05 linguistic theory meets lexicography

1,095 views

Published on

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

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,095
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
39
Comments
0
Likes
2
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

05 linguistic theory meets lexicography

  1. 1. Linguistic Theory Meets Lexicography
  2. 2. Comprehension Questions 1. Write the sense relationships which reflect the similarities between lexical p units. 2. State the kinds of antonyms and explain each of them. 3. Explain ‘frame semantics’ theory. 4. What are the roles of the frames, frame elements and context? 5. Which steps are involved during the analysis process carried out by using frame semantics theory? 6. What is the importance of using the frame semantics approach? 7. Write the information types which are relevant to make a lexicographic record of a word. 8. What are the inherent properties of the headword? 9. Why learning the properties of the source texts is sometimes needed?
  3. 3. 5.1 5 1 Preliminaries A grounding in linguistic theory is not a prerequisite for being a proficient lexicographer – still less a guarantee of success i th fi ld l i h till l t f in the field. But there are certain basic linguistic concepts which are invaluable in preparing people to analyse data and to produce concise, accurate dictionary entries. An awareness of linguistic theory can help lexicographers to do their jobs more effectively and with greater confidence. This chapter reviews those linguistic theories which we have found to have direct application to our work as dictionary planners and dictionary makers. 5.2 Sense relationships: similarities This section summarizes different types of ‘similarity’ between lexical units: o Th th t h ti t ti (hyponym and synonymy) d ) Those that share some semantic property or properties (h o Those that denote a part-whole relationship between objects in the real world (meronymy) o Those that allow similar metaphorical sense extensions (regular polysemy) 5.2.1 5 2 1 Hyponymy The nodes of this hierarchy are the ‘superordinate’ and the ‘hyponym’. This relationship can be summarized as ‘if a hyponym then a superordinate’. Its major significance for lexicographers is that the ‘genus expression’ (the central genus expression word or words) in a definition should ideally be the superordinate of the headword. Hyponymy rule of thumb: X is a Y but Y is not only an X (a terrier is a dog).
  4. 4. The hyponymy hierarchy is rarely found in adjectives, and consequently there is a real lack of superordinates. Cohyponyms rule of th b X and Y are both Zs ( rose and a tulip are both flowers). C h l f thumb: d b th Z (a d t li b th fl ) 5.2.2 Synonymy Synonyms are words which have the same meaning like ‘pavement’ and ‘sidewalk’. True synonyms are extremely rare; the nearest you get is usually a pseudo-synonymy and l h ll d d synonyms in dictionaries often turn out to be cohyponyms or superordinates. Pure synonymy is rare across languages, except for the names of concrete objects which the two cultures share. Synonymy rule of thumb: X is Y and Y is X (shut is close and close is shut). 5.2.3 Meronymy Meronymy reflects the relationship of the part to the whole and vice versa. It’s difficult to define the part without mentioning the whole but the part is only occasionally referred to in the definition of the whole. Meronymy rule of thumb: X and other parts of Y. Quasi-meronymy reflects the relationship of the member to the group or class of people, or collection of objects. This is a rather loose relationship: it’s difficult to word a formula appropriate to all the cover. varied Lus it should cover Quasi-meronymy rule of thumb: X belongs to / in a Y. 5.2.4 Regular polysemy Some polysemous words have a particular relationship with others i th i ‘l i l s t’ in S l s s ds h ti l l ti shi ith th s in their ‘lexical set’ i that several of their meanings seem to parallel each other.
  5. 5. Certain specific semantic components result in sets of words behaving lexicographically in a very similar way. This is known as ‘regular polysemy’. When you re planning the editorial work in a dictionary project it’s obciously a help to you’re project, it s the team if you can list the major instances of regular polysemy, either by producing template entries or simply by issuing lists of headwords related in this way. English morphology encourages a wider range of regular polysemt than is found in languages that have specific forms for verbs and nouns. l h h ifi f f b d 5.3 Sense relationships: differences This section summarizes relationships between LUs that are in some way opposite in h l h b L h meaning. The kinds are complementary, polar and directional antonymy. 5.3.1 5 3 1 Complementary antonymy This relationship is sometimes called ‘contradiction’. Complementary antonymy rule of thumb: If it isn’t X then it must be Y and vice versa. 5 3 2 Polar antonymy 5.3.2 This relationship is similar to, but more complex than, complementarity. There is a gradient between X and Y in polar antonymy. X and Y are at the poles of gradient, area, this gradient but in between there is an indeterminate area where more X and less Y are found. Polar antonymy rule of thumb: If it’s X then it can’t be Y and vice versa, but it can be somewhere in between. 5.3.3 Directional antonymy Directional antonyms include various subtypes: some denote contrary movement or position, for instance, pairs of words representing opposing poles along a shared axis.
  6. 6. 5.3.4 Converseness Converseness holds between pairs of words which have a certain semantic symmetry, so that although not antonyms one of the pair is felt in some way to be linked by g y p y y oppositeness to the other. There is little direct application of converse pairs in dictionaries, but if a word is difficult to define a look at its converse’s definition can be helpful. 5.4 Frame semantics The application of this theory to practical lexicography results in the approach to lexicographic relevance which helps lexicographers to identify useful facts in corpus texts. This theory which was produced by Fillmore describes words, their various meanings, and how these are combined with others to form the utterances and sentences of a language. Its aim is to analyse and record for each sense of a word or phrase, the full range of its semantic and syntactic relations. To do this they have devised a suite of codes denoting semantic roles (frame elements) this, and grammatical relationships, which allow them to document in detail the corpus contexts in which a word is found. The work is computer-assisted. The frame semantics approach to word behaviour is the most helpful and appropriate approach to corpus data, ensuring that the analysis is correctly carried out, and no vital fact is overlooked. 5.4.1 5 4 1 What are frames and frame elements Frame semantics describes the meanings of words and phrases in terms of the frame to which they belong and the contexts in which these LUs are found.
  7. 7. A semantic frame is a schematic representation of a situation type together with a list of the typical participants, props, and concepts that are to be found in such a situation; these are the semantic roles, or frame elements (Fes). The context is normally the phrase or clause and maximally the sentence in which the target word clause, appears in corpus data. 5.4.2 How is the analysis done? There are several distinct steps in the analysis process: o First, the frame is defined, and its core elements named and described. o Next, a list is made of as many words as can be found which in one of their senses evoke that frame. o Then for each sense or LU a set of corpus sentences is extracted, in which the word is used in Then, sense, LU, extracted the particular sense. o Each sentence is annotated by marking off any section which instantiates an FE and by recording for each FE thus identified: o Its phrase type o Its grammatical function 5.4.3 Why is this useful for lexicographers? The frame semantics approach, grounded in a coherent theory, offers the possibility of a more systematic less subjective way of analysing corpus data and gives us confidence that all relevant systematic, data, features are being captured. 5.5 Lexicographic relevance When looking at the concordances the corpus offers for a word we have to determine ‘what is lexicographically relevant’? We consider lexicographic relevance from the standpoint of Fillmore’s frame semantics.
  8. 8. Three types of information are relevant to making a lexicographic record of a word: o What we know, as native speakers, about the headword (its inherent properties) o What we learn from its use in corpora and elsewhere (its contextual features) o What we know about where the citations came from (the properties of the source texts) It’s important to remember that ‘lexicographic relevance’ relates to what is relevant to an LU, and not to a lemma, the focus is the headword in one of its senses, not the whole word. 5.5.1 Inherent properties of the headword This is the knowledge of our language that we all bring to analysing the corpus data and writing the dictionary entry. The properties of the headword that principally concern us can be summarized very briefly: o Its wordclass o Its wordforms o Its grammatical behaviour o Its semantics In corpus lexicography we use our inherent knowledge of the headword rather to help us discover the really useful facts in the corpus, and make sure the entry is comprehensive and h l l i i k the examples are pleasing to our native speakers’’ ears. Our knowledge of the headword’s inherent properties serves as quality control during our work on corpus data, as we discover and record its contextual features in each of its LUs. 5.5.2 Contextual features of the headword An understanding of lexicographic relevance helps you identify in a corpus sentence all the essential components of the headword’s context, all the facts that you need to take into account when writing any entry for that word.
  9. 9. 5.5.2.1 Case study: argue The headword argue contains four LUs; each represents a distinct sense of the headword. headword LU 1: the sense of ‘quarrel, dispute’, the communication frame. LU 2: the sense of ‘maintain, make a case for’, the reasoning frame. LU 3: the sense of ‘indicate’, the evidence frame indicate frame. LU 4: the sense of ‘persuade’, the persuasion frame. They will differ for each LU, since the frame elements depend on the frame the LU belongs to. ongs participant 1 participant 2 topic The sentence is ‘Sam / was arguing / with his brother / about the money’. We have to examine its; o Frame elements or semantic roles o Phrase types o Grammatical function Frame elements: Participant 1 Participant 2 Topic Sam with his brother about the money Phrase types + grammatical functions NP: Subject / PP-with: Complement / PP-about: Complement The phrase type information allows you to mark off in the sentence the actual sections relevant to your description. The information about grammatical function lets you assess the importance of the component for your database.
  10. 10. The set of threefold descriptions of each component contains most of the information you need to extract from this sentance for your database. Whan we are analysing corpus data in an attempt to collect the facts about a word for our dictionary entry, it’s important to be able to discover from the concordances tha actual source of each citation. This information is stored in the ‘document headers’ of each text in the corpus. Using this information the computer can tell you whether a particular citation comes mainly from spoken or written language, or political documents, or feminist publications and so on. If you h have any d b about the way a word i used, i ’ useful to b able to doubts b h d is d it’s f l be bl check up on where the citation came from. To summarize lexicographic relevance: the wordclass of the word is central to what is relevant to record, and there are lists of the principal co constituents of record co-constituents a clause that are relevant for each of the four major wordclasses.
  11. 11. Turkish Summary Bu bölümde sözlük oluşturan kişilerin çalışmalarına katkı sağlayabilecek bazı ş ş ç ş ğ y dilbilimsel kuramlardan ve bu kuramların uygulanış biçimlerinden bahsedilmektedir. Sözcükler arasında birtakım anlamsal ilişkiler vardır ve bu ilişkiler benzerlik ve farklılıklara göre şekillenir. Sözcükler arasındaki benzerlikten doğan ilişkiler sözcüklerin bazı anlambilimsel özellikleri paylaşmalarına nesneler arasındaki paylaşmalarına, parça-bütün ilişkilerine ve sözcüklerin benzer mecazi alt anlamları çağrıştırmalarına göre farklılık gösterir. Sözcükler arasındaki farklılıklardan doğan ilişkiler ise sözcüklerin birbirlerini zıtlıklarla tamamlamalarına, tamamen farklı kavramları çağrıştırmalarına ve birbirlerine zıt olmalarına göre farklılık gösterir. Dilbilimci Fillmore sözlükbilime de uygulanabilen ve ‘yapısal anlambilim’ olarak adlandırılan bir kuram geliştirmiştir. Bu kuram sözcükleri ve onların farklı anlamlarını tasvir eder ve bir dildeki sözce ve tümcelerin oluşturulması için ükl i diğ ükl l l birleştirilmesi gerektiğini açıklar. Bunu yapmak i il i k iği i kl B k sözcüklerin diğer sözcüklerle nasıl bi l için de anlambilimsel rolleri ve dilbilgisel ilişkileri gösteren bazı kodlar tasarlanır. Bu kuramın sözlükbilime uygulanması sonucunda sözlükbilimcilere bütünce metnindeki faydalı bilgileri tanımlama konusunda yardımcı olan sözlükbilimsel ilişki y g y ş yaklaşımı ortaya çıkmıştır. Bir sözcüğün sözlükbilimsel ilişkilerini belirlemek için sözcüğün genel özelliklerinin, bağlamsal özelliklerinin ve kaynak metinlerin özelliklerinin bilinmesi gereklidir.
  12. 12. Comprehension Questions / Answers Write the sense relationships which reflect the similarities between lexical units. Different types of ‘similarity’ between lexical units: o Those that share some semantic property or properties (hyponym and synonymy) o Those that denote a part-whole relationship between objects in the real world (meronymy) o Those that allow similar metaphorical sense extensions (regular polysemy) State the kinds of antonyms and explain each of them. The kinds are complementary, polar and directional antonymy. Complementary antonymy This relationship is sometimes called ‘contradiction’. Complementary antonymy rule of thumb: If it isn’t X then it must be Y and vice versa. P l antonymy t Polar This relationship is similar to, but more complex than, complementarity. There is a gradient between X and Y in polar antonymy. X and Y are at the poles of this gra nt, ut n tw n th r s gradient, but in between there is an indeterminate ar a, where more X and less Y ar foun . n t rm nat area, wh r mor an ss are found. Polar antonymy rule of thumb: If it’s X then it can’t be Y and vice versa, but it can be somewhere in between. Directional antonymy Directional antonyms include various subtypes: some denote contrary movement or position, for instance, pairs of words representing opposing poles along a shared axis. Explain ‘frame semantics’ theory.
  13. 13. This theory which was produced by Fillmore describes words, their various meanings, and how these are combined with others to form the utterances and sentences of a language. Its aim is to analyse and record for each sense of a word or phrase, the full range of its semantic and syntactic relations. What are the roles of the frames, frame elements and context? A semantic frame is a schematic representation of a situation type together with a list of the typical participants, props, and concepts that are to be found in such a situation; these are the semantic roles, or frame elements (Fes). The context is normally the phrase or clause and roles (Fes) clause, maximally the sentence in which the target word appears in corpus data. Which steps are involved during the analysis process carried out by using frame semantics theory? There are several distinct steps in the analysis process: o First, the frame is defined, and its core elements named and described. o Next, a list is made of as many words as can be found which in one of their senses evoke that f th t frame. o Then, for each sense, or LU, a set of corpus sentences is extracted, in which the word is used in the particular sense. o Each sentence is annotated by marking off any section which instantiates an FE and by y g y y recording for each FE thus identified: o Its phrase type o Its grammatical function What is the importance of using the frame semantics approach? The frame semantics approach, grounded in a coherent theory, offers the possibility of a more systematic, less subjective way of analysing corpus data, and gives us confidence that all relevant features are being captured. Write the information types which are relevant to make a lexicographic record of a word. Three types of information are relevant to making a lexicographic record of a word:
  14. 14. o What we know, as native speakers, about the headword (its inherent properties) o What we learn from its use in corpora and elsewhere (its contextual features) o Wh we know about where the citations came from (the properties of the source What k b h h i i f ( h i f h texts) What are the inherent properties of the headword? The properties of the headword that principally concern us can be summarized very briefly: o Its wordclass o Its wordforms ts wor forms o Its grammatical behaviour o Its semantics Why learning the properties of the source texts is sometimes needed? Using this information the computer can tell you whether a particular citation comes mainly from spoken or written language, or political documents, or feminist publications and so on. If you have any doubts about the way a word is used, it’s useful to be able to check up on where the citation came from from.

×