FrameNet’s Using relation as a source of concept-based paraphrases
Characterizing paraphrases formally has proven to be a challenging task. Hasegawa et al. (2011)
pointed out the usefulness of FrameNet for
paraphrase research, focusing on paraphrases which are backed by underlying classical linguistic relationships such as synonymy or
voice alternations. This article proposes that other frame-to-frame-relations, notably Using
, can serve as a source for
concept-based paraphrases – that is, paraphrases that are backed by common sense knowledge, as in he called him a
– he praised him for being a hero
. While the predicates in these sentences are not synonymous,
we would argue that the sentences are paraphrases – albeit of a kind that involves world knowledge about the relationship between
different event classes. In this article, we propose a shallow taxonomy for the frame pairs which
, that is motivated by their ability to form concept-based paraphrases. Second, we analyze the subclass of Using
instances which supports concept-based paraphrasing, and provide a formalization of some prominent types of side
conditions that are necessary to produce felicitous paraphrases.
- 2.Frame-to-frame relations in FrameNet
- 3.Analyzing and classifying instances of Using
- 3.1Class 1: EVENTUALITY uses OBJECT
- 3.2Class 2: OBJECT uses OBJECT
- 3.3Class 3: EVENTUALITY uses EVENTUALITY
- 3.3.1Class 3a: minimal paraphrases
- 3.3.2Class 3b: non-minimal paraphrases
- 3.4Class 4: other (non-EVENTUALITY, non-OBJECT)
- 3.5Frequencies of classes
- 4.Formalizing side conditions for minimal concept-driven paraphrases
- 4.1Side condition type 1: presence of sentiment
- 4.2Side condition type 2: granularity of semantic roles
- 4.3Side condition type 3: presence of semantic roles
Abelson, R. P.
) Psychological status of the script concept
. American psychologist
, 36(7), 715.
Aharon, R. B., Szpektor, I., & Dagan, I.
) Generating entailment rules from FrameNet
. In Proceedings of ACL
(pp. 241–246). Uppsala, Sweden.
) On time, tense, and aspect: an essay in English metaphysics
. In P. Cole
(Ed.), Radical Pragmatics
(pp. 63–81). New York: Academic Press.
Baker, C. F., Fillmore, C. J., & Cronin, B.
) The structure of the Framenet database
. International Journal of Lexicography
, 16(3), 281–296.
) In Other Words
. London: Routledge.
Botschen, T., Mousselly Sergieh, H., & Gurevych, I.
) Prediction of frame-to-frame relations in the FrameNet hierarchy with frame embeddings
. In Proceedings of the 2nd workshop on representation learning
(pp. 146–156). Association for Computational Linguistics.
) Lexical-Functional Syntax
. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Castillo, J. J.
) A WordNet-based semantic approach to textual entailment and cross-lingual textual entailment
. International Journal of Machine Learning and Cybernetics
, 2(3), 177–189.
Chang, N., Narayanan, S., & Petruck, M. R.
) Putting frames in perspective
. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics
(pp. 148–154). Taipei, Taiwan. International Committee on Computational Linguistics.
Chow, I. C., & Webster, J. J.
) Integration of linguistic resources for verb classification: FrameNet frame, WordNet verb, and suggested upper merged ontology
. In Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing
(pp. 1–11). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.
Coyne, R., & Rambow, O.
) Lexpar: A freely available English paraphrase lexicon automatically extracted from FrameNet
. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Semantic Computing
, (pp. 53–58). Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
Dolan, W. B. & Brockett, C.
) Automatically constructing a corpus of sentential paraphrases
. In Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Paraphrasing
(pp. 9–16). Association for Computational Linguistics.
Ellsworth, M., & Janin, A.
) Mutaphrase: paraphrasing with FrameNet
. In Proceedings of the ACL-PASCAL Workshop on Textual Entailment and Paraphrasing
(pp. 143–150). Prague: Association for Computational Linguistics.
) WordNet An Electronic Lexical Database
. Cambridge, MA/London: The MIT Press.
Fillmore, C. J.
) Frames and the semantics of understanding
. Quaderni di Semantica
, IV(2), 222–254.
Fillmore, C. J., Baker, C. F., & Sato, H.
) FrameNet as a “net”
. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation
. European Language Resource Association.
Fillmore, C. J., Johnson, C. R., & Petruck, M. R. L.
) Background to FrameNet
. International Journal of Lexicography
, 16(3), 235–250.
Fodor, J. A.
) Projection and paraphrase in semantics
, 211, 73–77.
Gawron, J. -M.
) Frame semantics
. In Handbook of Semantics
, Volume 11 (pp. 664–687). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Hasegawa, Y., Lee-Goldman, R., Kong, A., & Kimi, A.
Jackendoff, R. S.
) Semantic Structures
. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Katz, J. J., & Fodor, J. A.
) The structure of a semantic theory
, 391, 170–210.
Kay, P., & Fillmore, C. J.
) Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: the What’s X doing Y? construction
, 751, 1–33.
) English verb classes and alternations: a preliminary investigation
. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
) Bridging text and knowledge with frames
. In Proceedings of Frame Semantics in NLP: A Workshop in Honor of Chuck Fillmore
(pp. 22–25). Association for Computational Linguistics.
) Inference in text understanding
. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence
(pp. 561–565). Seattle, WA: American Association of Artificial Intelligence.
) Cross-lingual parallelism and translational equivalence: the case of FrameNet frames
. In P. Nugues
& R. Johansson
(Eds.), Building Frame Semantics resources for Scandinavian and Baltic languages
] (pp. 39–46). Department of Computer Science, Lund University.
Petruck, M. R., & de Melo, G.
) Precedes: a semantic relation in FrameNet
. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Language Resources for Public Security Applications
(pp. 45–49). Istanbul, Turkey: European Language Resource Association.
Petruck, M. R., Fillmore, C. J., Baker, C. F., Ellsworth, M., & Ruppenhofer, J.
) Reframing FrameNet data
. In Proceedings of The 11th EURALEX International Congress
(pp. 405–416). Université de Bretagne Sud, Lorient, France.
Reiter, N., Hellwig, O., Frank, A., Gossmann, I., Larios, B. M., Rodrigues, J., & Zeller, B.
) Adapting NLP tools and frame-semantic resources for the semantic analysis of ritual descriptions
. In C. Sporleder
, A. van den Bosch
, & K. Zervanou
(Eds.), Language technology for cultural heritage: selected papers from the LaTeCH workshop series
(pp. 171–193). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.
Ruppenhofer, J., Ellsworth, M., Petruck, M. R. L., Johnson, C. R., & Scheffczyk, J.
) FrameNet II: extended theory and practice
. Revision of Nov 1, 2016.
Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R.
) Scripts, goals, plans, and understanding
. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Scheffczyk, J., Pease, A., & Ellsworth, M.
) Linking FrameNet to the SUMO ontology
. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems
(pp. 289–300). Baltimore, MD.
) On paraphrase relations
. In Wortstellung in Bedeutung: Akten des 12. Linguistischen Kolloquiums
(pp. 225–235), Pavia, Italy. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.
Cited by 2 other publications
Abdelzaher, Esra’ M. & Bacem A. Essam
. The frame system as an interlingual representation for parallel texts
. Intercultural Pragmatics
pp. 657 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.