Cover not available
Part of
Evaluation in Context
Edited by Geoff Thompson † and Laura Alba-Juez
[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series 242] 2014
► pp. 117–136

The implementation of the axiological parameter in a verbal subontology for natural language processing

FunGramKB (FGKB), on the one hand, is a multipurpose lexico-conceptual knowledge base for natural language processing (NLP) systems and comprises three major interrelated knowledge level modules: lexical, grammatical and conceptual. At the conceptual level the core ontology is presented as a hierarchical catalogue of the concepts that a person has in mind and a repository where semantic knowledge is stored. Axiology, on the other hand, is widely considered to be a primitive, basic or key parameter, among others, in the architecture of meaning construction at different levels. This parameter can be traced back to the three subontologies into which FunGramKB can be split: #ENTITY for nouns, # EVENT for verbs, and #QUALITY for adjectives. Even if most of the specific research conducted so far has been devoted to the category #QUALITY, there is no reason to consider verbs as less of an axiological category. Consequently, in this chapter we shall concentrate on the subontology # EVENT and explore how the main categories and features of the axiological parameter (good-bad or positive-negative [+/−]) are represented and encoded within FunGramKB ontology, particularly inside semantic properties such as basic or terminal concepts and meaning postulates, or syntactic operators, such as modality or polarity.
Published online: 4 February 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.242.06fel
References (46)
References
Aarts, Jan and Calbert, Joseph. 1979: Metaphor and Non-Metaphor: The Semantics of Adjective-Noun Combinations. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alba Juez, Laura and Martínez Caro, Elena. 2011. “No wonder you’re in trouble! The evaluative function as part of the hidden pragmatic meaning of certain expressions in English and Spanish”. Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature. 65 (2): 188–207. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cortés-de-los-Ríos, María Enriqueta. 2001. Nuevas Perspectivas Lingüísticas en la Publicidad Impresa Anglosajona. Almería: University of Almería.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1967. “Lexicalische solidaritäten.” Poetica, 1: 293–303.Google Scholar
1968. “Les structures lexématiques.” In Probleme der Semantik. Beiheft 1 (Neue Folge) Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Literatur, W. Thomas Elbert (ed.), 13–16. Wiesbaden.Google Scholar
1977. Principios de Semántica Estructural. Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
Dik, Simon C. 1978. Stepwise Lexical Decomposition. Lisse: The Peter De Ridder Press.Google Scholar
1989. The Theory of Functional Grammar. Part I: The Structure of the Clause. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Escalier, Marie Christine and Fournier, Corinne. 1997. “Towards a notional representation of meaning in the Meaning-Text Model: The case of the French SI”. In Recent Trends in Meaning Text Theory, Leo Wanner (ed.), 25–55. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela and >Mairal-Usón, Ricardo. 1999. Constructing a Lexicon of English Verbs. Berlin / New York: Mouton de Gruyter DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Felices-Lago, Ángel. 1991. El Componente Axiológico en el Lenguaje. Su Configuración en los Adjetivos que Expresan Emociones y Conducta en la Lengua Inglesa. Ph. D. Dissertation. Granada: University of Granada.Google Scholar
1997a. “The integration of the axiological classeme in an adjectival lexicon based on Functional-Lexematic principles𠄽. In A Fund of Ideas: Recent Developments in Functional Grammar, Christopher S. Butler, John H. Connolly, Richard A. Gatward and Roel M. Vismans (eds), 95–112. Amsterdam: IFOTT.Google Scholar
Felices Lago, Ángel. 1997b. “La compilación de un diccionario de términos valorativos desde la perspectiva Lexemático-Funcional”. In Toward a Functional Lexicology/ Hacia una lexicología funcional, Gerd Wotjak (ed.), 159–184. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Felices-Lago Ángel. 2003. “Reformulation of the domain-level semantic pattern of axiological evaluation in the lexicon of English verbs”. Hermes 30: 179–179.Google Scholar
Hare, Richard M. 1952. The Language of Morals. London: Clarendon Press. (Oxford University Press, 1964).Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan and Thompson, Geoff. (eds) 1999. Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Katz, Jerrold J. 1964. “Semantic theory and the meaning of 'good`”. The Journal of Philosophy IXI, 23: 739–766. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krzeszowski, Tomasz P. 1990. “The axiological aspect of idealized cognitive models.” In Meaning and Lexicography, Jerzy Tomaszczyk and Barbara Lewandowska (eds), 135–165. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1993. “The axiological parameter in preconceptual image schemata.” In Conceptualizations and Mental Processing in Language, Richard A. Geiger and Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (eds), 307–330. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997. Angels and Devils in Hell. Elements of Axiology in Semantics. Warsaw: Energeia.Google Scholar
Leech, Geoffrey. 1975. Semantics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Lyons, John. 1977. Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mairal-Usón, Ricardo and Periñán-Pascual, Carlos. 2009. “The anatomy of the lexicon component within the framework of a conceptual knowledge base”. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 22: 217–217.Google Scholar
2010. “Role and Reference Grammar and ontological engineering”. In Los Caminos de la Lengua. Estudios en Homenaje a Enrique Alcaraz Varó, J.L. Cifuentes, A. Gómez, A. Lillo, J. Mateo and F. Yus (eds), 649–665. Alicante: University of Alicante.Google Scholar
Mairal-Usón, Ricardo and Ruiz de Mendoza-Ibáñez, Francisco José. 2008. “New challenges for lexical representation within the Lexical-Constructional Model”. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 57: 137–137.Google Scholar
2009. “Levels of description and explanation in meaning construction”. In Deconstructing Constructions, Christopher Butler and Javier Martín-Arista (eds), 153–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, James and White, Peter. 2005. The Language of Evaluation. Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martín-Mingorance, Leocadio. 1987. “Classematics in a Functional-Lexematic grammar of English”. Actas del X Congreso de AEDEAN, AEDEAN, Zaragoza, 377–388.Google Scholar
1990. “Functional Grammar and Lexematics in lexicography”. In Meaning and Lexicography, Jerzy Tomaszczyk and Barbara Lewandowska (eds), 227–253. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995. “Lexical logic and structural semantics. Methodological underpinnings in the structuring of a lexical database for Natural Language Processing.” In Panorama der Lexicalischen Semantik, Ulrich Hoinkes (ed.), 461–474. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
1998. El Modelo Lexemático-Funcional. Amalia Marín Rubiales (ed.). Granada: University of Granada.Google Scholar
Nida, Eugene. 1975. Exploring Semantic Structures. Munich: W. Fink.Google Scholar
Nute, Donald. 2003. “Defeasible logic: theory, implementation, and applications,” In Oskar Bartenstein, Ulrich Geske, Markus Hannebauer, Osamu Yoshie (eds.), Web Knowledge Management and Decision Support: Proceedings of INAP 2001, 14th International Conference on Applications of Prolog (Revised Papers), Berlin: Springer Verlag, 151–169. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Osgood, Charles, Suci, George and Tannenbaum, Percy. 1957. The Measurement of Meaning. Chicago: Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Pauwels, Paul and Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie. 1993. “Value judgment in the metaphorization of linguistic action.” In Conceptualizations and Mental Processing in Language, Richard A. Geiger and Brygida Rudzka-Ostyn (eds), 331–367. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1995. “Body parts in linguistic action: Underlying schemata and value judgments.” In By Word of Mouth: Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Perspective, Louis Goossens, Paul Pauwels, Brygida Rudszka-Ostyn, Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen and Johan Vanparys (eds), 35–70. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, Carlos and Arcas-Túnez, Francisco. 2004. “Meaning postulates in a lexico-conceptual knowledge base”. 15th International Workshop on Databases and Expert Systems Applications, IEEE, Los Alamitos (California), 38–42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005. “Microconceptual-Knowledge Spreading in FunGramKB”. Proceedings of the 9th IASTED International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing, ACTA Press: Anaheim-Calgary-Zurich, 239–244.Google Scholar
2007. “Cognitive modules of an NLP knowledge base for language understanding”. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 39: 197–197.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, Carlos and Mairal Usón, Ricardo. 2009. “Bringing Role and Reference Grammar to natural language understanding”. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 43: 265–265.Google Scholar
2010. “La gramática de COREL: un lenguaje de representación conceptual”. Onomázein 21 (1): 11–45.Google Scholar
Pottier, Bernard. 1964. “Vers une sémantique moderne”. Travaux de linguistique et de littérature 2 (1):101–137.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco José and Mairal Usón, Ricardo. 2008. “Levels of description and constraining factors in meaning construction: an introduction to the Lexical Constructional Model.” Folia Linguistica 42 (2): 355–400.Google Scholar
Simon-Vandenbergen, Anne-Marie. 1995. “Assessing linguistic behaviour: a study of value judgements”. In By Word of Mouth: Metaphor, Metonymy and Linguistic Action in a Cognitive Perspective, Louis Goossens, Paul Pauwels, Brygida Rudszka-Ostyn, Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen and Johan Vanparys (eds), 71–123. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stati, Sorin. 1979. La Sémantique des Adjectifs: Essai d'Analyse Componentielle Appliqué aux Langues Romanes. Paris: Jean Favard.Google Scholar
Velardi, Paula, Pazienza, Maria Teresa and Fasolo, Michela. 1991. “How to encode semantic knowledge: a method for meaning representation and computer-aided acquisition”. Computational Linguistics 17 (2): 153–170.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Benenowska, Iwona & Anna Bączkowska
2023. “Nobody from the Kossaks family has mounted a horse with a knife and fork so far” – Axiolinguistic analysis of evaluative culinary language in letters written by Maria Pawlikowska-Jasnorzewska. Forum Filologiczne Ateneum :1(11)2023 ► pp. 113 ff. DOI logo
Su, Hang & Susan Hunston
2019. Language patterns and attitude revisited. Functions of Language 26:3 ► pp. 343 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 july 2024. 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.