Global organization of the Wordnet lexicon

The lexicon consists of a set of word meanings and their semantic relationships. A systematic representation of the English lexicon based in psycholinguistic considerations has been put together in the database Wordnet in a long-term collaborative effort. We present here a quantitative study of the graph structure of Wordnet to understand the global organization of the lexicon. Semantic links follow power-law, scale-invariant behaviors typical of self-organizing networks. Polysemy (the ambiguity of an individual word) is one of the links in the semantic network, relating the different meanings of a common word. Polysemous links have a profound impact in the organization of the semantic graph, conforming it as a small world network, with clusters of high traffic (hubs) representing abstract concepts such as line, head, or circle. Our results show that: (i) Wordnet has global properties common to many self-organized systems, and (ii) polysemy organizes the semantic graph in a compact and categorical representation, in a way that may explain the ubiquity of polysemy across languages.

[1]  Alan M. Gibbons.  Graph theory , 2003 .

[2]  G. Āllport.  The Psycho-Biology of Language. , 1936 .

[3]  Nick Dean,et al.  The Mind within the Net: Manfred Spitzer: MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 351pp., ISBN: 0-262-1904-6 , 2000, Neurocomputing.

[4]  Albert-László Barabási,et al.  Error and attack tolerance of complex networks , 2000, Nature.

[5]  Allan Collins,et al.  A spreading-activation theory of semantic processing , 1975 .

[6]  J. H. Neely.  Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention. , 1977 .

[7]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. , 1989, Psychological review.

[8]  Gesine Reinert,et al.  Small worlds , 2001, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[9]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[10]  Annie Zaenen,et al.  Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Approaches , 2000 .

[11]  Marvin Minsky,et al.  Semantic Information Processing , 1968 .

[12]  M R Quillian,et al.  Word concepts: a theory and simulation of some basic semantic capabilities. , 1967, Behavioral science.

[13]  Ramon Ferrer i Cancho,et al.  The small world of human language , 2001, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[14]  James A. McHugh,et al.  Algorithmic Graph Theory , 1986 .

[15]  K. Forster,et al.  REPETITION PRIMING AND FREQUENCY ATTENUATION IN LEXICAL ACCESS , 1984 .

[16]  Tang,et al.  Critical exponents and scaling relations for self-organized critical phenomena. , 1988, Physical review letters.

[17]  S. Dehaene,et al.  Imaging unconscious semantic priming , 1998, Nature.

[18]  G. Zipf,et al.  The Psycho-Biology of Language , 1936 .

[19]  W. Quine.  Main trends in recent philosophy: two dogmas of empiricism. , 1951 .

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

[21]  R. Albert,et al.  The large-scale organization of metabolic networks , 2000, Nature.

[22]  Curt Burgess,et al.  Activation and selection processes in the recognition of ambiguous words. , 1985 .

[23]  H. R. Quillian.  In semantic information processing , 1968 .

[24]  R. Schvaneveldt,et al.  Facilitation in recognizing pairs of words: evidence of a dependence between retrieval operations. , 1971, Journal of experimental psychology.