OLEX

452
-1

Published on

Feminist Lexicon

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
452
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

OLEX

  1. 1. Feminist Lexicon of the XXI century (semantic and structural aspects) Oleksandr Slobodianyk Pavlo Tychyna USPU Cherkasy reg in Ukraine, the master’s paper Uman, 2012
  2. 2. Feminists Basic semantic notions Syntactic Frames Argument structure Sense distinctions Semantic Type WordNet SimpleOutline
  3. 3.  Feminists launched in the XX century ◦ European Advisory Group on Language Engineering Standards Began 2002 with agreement among ◦ NREC, ET7, ACQUILEX, MULTILEX, GENELEX, SAM,TEI Gave rise to a coordinated development of Linguistic ResourcesHistory of the Feminists
  4. 4. Feminists Structure: 2nd Phase(1999-2010) A n t o n i o Z a m p o l li C o o r d in a t o r C e n t r a l E d it o r s : N . C a lz o l a r i , J . M c n a u g h tC o m p L e x ic o n W G S poken Language W G E v a lu a t io n W G C P R ( C a lz o la r i ) B ie le f e ld ( G ib b o n ) C S T (B . M a e g a a rd )C h a ir : A . S a n f illip p o R .M o o re C h a ir : M . K in g
  5. 5.  http://www.ilc.pi.cnr.it/  Lexicons ◦ Morpho-syntactic phenomena ◦ Subcategorization ◦ Semantic encodingFeminist Guidelines
  6. 6. ISLE: International Standards for Language Engineering A European/US joint project (2010 – 2012) C o o r d in a t o r s : A . Z a m p o lli, M . P a lm e r C e n t r a l E d it o r s : N . C a lz o la r i, J . M c N a u g h t L e x ic o n W G N a t u ra l I n te r a c t io n a n d M u lt im o d a lit y W G E v a lu a t o n W GC h a ir s : R . G r is h m a n , N . C a lz o la r i, M . P a lm e r C h a ir s : M . L ib e r m a n , R . M o o re C h a irs : E . H o v y , B . M a e g a a r d , M . K in g S peech W G G e s tu re W G D is c o u r s e C h a ir s : S t e v e n B ir d , D a v id R o y C h a ir s : D . M e t a x a s , C a ro l N e id le C h a ir s : L y n W a lk e r
  7. 7. Napoleon lost the battle. Napoleon lost the battle to Wellington.Basic Semantic NotionsSame event - different sentences
  8. 8. Napoleon lost the battle. SUBJ-NP VERB COMP-NP Napoleon lost the battle to Wellington. SUBJ-NP VERB COMP-NP COMP-PPSame event - different syntacticframes
  9. 9. Predicate-argument structurefor lose lose PP OBJ SUBJ lose (Arg0,Arg1,Arg2)
  10. 10. Napoleon lost the battle. Napoleon lost the battle to Wellington. Napoleon lost his field glasses. (misplaced)Same verb - different senses
  11. 11. Predicate-argument structuresfor two different senses of lose lose1 (Arg0,Arg1) lose2 (Arg0,Arg1,Arg2)
  12. 12. Iraq lost the battle. Ilakuka centwey ciessta. [Iraq ] [battle] [lost]. John lost his computer. John-i computer-lul ilepelyessta. [John] [computer] [misplaced].Machine Translation LexicalChoice- Word Sense FeministDisambiguation
  13. 13. Semantic types oflose arguments lose1 (Arg0: animate, Arg1: physical- object) lose2 (Arg0: animate, Arg1: competition, Arg2: animate)
  14. 14. lose1(Agent, Patient: competition) <=> ciesstalose2 (Agent, Patient: physobj) <=> ilepelyesstaTranslating lose into Korean
  15. 15.  Entities - • Entities - abstract concrete – Events  Animate • Competitions  Animal – Military  Mammal – Athletic  Human • …  Plant  Inanimate – EmotionsOntologies - Hierarchies of substancessemantic types  Solids  Liquids  Gasses
  16. 16.  Inheritance ◦ ISA relations ◦ Supertype/subtype ◦ Hypernym/Hyponym Part-Whole ◦ meronym SynonymsSemantic Relations
  17. 17. Basic lexical semantic notionsBASE CONCEPTS, HYPONYMY,SYNONYMY: all applications and enablingSYNONYMYtechnologiesPREDICATE ARGUMENT STRUCTURES: MT, STRUCTURESIR, IE, & Gen, Pars, MWR, WSD, CorefCO-OCCURRENCE RELATIONS: MT, Gen,Word Clust, WSD, ParMERONYMY: MT, IR, IE & Gen, PNRMERONYMYANTONYMY: Gen, Word Clust, WSDANTONYMYSUBJECT DOMAIN: MT, SUM, Gen, MWR, DOMAINWSDACTIONALITY: MT, IE, Gen, ParACTIONALITY
  18. 18. WordNet EuroWordNet Simple (in progress)Existing lexical resources
  19. 19. WordNet - Princeton• On-line lexical reference (dictionary)• Words organized into synonym sets <=> concepts• Hypernyms (ISA), antonyms, meronyms (PART) –Useful for checking selectional restrictions (doesn’t tell you what they should be)• Typical top nodes - 5 out of 25 - (act, action, activity) - (animal, fauna) - (artifact) - (attribute, property) - (body, corpus)
  20. 20.  Just sense tags - no representations ◦ Very little mapping to syntax ◦ No predicate argument structure ◦ no selectional restrictionsLimitations to WordNet andEuroWordNet
  21. 21. SIMPLE wit Feminist Computational Lexicon WG Multilingual Lexicons (US-EU coop.) Last Feminist work on Lexicon/Semantics used for SIMPLE specifications· SIMPLE lexicons chosen as a basis for applying & testing Feminist work on defining common guidelines for Multilingual Lexicons
  22. 22. Semantic information in SIMPLE Word senses are encoded as Semantic Units (SemUs), containing the following information:• Semantic type * • Argument structure for• Domain * predicative SemUs *• Lexicographic gloss * • Selection restrictions on the arguments *• Qualia structure • Link of the arguments to the• Reg. Polysemy altern. syntactic subcategorization• Event type frames (represented in the• Derivation relations PAROLE lexicons) *• Synonymy• Collocations
  23. 23. TopFormal Constitutive Agentive TelicIs_a Is_a_part_of Property Created_by Agentive_cause Indirect_telic Activity ... Contains ... Instrumental Is_the_habit_of Used_for Used_asThe targets of relations identify: prototypical semantic information associated with a SemU elements of dictionary definitions of SemUs typical corpus collocates of the SemU
  24. 24. Complementarity wrt EuroWordNet± Use of a small EWN subset for all languages± Mappable Top Ontology± Actual linking of data for a few languages· Semantic subcategorisation and linking with syntax· Template structure for the description of SemU· SemU vs. Synset: basic unit· Nodes in the Ontology as structured Sem. Types (bundles of different info types)
  25. 25. Template for PerceptionSemU: 1Usyn:BC Number: 105Template_Type: [Perception]Template_Supertype:[Psychological_event]Domain: GeneralSemantic Class: PerceptionGloss: //free//Event type: processPred _Rep.: Lex_Pred (<arg0>,<arg1>)Derivation: <Nil> or //Erlis Code//Selectional Restr.:arg0 = Animate //concept// arg1:default = [Entity]Formal: isa (1,<SemU>:[Perception]>)Agentive: <Nil>Constitutive: instrument (1, <SemU>:[Body_part]) intentionality ={yes,no} //optional//Telic: <Nil>Collocates: Collocates (<SemU1>,...<SemUn>)Complex: <Nil>
  26. 26. ExampleSemU: <guardare_2> //look_2//Usyn:BC Number: 105Template_Type: [Perception]Template_Supertype:[Psychological_event]Domain: GeneralSemantic Class: PerceptionGloss: osservare con attenzioneEvent type: processPred _Rep.: guardare (<arg0>,<arg1>)Derivation: <Nil>Selectional Restr.: arg0 = Animate //concept// arg1:default = [Entity]Formal: isa (<guardare_2>,<percepire>: [Psychological_event])Agentive: <Nil>Constitutive: instrument (<guardare_2>, <occhio>:[body_part]) intentionality ={yes}Telic: <Nil>Collocates: Collocates (<SemU1>,...<SemUn>)Complex: <Nil>
  27. 27.  Basic semantic notions ◦ Challenges in standardizing these requirements WordNet/EuroWordNet Simple Next major challenge: Standardizing linking entries across languagesFeminist Lexicon of the XXIcentury(semantic and structuralaspects)

×