Lexical Knowledge Representation and Natural Language Processing

Abstract Traditionally, semantic information in computational lexicons is limited to notions such as selectional restrictions or domain-specific constraints, encoded in a “static” representation. This information is typically used in natural language processing by a simple knowledge manipulation mechanism limited to the ability to match valences of structurally related words. The most advanced device for imposing structure on lexical information is that of inheritance, both at the object (lexical items) and meta (lexical concepts) levels of lexicon. In this paper we argue that this is an impoverished view of a computational lexicon and that, for all its advantages, simple inheritance lacks the descriptive power necessary for characterizing fine-grained distinctions in the lexical semantics of words. We describe a theory of lexical semantics making use of a knowledge representation framework that offers a richer, more expressive vocabulary for lexical information. In particular, by performing specialized inference over the ways in which aspects of knowledge structures of words in context can be composed, mutually compatible and contextually relevant lexical components of words and phrases are highlighted. We discuss the relevance of this view of the lexicon, as an explanatory device accounting for language creativity, as well as a mechanism underlying the implementation of open-ended natural language processing systems. In particular, we demonstrate how lexical ambiguity resolution—now an integral part of the same procedure that creates the semantic interpretation of a sentence itself—becomes a process not of selecting from a pre-determined set of senses, but of highlighting certain lexical properties brought forth by, and relevant to, the current context.

[1]  Marc Moens,et al.  Expressing generalizations in unification-based grammar formalisms , 1989, EACL.

[2]  Ted Briscoe,et al.  Enjoy the Paper: Lexicology , 1990, COLING.

[3]  Ann A. Copestake,et al.  The ACQUILEX LKB: representation issues in semi-automatic acquisition of large lexicons , 1992, ANLP.

[4]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  Lexical Semantic Techniques for Corpus Analysis , 1993, CL.

[5]  Uriel Weinreich,et al.  Explorations in semantic theory , 1972 .

[6]  H. M. Thipa Metaphors we live , 1988 .

[7]  James F. Allen Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals , 1983, CACM.

[8]  Annette Herskovits,et al.  Language and spatial cognition , 1986 .

[9]  Stuart M. Shieber,et al.  An Introduction to Unification-Based Approaches to Grammar , 1986, CSLI Lecture Notes.

[10]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  On The Semantic Interpretation of Nominals , 1988, COLING.

[11]  Luca Cardelli,et al.  On understanding types, data abstraction, and polymorphism , 1985, CSUR.

[12]  Peter H. Schmitt,et al.  An Order-Sorted Logic for Knowledge Representation Systems , 1992, Artif. Intell..

[13]  Ronald J. Brachman,et al.  An Overview of the KL-ONE Knowledge Representation System , 1985, Cogn. Sci..

[14]  J. Moravcsik Aitia as generative factor in Aristotle's philosophy , 1975, Dialogue.

[15]  Yorick Wilks,et al.  Making Preferences More Active , 1978, Artif. Intell..

[16]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Metaphors We Live by , 1982 .

[17]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  An Application of Lexical Semantics to Knowledge Acquisition from Corpora , 1990, COLING.

[18]  Yorick Wilks,et al.  A tractable machine dictionary as a resource for computational semantics , 1989 .

[19]  Gerald Gazdar,et al.  Inference in DATR , 1989, EACL.

[20]  Jaime G. Carbonell,et al.  Default reasoning and inheritance mechanisms on type hierarchies , 1981, Workshop on Data Abstraction, Databases and Conceptual Modelling.

[21]  J. Katz Semantic Theory and the Meaning of 'Good' , 1964 .

[22]  Yorick Wilks,et al.  An intelligent analyzer and understander of English , 1975, Commun. ACM.

[23]  William Croft,et al.  Commonsense Metaphysics and Lexical Semantics , 1986, ACL.

[24]  William A. Woods,et al.  What's in a Link: Foundations for Semantic Networks , 1975 .

[25]  Wolfgang Motsch,et al.  Untersuchungen zur Semantik , 1983 .

[26]  益子 真由美 Argument Structure , 1993, The Lexicon.

[27]  George Lakoff,et al.  Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things , 1987 .

[28]  Richard Montague,et al.  The Proper Treatment of Quantification in Ordinary English , 1973 .

[29]  Graeme Hirst,et al.  Semantic Interpretation and the Resolution of Ambiguity , 1987, Studies in natural language processing.

[30]  Ivan A. Sag,et al.  Information-based syntax and semantics , 1987 .

[31]  Charles J. Fillmore,et al.  Frames and the semantics of understanding , 1985 .

[32]  Nicoletta Calzolari,et al.  Acquiring and Representing Semantic Information in a Lexical Knowledge Base , 1991, SIGLEX Workshop.

[33]  Mark Steedman,et al.  Temporal Ontology and Temporal Reference , 1988, CL.

[34]  B. T. S. Atkins,et al.  Predictable Meaning Shift: Some Linguistic Properties of Lexical Implication Rules , 1991, SIGLEX Workshop.

[35]  Rebecca J. Passonneau,et al.  A Computational Model of the Semantics of Tense and Aspect , 1988, CL.

[36]  Ray Jackendoff,et al.  Multiple subcategorization and the ϑ-criterion: The case of climb , 1985 .

[37]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  The syntax of event structure , 1991, Cognition.

[38]  Igor Mel'čnk,et al.  Semantic Description of Lexical Units in an Explanatory Combinatorial Dictionary: Basic Principles and Heuristic Criteria1 , 1988 .

[39]  James Pustejovsky,et al.  The Generative Lexicon , 1995, CL.

[40]  B. T. S. Atkins,et al.  Anatomy of a Verb Entry: from Linguistic Theory to Lexicographic Practice , 1988 .

[41]  Ewan Klein,et al.  Categories, polymorphism and unification , 1987 .

[42]  Patrick J. Hayes,et al.  The Naive Physics Manifesto , 1990, The Philosophy of Artificial Intelligence.

[43]  Dan Flickinger,et al.  Structure-Sharing in Lexical Representation , 1985, ACL.

[44]  Ted Briscoe,et al.  Lexical Operations in a Unification-based Framework , 1991, SIGLEX Workshop.