Abstract
The traditional approach to natural language understanding is to list all polysemous meanings of a word or idiom in the lexicon. For each word a choice is made between one of its lexical entries, and this choice is used to construct the meaning of the sentence. In this paper we will propose an alternative that derives the appropriate meaning by starting with a single more general lexical entry that is expanded to the appropriate polysemous meaning. The semantic details can be provided by the textual context, the background context, and pragmatic knowledge.
In [Willems, 1993a] a model of natural language understanding was developed that constructed a syntax-semantics correspondence by joining (only) lexical entries. One of the principles underlying this construction was determinacy. Here, we will show that this determinacy principle is not ideal, and that one should join schematic expansions of the lexical entries instead to achieve the semantic graph of a sentence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
D. Bolinger. Semantic overloading: a restudy of the verb remind. Language, 47, 1971.
P. Grice. Studies in the Way of Word. Harvard Univertsity Press, Oxford, 1989.
G. Hirst. Anaphora in Natural Language Understanding: a survey, volume 119 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1981.
G. Hirst. Semantic Interpretation and the Resolution of Ambiguity. Cambridge University Press, New York, 1987.
J. Pustejovsky. The generative lexicon. Computational Linguistics, 17(4), 1991.
C. Ruhl. On Monosemy: a Study in Linguistic Semantics. State University of New York Press, 1989.
J. F. Sowa. Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine. Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1984.
S. Ullman. The Principles of Semantics. Blackwell, Oxford, 1957.
Y. Wilks. An intelligent analyser and understander of english. Comm. ACM, 18(5):264–274, 1975.
M. Willems. Chemistry of Language: a graph-theoretical study of linguistic semantics. PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, 1993.
M. Willems. Using a lexicon of conceptual graphs. In J.M. Akkermans and J.A. Breuker, editors, Working Papers NAIC'93, Enschede, 1993.
T. Winograd. Understanding Natural Language. Academic Press, New York and London, 1972.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1994 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Willems, M. (1994). Pragmatic semantics by conceptual graphs. In: Tepfenhart, W.M., Dick, J.P., Sowa, J.F. (eds) Conceptual Structures: Current Practices. ICCS 1994. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 835. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58328-9_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-58328-9_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-58328-8
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-38675-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive