By Harry Bunt, Reinhard Muskens
This publication offers an in-depth view of the present concerns, difficulties and methods within the computation of that means as expressed in language. aimed toward linguists, desktop scientists, and logicians with an curiosity within the computation of which means, this publication makes a speciality of major issues in contemporary learn in computational semantics. the 1st subject is the definition and use of underspecified semantic representations, i.e. formal buildings that signify a part of the which means of a linguistic item whereas leaving different components unspecified. the second one subject mentioned is semantic annotation. Annotated corpora became an fundamental source either for linguists and for builders of language and speech know-how, in particular while utilized in mix with laptop studying tools. The annotation in corpora has basically marginally addressed semantic details, although, due to the fact that semantic annotation methodologies are nonetheless of their infancy. This booklet discusses the advance and alertness of such methodologies.
Read or Download Computing Meaning: Volume 3 PDF
Best semantics books
The shaping of complicated meanings relies on punctual and relational coding and inferencing. Coding is seen as a vector which could run both from expression to content material or from options to (linguistic) types to mark autonomous conceptual kin. whereas coding will depend on systematic assets inner to language, inferencing primarily will depend on a layered approach of self sufficient shared conceptual constructions, which come with either cognitive versions and consistency standards grounded in a common ontology.
This publication offers with the translation of adverbially quantified sentences containing sure DPs and unfastened relations (FR) Thereby, it concentrates at the origins of Quantificational Variability results (QVEs), i. e. readings in accordance with which the respective quantificational adverb turns out to quantify over the participants denoted via the respective DP/FR.
Cautious writers and audio system agree that clichés are commonly to be kept away from. even though, the vast majority of us proceed to exploit them. Why do they persist in our language? In it has been acknowledged sooner than, lexicographer Orin Hargraves examines the abnormal thought and tool of the cliché. He is helping readers comprehend why definite words grew to become clichés and why they need to be refrained from -- or why they nonetheless have lifestyles left in them.
The final objective of this ebook is to increase a Gricean theoretical framework of traditional implicature in which chinese language pragmatic markers will be accommodated. It has associated targets. first of all it units out to improve a thought of traditional implicature. traditional implicature is itself a hugely arguable time period, understood very otherwise by means of a variety of manufacturers of latest pragmatic conception, and is a pivotal idea within the debates among the Gricean and Neo-Gricean theorists at the one hand and proponents of Relevance idea at the different.
- Toward a Cognitive Semantics: Volume II: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring
- "Der Hofmeister" von J. M. R. Lenz: Ein Versuch einer Neuinterpretation
- Interdisciplinary Works in Logic, Epistemology, Psychology and Linguistics: Dialogue, Rationality, and Formalism
- The semantic tradition from Kant to Carnap: To the Vienna station
Additional resources for Computing Meaning: Volume 3
Journal of Memory and Language 29, 181–200. Garrod, S. , D. Freudenthal, and E. Boyle: 1994, ‘The role of diﬀerent types of anaphor in the on-line resolution of sentences in a discourse’. Journal of Memory and Language 32, 1–30. Garrod, S. C. and A. J. Sanford: 1985, ‘On the real-time character of interpretation during reading’. Language and Cognitive Processes 1, 43–61. Gernsbacher, M. A. and D. Hargreaves: 1988, ‘Accessing Sentence Participants: The Advantage of First Mention’. Journal of Memory and Language 27, 699–717.
Garrod, S. , D. Freudenthal, and E. Boyle: 1994, ‘The role of diﬀerent types of anaphor in the on-line resolution of sentences in a discourse’. Journal of Memory and Language 32, 1–30. Garrod, S. C. and A. J. Sanford: 1985, ‘On the real-time character of interpretation during reading’. Language and Cognitive Processes 1, 43–61. Gernsbacher, M. A. and D. Hargreaves: 1988, ‘Accessing Sentence Participants: The Advantage of First Mention’. Journal of Memory and Language 27, 699–717. : 1970, A Theory of Human Action.
And P. Sturt: 2002, ‘Depth of processing in language comprehension: not noticing the evidence’. Trends in Cognitive Science 6, 382–386. : 1988, ‘Pronominal reference to events and actions: Evidence from naturally-occurring data’. LINC LAB 100, University of Pennsylvania, Dept. of Computer and Information Science, Philadelphia. Sidner, C. : 1979, ‘Towards a computational theory of deﬁnite anaphora comprehension in English discourse’. D. thesis, MIT. Stevenson, R. , R. A. Crawley, and D. Kleinman: 1994, ‘Thematic Roles, Focus, and the Representation of Events’.
Computing Meaning: Volume 3 by Harry Bunt, Reinhard Muskens