Skip to main content
Log in

Customizing verb definitions for specific semantic domains

  • Published:
Machine Translation

Abstract

We examine the functions performed by verb definitions in the process of semantic interpretation in PUNDIT, and the changes in the interpretation process that are caused by different uses of the same verb. We give detailed examples of how the interpretation process is affected by changes in thematic roles, selection restrictions and semantic predicates in the decompositions that constitute the verb definitions. In addition we introduce the notion of a change-of-state inference that must be drawn by reference resolution and argue that it plays an equally important function in capturing distinctions among verb senses. We demonstrate the role of the change-of-state inference with several different concrete representations of varying senses of the verb break.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • BundyAlan. 1979. Solving Mechanics Problems Using Meta-Level Inference. In: D.Michie (ed.), Expert Systems in the Micro-Electronic Age. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 50–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahl, Deborah A. 1986. Focusing and Reference Resolution in pundit. Proceedings of 5th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Philadelphia.

  • Dahl, Deborah A., Martha S. Palmer and Rebecca J. Passonneau. 1987a. Nominalizations in P upundit. Proceedings of ACL-87, Stanford, 131–139.

  • DahlDeborah A., JohnDowding, LynetteHirschman, FrancoisLang, MarciaLinebarger, MarthaPalmer, RebeccaPassonneau and LeslieRiley. 1987b. Integrating Snytax, Semantics, and Discourse: darpa Natural Language Understanding Program, R and D Status Report, Unisys Corporation, Paoli, Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • FillmoreCharles J. 1968. The Case for Case. In: E.Bach and R.T.Harms (Eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fillmore, C. 1986. Pragmatically Controlled Zero Anaphora. In Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 95–107.

  • FowlerH.W., F.G.Fowler and E.McIntosh (eds.). 1959. The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Current English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • HarrisZellig. 1968. Mathematical Structures of Language. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hobbs, Jerry R., Mark Stickel, Paul Martin and Douglas Edwards. 1988. Interpretation as Abduction. Proceedings of ACL-88, Buffalo, 95–103.

  • JackendoffR.S. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • JackendoffR.S. 1983. Semantics and Cognition. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • LarsonRichard K. 1988. Implicit Arguments in Situation Semantics. Linguistics and Philosophy 11: 131–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • LevinBeth, and MalkaRappaport. 1986. The Formation of Adjectival Passives. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 623–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linebarger, Marcia C., Deborah A. Dahl, Lynette Hirschman and Rebecca J. Passonneau. 1988. Sentence Fragments Regular Structures. Proceedings of ACL-88, Buffalo, 7–16.

  • MishF.C., E.W.Gilman, J.G.Lowe, R.D.McHenry, R.W.Pease et al. (eds.) 1986. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary. Springfield, Mass.: Merriam-Webster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, Martha. 1981. A Case for Rule-Driven Semantic Analysis. Proceedings of ACL-81, Stanford, 125–131.

  • Palmer, Martha. 1983. Inference-driven Semantic Analysis. Proceedings of AAAI-83, Washington, D.C., 310–313.

  • PalmerMartha. 1985. Driving Semantics for a Limited Domain. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, Martha, Deborah A. Dahl, Rebecca J. (Schiffman) Passonneau, Lynette Hirschman, Marcia Linebarger and John Dowding. 1986. Recovering Implicit Information. Proceedings of ACL-86, New York, 10–19.

  • PalmerMartha. 1990. Semantic Processing for Finite Domains. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Passonneau, Rebecca J. 1987. Situations and Intervals. Proceedings of ACL-87, Stanford, 16–24.

  • PassonneauRebecca J. 1988. A Computational Model of the Semantics of Tense and Aspect. Computational Linguistics 14: 44–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Passonneau, Rebecca J., Carl Weir, Tim Finin and Martha Palmer. 1990. Integrating Natural Language Processing and Knowledge Based Processing: Demand-Driven Reasoning for Document Analysis. To appear in Proceedings of AAAI-90.

  • Rappaport, Malka and Beth Levin. 1986. What to Do with Theta-Roles. Lexicon Project Working Papers, MIT Center for Cognitive Science.

  • Weir, Carl, and Martha Palmer. 1989. The Status of Message Understanding Research. Presented at Seventh Intelligence Community AI/Advanced Computing Symposium, McLean, Virginia.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

Rebecca Passonneau and Carl Weir have made major contributions to the theory and implementation of verb semantics in the PUNDIT system. Marcia Linebarger has provided invaluable insights into verb semantics illustrated by innumerable examples without which the last two sections of this paper would not exist. Also, Bonnie Webber made substantial contributions to the representations of the verb break.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Palmer, M. Customizing verb definitions for specific semantic domains. Machine Translation 5, 5–30 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00310040

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00310040

Keywords

Navigation