The FunGramKB approach to constructional meaningThe FunGramKB approach to constructional meaning...

The FunGramKB approach to constructional meaning

Carlos Periñán Pascual

Universidad Politécnica de Valencia

1

Table of contents

1. RRG, LCM & FunGramKB

2. The Lexicon and the Grammaticon

3. ARTEMIS: building the CLS

4. Conclusions and future research2

RRG, LCM & FunGramKB

3

• Functional

model

• Monostratal

model

• Typologically-

adequate model

Projectionism

Constructivism

Lexicon

Grammaticon

4

The Lexicon

5

Basic: headword, index, and language.

Morphosyntax: graphical variant, abbreviation, phrase

constituents, category, number, gender, countability, degree,

adjectival position, verb paradigm and constraints, and

pronominalization.

Core grammar: Aktionsart, lexical template and constructions.

Miscellaneous: dialect, style, domain, example and

translation.

FunGramKB Lexicon

6

FunGramKB Lexicon

Attribute Value

Aktionsart Causative accomplishment

Lexical

Template

Variables x, y

Thematic-

frame

mapping

x = Theme, y = Referent

Idiosyncratic

features MR2

Constructions

Inchoative Construction

Middle Construction

Transitive Resultative Construction

Intransitive Resultative Construction

Kernel-2 Construction

freeze

9

The Grammaticon

10

FunGramKB Grammaticon

11


12


He fried the egg in the pan.Goldberg’s CxG

13


An accurate definition???

There is no precise definition of (i) the notion of a

productive unit in CxG, (ii) the way productive units

are acquired step by step from incoming input

utterances, and (iii) the combination operations that

combine constructions into (an open-ended number

of) new utterances. (Bod, 2009, p. 130)

Constructions, constructions, constructions everywhere!!!

14


What is a construction in FunGramKB? construct vs. construction

CONSTRUCT

pairing of form and meaning

CONSTRUCTION

construct whose meaning is derived synergistically

2 + 3 = 6 15


CONSTRUCTS

CONSTRUCTIONALNON-CONSTRUCTIONAL

CONSTRUCTIONCONSTRUCT

lexical meaning constructional meaning

16


He fried the egg in the pan.

He fried the egg in the pan.

Goldberg’s CxG

FunGramKB

17


18


19


construc

Intransitive Resultative Construction

CLS

COREL scheme

Aktionsart ACC

Variables Type

+(e1: <EVENT> (f1: (e2: +BECOME_00

(x1: y)Theme (x2: w)Attribute))Result)

y

Type w

Role result

Phrase ADJP | PP

Syntax nucleus

Prep into

20


hybrid approach to constructional meaning

21

ARTEMIS: building the CLS

22

ARTEMIS

Argumental constructions in:

(i) the syntactic analysis

(ii) the logical structure

23

ARTEMIS

Argumental constructions in:

(i) the syntactic analysis

(ii) the conceptual logical structure

24

ARTEMIS

The juice froze black in the refrigerator.

<IF DEC <TNS PAST < be-in' (refrigerator, [[do' (juice, [freeze' (juice)])] CAUSE [BECOME black' (juice)])>>>

<IF DECL <Tense PAST <CONSTR-L1 RESI <CONSTR-L1 INCH <AKT ACC [+FREEZE_00 (+JUICE_00-Referent, +BLACK_00)] (+REFRIGERATOR_00-Location) >>>>>

• Ontological concepts

• Thematic roles

• Constructional operator

• Aktionsart operator25

ARTEMIS

the RRG layered structure of the clause

26

ARTEMIS

SENTENCE

CLAUSE

PERIPHERYCORE

ARG ARGNUCARG

standard LSC

SENTENCE

CLAUSE

L1-CONSTRUCTION PERIPHERY

CORE

…

L1-CONSTRUCTION ARG

L1-CONSTRUCTION ARG

NUCARG

enhanced LSC

(unrefined tree)

27

ARTEMIS

SENTENCE

CLAUSE

PERIPHERYCORE

ARG ARGNUCARG

standard LSC enhanced LSC

(refined tree)

SENTENCE

CLAUSE

PERIPHERY

CORE

ARG ARGNUCARG

L1-CONSTRUCTION

L1-CONSTRUCTION

L1-CONSTRUCTION

28

ARTEMIS

SENTENCE

CLAUSE

PERIPHERYCORE

ARG ARGNUCARG

standard LSC enhanced LSC

(simplified tree)

29

ARTEMIS

Type y

Concept +JUICE_00

Role Referent

Macrorole U

Tense past

AKT ACC

Template RESI

Weight 3

Template INCH

Weight 2

Num sg

Concept +FREEZE_00 Concept +BLACK_00

30

ARTEMIS

The juice froze black.

(S[]

(CL[Tense='past']

(CONSTR-L1[Template='RESI', Weight=3]

(CONSTR-L1[Template='INCH', Weight=2]

(CORE[Akt='ACC']

(ARG[Type='y', Concept='+JUICE_00', Role='Referent', Macrorole='U']

(NP[]

(det[] the)

(n[Num='sg'] juice)))

(NUC[]

(PRED[Concept='+FREEZE_00']

(v[] froze)))))

(NUC-S[]

(PRED-S[Concept='+BLACK_00']

(adj[] black))))))

31

ARTEMIS

Automatically Representing TExt Meaning via an

Interlingua-based System

32

Conclusions

33

• Integrating argumental constructions into the RRG model

• Narrowing the gap between the projectionist and constructivist approaches

34

Future research

35

• complex syntactic phenomena

• wider range of operators

• co-occurrence of constructions

• prepositions in the periphery

36

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Periñán-Pascual, Carlos (in preparation) “Towards a model of constructional

meaning for natural language understanding”. In Brian Nolan & Elke Diedrichsen

(eds.) Linking Constructions into Functional Linguistics: The Role of

Constructions in RRG Grammars. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

Periñán-Pascual, Carlos & Arcas-Túnez, Francisco (in preparation) “The

implementation of the FunGramKB CLS Constructor”. In Periñán-Pascual,

Carlos & Nolan, Brian (eds.) Language Processing and Grammars: The Role of

Functionally Oriented Computational Models. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John

Benjamins.

37

Thank you!

E-mail: [email protected]

The FunGramKB approach to constructional meaningThe FunGramKB approach to constructional meaning...

Documents

Transcript of The FunGramKB approach to constructional meaningThe FunGramKB approach to constructional meaning...