Cover not available
Part of
Language Processing and Grammars: The role of functionally oriented computational models
Edited by Brian Nolan and Carlos Periñán-Pascual
[Studies in Language Companion Series 150] 2014
► pp. 165–196

The implementation of the CLS constructor in ARTEMIS

| Universidad Politécnica de Valencia
| Universidad Católica San Antonio
Most natural language processing researchers highlight the benefits of interlingua-based systems in multilingual settings. In this scenario, Role and Reference Grammar can contribute to build a cross-language semantic representation of the input text in terms of its logical structure. Our goal is to describe the various stages in the development of one of the first computational systems which employs a lexico-conceptual knowledge base to generate the logical structure of sentences. Our approach actually involved some changes in the standard functional model in order to convert the logical structure into an ontology-grounded representation of sentential meaning. In fact, we demonstrate that constructional schemata should become the cornerstone of the syntax-semantics interface in this computerized model of Role and Reference Grammar.
Published online: 1 April 2014
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.150.07per
References (42)
References
Allen, James F. 1983. Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Communications of the ACM 26(11): 832–843. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allen, James F. & Ferguson, George. 1994. Actions and events in interval temporal logic. Journal of Logic and Computation 4(5): 531–579. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baldridge, Jason, Morton, Thomas & Bierner, Gann. 2001. The OpenNLP Toolkit. <[URL]> (21 September 2012).
Bird, Steven, Klein, Ewan & Loper, Edward. 2009. Natural Language Processing with Python . Sebastopol CA: O’Reilly.Google Scholar
Cooper, Richard P. 2002. Modelling High-Level Cognitive Processes . Mahwah NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2001. Radical Construction Grammar . Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dowty, David. 1979. Word Meaning and Montague Grammar . Dordrecht: Reidel. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Earley, Jay. 1970. An efficient context-free parsing algorithm. Communications of the ACM 13(2): 94–102. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Frazier, Lyn. 1979. On Comprehending Sentences: Syntactic Parsing Strategies. PhD dissertation, University of Connecticut.
Frazier, Lyn & Fodor, Janet Dean. 1978. The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition 6: 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure . Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Guest, Elizabeth. 2009. Parsing using the Role and Reference Grammar paradigm. <[URL]> (21 September 2012).
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1990. Semantic Structures . Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jursic, Matjaz, Mozetic, Igor, Erjavec, Tomaz & Lavrac, Nada. 2010. LemmaGen: Multilingual lemmatisation with induced ripple-down rules. Journal of Universal Computer Science 16(9): 1190–1214.Google Scholar
Mairal-Usón, Ricardo & Periñán-Pascual, Carlos. 2009. The anatomy of the lexicon component within the framework of a conceptual knowledge base. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 22: 217–244.Google Scholar
Mairal-Usón, Ricardo & Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco José. 2008. Internal and external constraints in meaning construction: The lexicon grammar continuum. In Estudios de Filología Inglesa: Homenaje a la Dra. Asunción Alba Pelayo , Laura Alba Juez & María Teresa Gibert Maceda (eds), 219–237. Madrid: Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia.Google Scholar
. 2009. Levels of description and explanation in meaning construction. In Deconstructing Constructions [Studies in Laguage Compagnion Series 107], Christopher Butler & Javier Martín Arista (eds), 153–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaelis, Laura A. 2003. Word meaning, sentence meaning, and syntactic meaning. In Cognitive Approaches to Lexical Semantics , Hubert Cuykens, René Dirven & John R. Taylor (eds), 93–122. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nirenburg, Sergei & Levin, Lori. 1992. Syntax-driven and ontology-driven lexical semantics. In Lexical Semantics and Knowledge Representation: First SIGLEX Workshop , James Pustejovsky & Sabine Bergler (eds), 5–20. Berlin: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pelletier, Francis Jeffry. 2012. Holism and compositionality. In The Oxford Handbook of Compositionality , Markus Werning, Wolfram Hinzen & Edouard Machery (eds), 149–174. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, Carlos. 2013. Towards a model of constructional meaning for natural language understanding. In Linking Constructions into Functional Linguistics: The Role of Constructions in RRG Grammars [Studies in Language Companion Series 145], Brian Nolan & Elke Diedrichsen (eds), 205–230. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, Carlos & Arcas-Túnez, Francisco. 2004. Meaning postulates in a lexico-conceptual knowledge base. In Proceedings of the 15th International Workshop on Databases and Expert Systems Applications , 38–42. Los Alamitos CA: IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
. 2005. Microconceptual-knowledge spreading in FunGramKB. In Proceedings of the 9th IASTED International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing , 239–244. Anaheim CA: ACTA Press.Google Scholar
. 2007. Cognitive modules of an NLP knowledge base for language understanding. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 39: 197–204.Google Scholar
. 2008. A cognitive approach to qualities for NLP. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 41: 137–144.Google Scholar
. 2010a. Ontological commitments in FunGramKB. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 44: 27–34.Google Scholar
. 2010b. The architecture of FunGramKB. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation , 2667–2674. Malta: European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, Carlos & Mairal-Usón, Ricardo. 2009. Bringing Role and Reference Grammar to natural language understanding. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 43: 265–273.Google Scholar
. 2010. La gramática de COREL: Un lenguaje de representación conceptual. Onomázein 21: 11–45.Google Scholar
. 2011. The COHERENT methodology in FunGramKB. Onomázein 24: 13–33.Google Scholar
Pickering, Martin J. & Van Gompel, Roger P.G. 2006. Syntactic parsing. In Handbook of Psycholinguistics , Matthew J. Traxler & Morton A. Gernsbacher (eds), 455–503. Amsterdam: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 1991. The generative lexicon. Computational Linguistics 17(4): 409–441.Google Scholar
Rappaport Hovav, Malka & Levin, Beth. 1998. Building verb meanings. In The Projection of Arguments: Lexical and Compositional Factors , Miriam Butt & Wilhelm Geuder (eds), 97–134. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, Francisco José & 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
Rumbaugh, James, Jacobson, Ivar & Booch, Grady. 1999. The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual . Reading MA: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Sag, Ivan A. 2012. Sign-based Construction Grammar: An informal synopsis. In Sign-based Construction Grammar , Hans C. Boas & Ivan Sag (eds.), 69–202. Stanford CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Salem, Yasser, Hensman, Arnold & Nolan, Brian. 2008. Towards Arabic to English machine translation. ITB Journal 17: 20–31.Google Scholar
Uszkoreit, Hans & Zaenen, Annie. 1995. Grammar formalisms. In Survey of the State of the Art in Human Language Technology , Giovanni Varile & Antonio Zampolli (eds), 100–101. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Jr., Robert D. 2005. Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface . Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. Role and Reference Grammar as a framework for linguistic analysis. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis , Bernd Heine & Heiko Narrog (eds), 703–738. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Jr., Robert D. & LaPolla, Randy J. 1997. Syntax, Structure, Meaning and Function . Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in Philosophy . Ithaca CA: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Cited by (5)

Cited by five other publications

Felices Lago, Ángel M. & Pedro Ureña Gómez-Moreno
2020. Conceptualización de entidades terminológicas en una subontología de derecho penal: análisis del concepto superordinado +DRUG_00 en FunGramKb. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 15:1 ► pp. 15 ff. DOI logo
Cortés-Rodríguez, Francisco J. & Carolina Rodríguez-Juárez
2019. The syntactic parsing of ASD-STE100adverbials in ARTEMIS. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 14:1 ► pp. 59 ff. DOI logo
Martín Díaz, María Auxiliadora
2019. Parsing adverbial complex sentences in ASD-STE100 within ARTEMIS. Complutense Journal of English Studies 27 ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Cortés-Rodríguez, Francisco José
2016. Towards the computational implementation of Role and Reference Grammar: Rules for the syntactic parsing of RRG Phrasal constituents. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación 65 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
Mairal-Usón, Ricardo
2015. Constructional meaning representation within a knowledge engineering framework. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 13:1 ► pp. 1 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.