Rocío 2
  1. 1 Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
    info

    Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/02msb5n36

  2. 2 Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01cby8j38

Revista:
Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación

ISSN: 1576-4737

Año de publicación: 2017

Título del ejemplar: Metapragmática del humor infantil

Número: 70

Páginas: 183-204

Tipo: Artículo

beta Ver similares en nube de resultados
DOI: 10.5209/CLAC.56322 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Círculo de lingüística aplicada a la comunicación

Objetivos de desarrollo sostenible

Resumen

Este artículo presenta un tratamiento computacional más fino de la construcción de movimiento causado en inglés (por ejemplo, He kicked the ball into the net, “metió de una patada la pelota en la red”) en una base de conocimientos para sistemas de Procesamiento de Lenguaje Natural llamada FunGramKB. Este proyecto computacional se basa en gran medida en la Gramática del Papel y la Referencia (RRG), que es una teoría funcionalista del lenguaje. Argumentamos que la caracterización basada en la RRG de la construcción de movimiento causado en FunGramKB es insuficiente para explicar la complejidad semántica y sintáctica de realizaciones tales como He walked the dog to the park, I will show you out, or Mac flew Continental to Bush International Airport , “Sacó a pasear al perro al parque, Te enseño la salida, Mac voló Continental al Aeropuerto Internacional Bush”. Así, basándose en las propuestas de las Gramáticas de Construcciones, se formalizan dentro de FunGramKB tres sub-construcciones de movimiento transitivas ligeramente distintas. A través de la de esquemas constructivos adicionales la máquina será capaz de dar cuenta de las diversas formas en que interactúan los verbos y las construcciones para producir diferentes textos de entrada.

€ Ver financiación

Información de financiación

The research projects on which this paper is based have received financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, grants no. FFI2013-43593-P and FFI2014-53788-C3-1-P.

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Author2 and Author1 (2013).
  • Author1 (2014).
  • Author1 and Author (2015).
  • Baicchi, Annalisa (2007). The high-level metaphor in the caused-motion construction. Paper presented at the workshop Bridging the gap between functionalism and cognitivism: The Lexical Constructional Model. 40th Annual Meeting of the Societas Linguistica Europaea: Functionalism in Linguistics, University of Joensuu, 29 August-1 September.
  • Baker, Collin F. (2014). FrameNet: A knowledge base for Natural Language Processing. Proceedings of Frame Semantics in NLP: A Workshop in Honor of Chuck Fillmore (1929-2014). Baltimore, Maryland USA, 1-5.
  • Boas, Hans C. (2003). A Constructional Approach to Resultatives. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
  • Boas, Hans C. (2005). Determining the productivity of resultative constructions: A reply to Goldberg & Jackendoff. Language 81(2), 448-464.
  • Boas, Hans C. (2008). Determining the structure of lexical entries and grammatical constructions in Construction Grammar. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 6, 113-144.
  • Boas, Hans C. (2011). Coercion and leaking argument structures in Construction Grammar. Linguistics 49(6), 1271-1303.
  • Bod, Rens (2009). Constructions at work or at rest? Cognitive Linguistics 20(1), 129-134.
  • Broccias, Cristiano (2003). The English Change Network: Forcing Changes into Schemas. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
  • Burchardt, Aljoscha, Pennacchiotti, Marci, Thater, Stefan and Pinkal, Manfred (2009). Assessing the impact of frame semantics on textual entailment. Natural Language Engineering, 15(4): 527-550.
  • Callison-Burch, Chris and Osborne, Miles (2003). Statistical Natural Language Processing. In Ali Farghaly (ed.): Handbook for Language Engineers, Stanford: CSLI Publications, 269-297.
  • Cambria, Erik and White, Bebo (2014). Jumping NLP curves: A review of natural language processing research. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, 48-57. DOI 10.1109/MCI.2014.2307227.
  • Diedrichsen, Elke (2016). Does NLP need Theoretical Linguistics? In Carlos Periñán and Eva M. Mestre (eds.): Understanding Meaning and Knowledge Representation: From Theoretical and Cognitive Linguistics to Natural Language Processing. UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 249-256.
  • Dimitriadis, Alexis (2010). Matching needs and resources: How NLP can help theoretical linguistics. Proceedings of the 2010 Workshop on NLP and Linguistics: Finding the Common Ground, ACL 2010. Uppsala, Sweden, 22-24.
  • Fillmore, Charles J. (1976). Frame Semantics and the nature of language. In Stevan R. Harnad, Horst D. Steklis and Jane Lancaster (eds.): Origins and Evolution of Language and Speech, New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 20-32.
  • Fillmore, Charles J. (1982). Frame Semantics. In The Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.): Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin, 11-137.
  • Fillmore, Charles J. (2008). Border conflicts: FrameNet meets construction grammar. In Proceedings of EURALEX13. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra. 49-68.
  • Fillmore, Charles J. and Atkins, Beryl T. (1992). Towards a frame-based organization of the lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbors. In Adrienne Lehrer and Eva Kittay (eds.): Frames, Fields, and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantics and Lexical Organization, Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum, 75-102.
  • Fillmore, Charles J., Johnson, Christopher R. and Petruck, Miriam R. L. (2003). Background to FrameNet. International Journal of Lexicography 16(3), 235-250.
  • Fillmore, Charles J., Kay, Paul, and O'Connor, Mary Catherine (1988). Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone. Language 64, 501-538.
  • Fillmore, Charles J., Lee-Goldman, R. R., and Rhomieux, R. (2012). The FrameNet constructicon. In Hans C. Boas and Ivan Sag (eds.): Sign-Based Construction Grammar, Stanford: CSLI. 309-372.
  • Goldberg, Adele E. (1995). Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Goldberg, Adele E. (2006). Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Goldberg, Adele E. (2013). Explanations and constructions. Mind and Language 28(4): 479-485.
  • Goldberg, Adele E. & Jackendoff, Ray S. (2004). The English resultative as a family of constructions. Language 80, 532-568.
  • Gonzálvez-García, Francisco and Butler, Christopher (2006). Mapping functional-cognitive space. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 5, 39-96.
  • Guest, Elizabeth (2008). Parsing for Role and Reference Grammar. In Robert D. Van Valin Jr. (ed.): Investigations of the Syntax-Semantics-Pragmatics Interface [Studies in Language Companion Series 105], Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 435-453.
  • Hoffmann, Thomas (2017). Construction Grammars. In Barbara Dancygier (ed.): The Cambridge Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 435-453.
  • Hoffmann, Thomas and Trousdale, Graeme (2013). The Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Iwata, Seizi (2006). Argument resultatives and adjunct resultatives in a lexical constructional account: The case of resultatives with adjectival result phrases. Language Sciences 28, 449-496.
  • Jackendoff, Ray S. (1983). Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
  • Kay, Paul and Fillmore, Charles J. (1999). Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What's X doing Y? construction. Language, 75 (1), 1-33.
  • Levin, Beth. (1993). English Verb Classes and Alternations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Mairal, Ricardo (2015). Constructional meaning representation within a knowledge engineering framework. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 13(1), 1-27.
  • Mairal, Ricardo and Periñán, Carlos (2009). The anatomy of the lexicon component within the framework of a conceptual knowledge base. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 22, 217-244.
  • Mairal, Ricardo and Periñán, Carlos (2016). Representing constructional schemata in FunGramKB Grammaticon. In Jens Fleischhauer, Anja Latrouite and Rainer Osswald (eds.): Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface [Series Studies in Language and Cognition]. Düsseldorf: Düsseldorf University Press, 77-108.
  • Mairal, Ricardo, Periñán, Carlos and Pérez, María Beatriz. (2012). La representación léxica. Hacia un enfoque ontológico. In Ricardo Mairal, Lilián Guerrero & Carlos González (eds.): El Funcionalismo en la Teoría Lingüística. La Gramática del Papel y la Referencia. Introducción, Avances y Aplicaciones, Madrid: Akal, 85-102.
  • Nolan, Brian (2016). What can Theoretical Linguistics do for Natural Language Processing research? In Carlos Periñán and Eva M. Mestre (eds.): Understanding Meaning and Knowledge Representation: From Theoretical and Cognitive Linguistics to Natural Language Processing. UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 235-248.
  • Nolan, Brian (2014). Theoretical and computational considerations of linking constructions in Role and Reference Grammar. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 12(2), 410-442.
  • Nolan, Brian and Periñán, Carlos (eds.). (2014). Language Processing and Grammars: The Role of Functionally Oriented Computational Models [Studies in Language Companion Series 150]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Nolan, Brian and Salem, Yasser (2010). UniArab: An RRG Arabic-to-English machine translation software. In Wataru Nakamura (ed.): Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Role and Reference Grammar (RRG 2009). University of California, Berkeley, 243-271.
  • Ovchinnikova, Ekaterina (2012). Integration of World Knowledge for Natural Language Understanding. Amsterdam & Paris & Beijing: Atlantis Press.
  • Ovchinnikova, Ekaterina, Vieu, Laure, Oltramari, Alessandro, Borgo, Stefano and Alexandrov, Theodore (2010). Data-driven and ontological analysis of FrameNet for Natural Language Reasoning. In Proceedings of the 7th Conference on International Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'10), Valletta: Malta, 3157-3164.
  • Panther, Klaus-Uwe and Thornburg, Linda (1998). A cognitive approach to inferencing in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 30, 755-769.
  • Peña, M. Sandra (2009). Constraints on subsumption in the caused-motion construction. Language Sciences 31(6), 740-765.
  • Peña, M. Sandra (2015). A constructionist approach to causative "frighten" verbs. Linguistics 53(6): 1247-1302.
  • Peña, M. Sandra (2016). Cognitive mechanisms underlying fake reflexive resultatives. Australian Journal of Linguistics 36(4), 502-541.
  • Periñán, Carlos (2012). En defensa del procesamiento del lenguaje natural fundamentado en la lingüística teórica. Onomázein 26, 13-48.
  • Periñán, Carlos (2013). Towards a model of constructional meaning for natural language understanding. In Brian Nolan and Elke Diedrichsen (eds): Liking Constructions into Functional Linguistics: The Role of Constructions in RRG Grammars [Studies in Language Companion Series 145], Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 205-230.
  • Periñán, Carlos and Arcas, Francisco (2007). Cognitive modules of an NLP knowledge base for language understanding. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 39, 197-204.
  • Periñán, Carlos and Arcas, Francisco (2010). The architecture of FunGramKB. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, European Language Resources Association (ELRA), 7th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Valeta (Malta), 2667-2674.
  • Periñán, Carlos and Arcas, Francisco (2014). The implementation of the FunGramKB CLS Constructor. In Brian Nolan and Carlos Periñán (eds.): Language Processing and Grammars: The Role of Functionally Oriented Computational Models. [Studies in Language Companion Series 150], Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 165-196.
  • Periñán, Carlos and Mairal, Ricardo (2010a). Enhancing UniArab with FunGramKB. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 44, 19-26.
  • Periñán, Carlos and Mairal, Ricardo (2010b). La gramática de COREL: Un lenguaje de representación conceptual. Onomázein 21, 11-45.
  • Periñán, Carlos and Mairal, Ricardo (2012). La dimensión computacional de la GPR: La estructura lógica conceptual y su aplicación en el procesamiento del lenguaje natural. In Ricardo Mairal, Lilián Guerrero and Carlos González Vergara (eds.): La Gramática del Papel y la Referencia: Introducción, Avances y Aplicaciones, Madrid: Akal, 333-348.
  • Periñán, Carlos and Mestre, Eva M. (eds.). (2016). Understanding Meaning and Knowledge Representation: From Theoretical and Cognitive Linguistics to Natural Language Processing. UK: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. (2013). Meaning construction, meaning interpretation and formal expression in the Lexical Constructional Model. In Brian Nolan and Elke Diedrichsen (eds): Linking Constructions into Functional Linguistics: The Role of Constructions in RRG Grammars [Studies in Language Companion Series]. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 231-270.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. and Galera, Alicia (2014). Cognitive Modeling: A Linguistic Perspective. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. and Mairal, Ricardo (2008). Levels of description and constraining factors in meaning construction: An introduction to the Lexical Constructional Model. Folia Linguistica 42(2), 355-400.
  • Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco J. and Pérez, Lorena (2001). Metonymy and the grammar: Motivation, constraints, and interaction. Language and Communication 21: 321-357.
  • Ruppenhofer, Josef, Ellsworth, Michael, Petruck, Miriam R. L., Johnson, Christopher R. and Scheffczyk, Jan (2010). FrameNet II: Extended Theory and Practice. <https://framenet2.icsi.berkeley.edu/docs/r1.5/book.pdf>.
  • Salem, Yasser, Hensman, Arnold and Nolan, Brian (2008). Towards Arabic to English machine translation. ITB Journal 17, 20-31.
  • Sharma, Dipti Misra (2010). On the role of NLP in Linguistics. Proceedings of the 2010 Workshop on NLP and Linguistics: Finding the Common Ground, ACL 2010, Uppsala, Sweden, 18-21.
  • Shen, Dan and Lapata, Mirella (2007). Using semantic roles to improve question answering. In Association for Computational Linguistics: Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning, Prague, 12-21.
  • Simpson, Jane (1983). Resultatives. In Lori Levin, Malka Rappaport and Annie Zaenen (eds.): Papers in Lexical-Functional Grammar, Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club. 143-158.
  • Steels, Luc (2011). Introducing Fluid Construction Grammar. In Luc Steels (ed.): Design Patterns in Fluid Construction Grammar, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 3-30.
  • Steels, Luc (2012). Design methods for fluid Construction Grammar. In Luc Steels (ed.): Computational Issues in Fluid Construction Grammar. A New Formalism for the Representation of Lexicons and Grammars. Berlin& Heidelberg: Springer.3-36. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-34120-5.
  • Steels, Luc and van Trijp, Remi (2011). How to make construction grammars fluid and robust. In Luc Steels (ed.): Design Patterns in Fluid Construction Grammar, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 301-330.
  • Torrent, Tiago Timponi, Meireles Lage, Ludmila, Fernandes Sampaio, Thais, da Silva Tavares, Tatiane and da Silva Matos, Ely Edison (2014). Revisiting border conflicts between FrameNet and Construction Grammar. Annotation policies for the Brazilian Portuguese Constructicon. Constructions and Frames 6:1 (2014), 33-50.
  • Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. (2005). Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. and LaPolla, Randy J. (1997). Syntax, Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. and Mairal, Ricardo (2014). Interfacing the Lexicon and an Ontology in a linking algorithm. In Ma Ángeles Gómez, Francisco Ruiz de Mendoza and Francisco Gonzálvez-García (eds.): Theory and Practice in Functional-Cognitive Space, Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 205-228.
  • Winther-Nielsen, Nicolai (2009). Biblical Hebrew parsing on display: The Role Lexical Module (RLM) as a tool for Role and Reference Grammar. SEE-J Hiphil 6: 1-51. <http: //www.see-j.net/index.php/hiphil/article/view/78>.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet