Embodiment & Compositionality Two fundamental, but unreconciled, aspects of human language:...
-
Upload
brian-daniel -
Category
Documents
-
view
232 -
download
0
Transcript of Embodiment & Compositionality Two fundamental, but unreconciled, aspects of human language:...
Embodiment & Compositionality
• Two fundamental, but unreconciled, aspects of human language: embodiment and compositionality
• Embodiment – the realization that scientific understanding of mind and language entails detailed modeling of the human brain
• Compositionality - only people can express and understand an essentially unbounded range of messages
Compositionality
Anything that deserves to be called a language must contain meaningful expressions built up from other meaningful expressions” [4]
strong compositionality states that the meaning of a expression is totally determined by its form and is independent of context
“In its strict version, this claim is clearly wrong” [5].
Truth-conditional SemanticsThe existence of these forms of context-dependence
would thus appear to spell the doom for truth-conditional semantics, understood as the project of assigning properties to syntactic items (partly by finding principles for determining properties of complex syntactic items on the basis of their parts) such that we await only the specification of something like an index to know what the truth-conditions of a given utterance of a given assertive sentence would be.- Jason Bridges
Wittgenstein’s Philosophical Investigations: A Critical Guide, A. M. Ahmed (ed.), Cambridge University Press, 2009.
Simulation Semantics
• Lectures 1 and 3 => embodied
• But what about public language, text?
• Skeletal shared meaning => schemas
• Language Community (LC)– Shares grammar, schemas, analysis rules
Compositionality
• Put the parts together to create the meaning of the whole.
• Questions:– what is the nature of the parts?– How and why do they combine with one another?– What meaning is associated with this composition?
Short NTL answers
• Parts = constructions, schemas
• Combination = binding, unification
• Meaning of the whole :– Public (LC) ~ Semantic Specification = SemSpec– Private ~ Enactment/Simulation of SemSpec
ECG Lattices
• Schemas – Image, X-schemas, Frames
• Constructions – Lexical, Grammatical
• Language Communities
• Situations ~ Mental Spaces
• Maps ~ Metaphor, etc.
LecturesI. Overview2. Simulation Semantics3. ECG and Best-fit Analysis4. Compositionality5. Simulation, Counterfactuals, and Inference
Constructions
Simulation
Utterance Discourse & Situational Context
Semantic Specification:
image schemas, bindings, action schemas
Analyzer:
incremental,competition-based,
psychologically plausibleA
Conceptual Structure
• Embodied
• Schematic
• (Partially) language-independent
Conceptual Composition• Highly interconnected
• Primitives
• Conceptual composition
• Metaphor
Image Schemasparameters of spatial cognitionaction schemas - controllergoals, force-dynamics (causation)parameters of parts & boundaries Time
Social Worldyoung/ mature/ oldauthority, approval, helpvalue , exchange, obligationtheory of mind, perception and intention, Communication speaker/ hearer, direct/ indirecttrue/ falsequestion, command, etc.
Grammaticalized conceptsperson, gender, age, agent, speakerpossession, mass/count, reflexives, Primal scenes/ event types – transitive, tense, aspect General Logicconnectives, numberssimilarity, inference, uncertaintypart/ whole, scales, magnitudebinding, variables, indefinites, generalization Mental Operations Learning, matching, bindingmental spaces, mappingssimulation, displacement
Some Conceptual Primitives
Conceptual CompositionEllen Dodge Thesis
1. Conjunction – horse with stripes2. Modification – camel without hump3. Abstraction - vehicle4. Mapping a. Metonymy – London thinks b. Metaphor – causes are forces5. Blending – apple bus6. Relational – horses eat grass
First example
• He bit the apple.
schema MotorControl subcase of Process roles Actor ↔ Protagonist
Effector Effort
Routine constraints Actor ← animate
Schemas
schema ForceApplication subcase of MotorControl evokes ForceTransfer as FT roles
Actor ↔ FT.Supplier ↔ Protagonist Acted Upon↔ FT.Recipient Effector
Routine Effort ↔ FT.Force.amount
schema ForceTransfer evokes Conact as C roles
Supplier ↔ C.entity1 Recipient ↔ C.entity2 Force
schema MotorControl subcase of Process roles Actor ↔ Protagonist
Effector Effort
Routine constraints Actor ← animate
schema Contact subcase of SpatialRelation roles Entity1: entity Entity2: entity
Schema Lattice
MotorControl
Motion
SPG
EffectorMotion
EffectorMotionPath
ForceTransfer
ForceApplication
ContactSpatiallyDirectedAction
CauseEffect
Contact
Agentive Impact
SelfMotion
SelfMotionPath
MotionPath
Construction BITE1 subcase of Verb form: bite meaning: ForceApplication constraints: Effector ← teeth Routine ← bite // close mouth
Verb Constructions
schema ForceApplication subcase of MotorControl evokes ForceTransfer as FT roles Actor ↔ FT.Supplier ↔ Protagonist Acted Upon ↔ FT.Recipient Effector Routine Effort ↔ FT.Force.amount
Verb Constructions
schema ForceApplication subcase of MotorControl
schema Agentive Impact subcase of ForceApplication
cxn BITE meaning: ForceApplication
schema MotorControl
cxn GRASP meaning: ForceApplicationcxn PUSH meaning: ForceApplicationcxn SLAP meaning: AgentiveImpactcxn KICK meaning: AgentiveImpactcxn HIT meaning: AgentiveImpact
Argument Structure Construction
construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
FA ↔ Vm
Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm
Argument Structure Construction
construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
FA ↔ Vm
Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm
CauseEffect schema
schema CauseEffect subcase of ForceApplication; Process roles
Causer ↔ Actor Affected ↔ ActedUpon ↔ Process.Protagonist Instrument ↔ Effector
MotorControl
Motion
SPG
EffectorMotion
EffectorMotionPath
ForceTransfer
ForceApplication
ContactSpatiallyDirectedAction
CauseEffect
Contact
SelfMotion
SelfMotionPath
MotionPath
Agentive Impact
Process
Schema Lattice
Argument Structure Construction
construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes: EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
FA ↔ Vm
Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm
Important points
Compositionality does not require that each component contain different information.
Shared semantic structure is not viewed as an undesirable redundancy
Argument Structure Construction
construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm
Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm
schema EventDescriptor
roles
EventType: Process
ProfiledProcess: Process
ProfiledParticipant: Entity
ProfiledState(s): State
SpatialSetting
TemporalSetting
Event Descriptor schema
Preconditions, resources, fine control structure are important aspects of events
Argument Structure Construction
Construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm
Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm
construction NPVP1 constituents: Subj: NP VP : VPform Constraints Subj f before VPf
meaning: EventDescriptor ProfiledParticipant ↔ Subjm
Bindings with other cxnsconstruction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V ; NP form: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
Affected ↔ NPm
Construction NPVP1 constituents: Subj: NP VP : VPform constraints Subj f before VPf
meaning: EventDescriptor ProfiledParticipant ↔ Subjm
Bindings with other cxnsconstruction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V ; NP form: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
Affected ↔ NPm
schema EventDescriptor roles EventType ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant ProfiledState(s) SpatialSetting TemporalSetting
Bindings with other cxns
schema EventDescriptor roles EventType ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant ProfiledState(s) SpatialSetting TemporalSetting
construction NPVP1 constituents: Subj: NP VP : VPform Constraints Subj f before VPf
meaning: EventDescriptor ProfiledParticipant ↔ Subjm
construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V ; NP form: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
Affected ↔ NPm
Unification
CauseEffect causer affected
ForceApplication actor actedupon
EventDescriptor EventType ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
BITE
TransitiveAction2
HE
NP1
NPVP1
THE APPLE
NP2ReferentDescriptor
ReferentDescriptor
Meaning Constructions
Unification
CauseEffect causer affected
ForceApplication actor actedupon
EventDescriptor EventType ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
BITE
TransitiveAction2
HE
NP1
NPVP1
THE APPLE
NP2ReferentDescriptor
ReferentDescriptor resolved referent
Meaning Constructions
Unification
CauseEffect causer affected
ForceApplication actor actedupon
EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
BITE
TransitiveAction2 Verb
HE
NP1
NPVP1
THE APPLE
NP2ReferentDescriptor
ReferentDescriptor resolved referent
Meaning Constructions
Unification
CauseEffect causer affected
ForceApplication actor actedupon
EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
BITE
TransitiveAction2
HE
NP1
NPVP1 subj
THE APPLE
NP2ReferentDescriptor
ReferentDescriptor
Meaning Constructions
Unification
CauseEffect causer affected
ForceApplication actor actedupon
EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
BITE
TransitiveAction2 NP
HE
NP1
NPVP1
THE APPLE
NP2ReferentDescriptor
ReferentDescriptor
Meaning Constructions
Semantic SpecificationHe bit the apple
EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
CauseEffect causer affected
ForceApplication actor actedupon routine bite effector teeth
RD55category
Person
Apple
RD27category
Argument Structure ConstructionHe was bitten (by a toddler)
construction PassiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : PassiveVerb (PP: agentivePP) form constraints: VF before PPF
meaning: CauseEffectAction evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Affected ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm
Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Causer ↔ PP.NPm
Semantic SpecificationHe was bitten (by a toddler)
EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
CauseEffect causer affected
ForceApplication actor actedupon routine bite effector teeth
RD48category
Person
Person
RD27category
Variations on a theme
• He shattered the window
• The window was shattered
• The window shattered
Construction SHATTER1 subcase of Verb form: shatter meaning: StateChange constraints: Initial :: Undergoer.state ← whole Final :: Undergoer.state ← shards
Verb Construction -- shatter
schema StateChange subcase of Process roles Undergoer ↔ Protagonist
Argument Structure ConstructionHe shattered the window
construction ActiveTransitiveAction3 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes: EventDescriptor as ED; StateChange as SC constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
SC ↔ Vm
Affected ↔ SC.Undergoer Affected ↔ NPm
Semantic SpecificationHe shattered the window
EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
CauseEffect causer affected
StateChange Undergoer state “wholeness”
RD189category
Person
Window
RD27category
Argument Structure ConstructionThe window was shattered
construction PassiveTransitiveAction3 subcase of VP constituents: V : PassiveVerb (PP: agentivePP) form constraints: VF before NPF
meaning: CauseEffect evokes: EventDescriptor as ED; StateChange as SC constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Affected ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
SC ↔ Vm
Affected ↔ SC.Undergoer Causer ↔ PP.NPm
Semantic SpecificationThe window was shattered
EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
CauseEffect causer affected
StateChange Undergoer state “wholeness”
RD175category
Window
Argument Structure ConstructionThe window shattered
construction ActiveIntransitiveAction1 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb form meaning: Process evokes: EventDescriptor as ED; StateChange as SC constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Protagonist ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant
SC ↔ Vm
Protagonist ↔ SC.Undergoer
Semantic SpecificationThe window shattered
EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant
Process protagonist
StateChange Undergoer state “wholeness”
RD177categoryWindow
Summary
• Small set of constructions and schemas
• Composed in different ways
• Unification produces specification of simulation
• Sentence understanding is simulation
• Different meanings => different simulations
NTL Compositionality
• Language understanding is simulation• Simulation activates conceptual structures• Conceptual Compositionality is basic• Grammatical Compositionality is inherently
constructional, not surface• SemSpec ~ Semantic Specification
– Skeletal Meaning– Captures shared understanding of an LC– Site of Compositionality
Argument Structure ConstructionHis white teeth bit into the apple
construction ActiveEffectorMotionPath3 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb PP: Spatial-PP form constraints:
VF before PPF
meaning: EffectorMotionPath evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints:
{Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Effector ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm
Actor ↔ FA.Actor // INIEffector ↔ FA.EffectorTarget ↔ FA.ActedUpon SPG ↔ PPm
Target ↔ PPm .Prep.LM
Simulation: His white teeth bit into the apple
Action
Source
Path Goal
Effector Motion
Protagonist = Actor
Protagonist = Effector
Non-agentive biting
• He landed on his feet, hitting the narrow pavement outside the yard with such jarring impact that his teeth bit into the edge of his tongue. [BNC]
• The studs bit into Trent's hand. [BNC]
• His chest burned savagely as the ropes bit into his skin. [BNC]
MotorControl
Motion
SPG
EffectorMotion
EffectorMotionPath
ForceTransfer
ForceApplication
ContactSpatiallyDirectedAction
CauseEffect
Contact
SelfMotion
SelfMotionPath
MotionPath
Agentive Impact
Process
Schema Network
Simulation: His teeth bit his tongue
Source
Path Goal
MotionProtagonist = Mover
Key assumptions of NTL
• Language understanding is simulation
• Simulation involves activation of neural structures
Constructions
Construction Grammar• Constructions are form-meaning pairings • A given utterance instantiates many different constructions
Embodied Construction Grammar• Construction meaning is represented using schemas• Meaning is embodied
LecturesI. Overview2. Simulation Semantics3. ECG and Best-fit Analysis4. Compositionality5. Simulation, Counterfactuals, and Inference
Constructions
Simulation
Utterance Discourse & Situational Context
Semantic Specification:
image schemas, bindings, action schemas
Analyzer:
incremental,competition-based,
psychologically plausible
Constructions
Simulation
Utterance Discourse & Situational Context
Semantic Specification:
image schemas, bindings, action schemas
Analyzer:
incremental,competition-based,
psychologically plausible
Image Schemasparameters of spatial cognitionaction schemas - controllergoals, force-dynamics (causation)parameters of parts & boundaries Time
Social Worldyoung/ mature/ oldauthority, approval, helpvalue , exchange, obligationtheory of mind, perception and intention, Communication speaker/ hearer, direct/ indirecttrue/ falsequestion, command, etc.
Grammaticalized conceptsperson, gender, age, agent, speakerpossession, mass/count, reflexives, Primal scenes/ event types – transitive, tense, aspect General Logicconnectives, numberssimilarity, inference, uncertaintypart/ whole, scales, magnitudebinding, variables, indefinites, generalization Mental Operations Learning, matching, bindingmental spaces, mappingssimulation, displacement
Some Conceptual Primitives
Conceptual Composition
1. Conjunction – horse with stripes2. Modification – camel without hump3. Abstraction - vehicle4. Mapping a. Metonymy – London thinks b. Metaphor – causes are forces5. Blending – trash can basketball
Putting the parts together
• Bindings
• Unification
“Pre-existing” structure
Cxn
schema
schema schema
schema
Cxn
Cxn
schema
Unification
Cxn
schema
schema schema
schema
Cxn
Cxn
schema
Process
Simulation - He bit the apple
CauseEffect
ForceApplication
Protagonist = Causer ↔ Actor
Protagonist = Affected ↔ ActedUpon
Process
Simulation - He bit the apple
CauseEffect
ForceApplication
Protagonist = Causer ↔ Actor
Protagonist = Affected ↔ ActedUpon
MotorControl
Motion
SPG
EffectorMotion
EffectorMotionPath
ForceTransfer
ForceApplication
ContactSpatiallyDirectedAction
CauseEffect
Contact
SelfMotion
SelfMotionPath
MotionPath
Agentive Impact
Process
Schema Lattice
Prototypes and extensions?
CauseMotion Path:
• He threw the ball across the room
• He kicked the ball over the table
• He sneezed the napkin off the table
• [He coughed the water out of his lungs]
Key points
• In prototypical verb-argument structure construction combinations, verb meaning is very similar to argument structure meaning.
• Verbs whose meaning partially overlaps that of a given argument structure constructions may also co-occur with that argument structure construction
• These less prototypical combinations may motivate extensions to the central argument structure constructions
Some more variations on a theme
• He bit the apple
• He bit into the apple
• His white teeth bit into the apple.
Argument Structure ConstructionHe bit into the apple
construction ActiveEffectorMotionPath2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb PP: Spatial-PP form constraints:
VF before PPF
meaning: EffectorMotionPath evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints:
{Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Actor ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm
Actor ↔ FA.ActorEffector ↔ FA.Effector // INITarget ↔ FA.ActedUpon SPG ↔ PPm
Target ↔ PPm .Prep.LM
Schema
schema EffectorMotionPath subcase of EffectorMotion subcase of SPG // or evokes SPG roles Actor ↔ MotorControl.protagonist
Effector ↔ SPG.Tr ↔ M.Mover ↔ Motion.protagonistTarget ↔ SPG.Lm
MotorControl
Motion
SPG
EffectorMotion
EffectorMotionPath
ForceTransfer
ForceApplication
ContactSpatiallyDirectedAction
CauseEffect
Contact
SelfMotion
SelfMotionPath
MotionPath
Agentive Impact
Process
Schema Lattice
Argument Structure Construction He bit into the apple
construction ActiveEffectorMotionPath2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb PP: Spatial-PP form constraints:
VF before PPF
meaning: EffectorMotionPath evokes: EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints:
{Selfm ↔ ED.EventType}
{Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess}
Actor ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm
Actor ↔ FA.ActorEffector ↔ FA.Effector // INITarget ↔ FA.ActedUpon SPG ↔ PPm
Target ↔ PPm .Prep.LM
EffectorMotionPath
Action
Source
Path Goal
Effector Motion
Protagonist = Actor
Protagonist = Effector
The ‘subject’ NP (She) is bound to these roles:
• profiledParticipant of EventDescriptor• causer of CauseMotionAction• actor of ForceApplication• supplier of ForceTransfer• [actor of ForcefulMotionAction]• [actor of EffectorMotionAlongAPath]• protagonist of CauseMotionAction and
ForceApplication• [protagonist of ForcefulMotionAction and
EffectorMotionAlongAPath]
The ‘direct object’ NP (his hand) is bound to:
•affected of CauseMotionAction•protagonist2 of CauseMotionAction•actedUpon of ForceApplication•recipient of ForceTransfer•mover of MotionAlongAPath•trajector of SPG•[actedUpon < -- > Target of ForcefulMotionAction]•[target of EffectorMotionAlongAPath] (landmark of a different SPG schema)
construction CauseMotion4 subcase of CauseMotion1 constructional constituents v : Verb np: NP
pp: Path-PP form constraints v.f before np.f np.f before pp.f meaning: CauseMotionAction evokes EventDescriptor as ed evokes ForcefulMotionAction as fma constraints ignore self.m <--> v.m self.m.process1 <--> v.m.process1 v.m <--> fma self.m<--> ed.eventType v.m<--> ed.profiledPorcess self.m.affected <--> np.m self.m.causer <--> ed.profiledParticipant self.m.process2.spg <--> pp.m.spg