zbMATH — the first resource for mathematics

Deverbal semantics and the Montagovian generative lexicon \(\Lambda \mathsf {Ty}_n\). (English) Zbl 1305.03029
Summary: We propose a lexical account of event nouns, in particular of deverbal nominalisations, whose meaning is related to the event expressed by their base verb. The literature on nominalisations often assumes that the semantics of the base verb completely defines the structure of action nominals. We argue that the information in the base verb is not sufficient to completely determine the semantics of action nominals. We exhibit some data from different languages, especially from Romance language, which show that nominalisations focus on some aspects of the verb semantics. The selected aspects, however, seem to be idiosyncratic and do not automatically result from the internal structure of the verb nor from its interaction with the morphological suffix. We therefore propose a partially lexicalist approach view of deverbal nouns. It is made precise and computable by using the Montagovian generative lexicon, a type theoretical framework introduced by C. Bassac, B. Mery and C. Retoré [“Towards a type-theoretical account of lexical semantics“, J. Logic Lang. Inf. 19, No. 2, 229–245 (2010; doi:10.1007/s10849-009-9113-x)]. This extension of Montague semantics with a richer type system easily incorporates lexical phenomena like the semantics of action nominals in particular deverbals, including their polysemy and (in)felicitous copredications.
03B65 Logic of natural languages
91F20 Linguistics
Full Text: DOI
[1] Alexiadou, A; Iordachioaia, G; Soare, E, Number/aspect interactions in the syntax of nominalizations: A distributed morphology approach, Journal of Linguistics, 46, 537-574, (2010)
[2] Asher, N. (1993). Abstract objetcs in discourse. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publisher.
[3] Asher, N. (2011). Lexical meaning in context—a web of words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[4] Asher, N., & Denis, P. (2005). Lexical ambiguity as type disjunction. Third international Workshop on Generative Approaches to the Lexicon.
[5] Bassac, C., Mery, B., & Retoré, C. (2010). Towards a type-theoretical account of lexical semantics. Journal of Logic Language and Information 19(2):229-245. http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00408308/.
[6] Beard, R. (1995). Lexeme-morpheme based morphology. New York: State University New York Press.
[7] Brandtner R. (2011). Deverbal Nominals in Context: Meaning and Variation Co-predication. PhD thesis, Universität Stuttgart, sinSpec 8 (2011) ISSN: 1867-3082.
[8] Chomsky, N. (1970). Remarks on nominalization. In R. A. Jacob & P. S. Rosenbaum (Eds.), Readings in English transformational grammar (pp. 184-221) .Waltham, MA : Ginn.
[9] Comrie, B. (1976). The syntax of action nominals: A cross-language study. Lingua 40.
[10] Cruse, A. (2004). Meaning in language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[11] de Paiva, V., Rademaker, A., de Melo, G. (2012). Openwordnet-pt: An open brazilian wordnet for reasoning. In M. Kay, C. Boitet (Eds.) COLING 2012.
[12] Girard, J. Y. (1971). Une extension de l’interprétation de Gödel à l’analyse et son application: l’élimination des coupures dans l’analyse et la théorie des types. In J.E. Fenstad (Ed.) Proceedings of the Second Scandinavian Logic Symposium, North Holland, Amsterdam, Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 63,pp. 63-92.
[13] Girard, J. Y. (2011). The blind spot—lectures on logic. European Mathematical Society. · Zbl 1238.03045
[14] Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge: MIT Press.
[15] Gurevich, O; Crouch, R; King, TH; Paiva, V, Deverbal nouns in knowledge representation, Journal of Logic and Computation, 18, 385-404, (2008)
[16] Hamm, F., & Kamp, H. (2009). Ontology and inference: The case of German ung-nominals. SinSpeC 6, 1-67, ISSN: 1867-3082.
[17] Heyvaert, L, On the constructional semantics of gerundive nominalizations, Folia Linguistica, 49, 39-82, (2008)
[18] Jackendoff, R, Morphological and semantic regularities in the lexicon, Language, 51, 639-671, (1975)
[19] Jacquey, E. (2006). Un cas de polysémie logique : Modélisation de noms d’action en français ambigus entre processus et artefact. Traitement Automatique Des Langues 47(1), 137-166, http://www.atala.org/Un-cas-de-polysemie-logique.
[20] Ježek, E; Melloni, C, Nominals, polysemy, and co-predication, Journal of Cognitive Science, 22, 1-31, (2011)
[21] Lafourcade, M. (2011). Lexique et analyse sémantique de textes - structures, acquisitions, calculs, et jeux de mots. Mémoire d’habilitation à diriger des recherches: Université de Montpellier II.
[22] Lafourcade, M., & Joubert, A. (2010). Computing trees of named word usages from a crowdsourced lexical network. In IMCSIT, Vol Computational linguistics—applications (CLA’10) (pp. 439-446).
[23] Lefeuvre, A., Moot, R., Retoré, C., Sandillon-Rezer, N. F. (2012). Traitement automatique sur corpus de récits de voyages pyrénéens : Une analyse syntaxique, sémantique et temporelle. In Traitement Automatique Du Langage Naturel, TALN’2012, vol. 2, pp. 43-56. http://aclweb.org/anthology/F/F12/.
[24] Luo, Z. (2011). Contextual analysis of word meanings in type-theoretical semantics. In S. Pogodalla & J. P. Prost (Eds.), LACL (Vol. 6736, pp. 159-174). LNCS Springer. · Zbl 1333.03098
[25] Melloni, C. (2007). Polysemy in word formation: The case of deverbal nominals. PhD thesis, Università degli studi di Verona.
[26] Mery, B., & Retoré, C. (2013). Advances in the logical representation of lexical semantics. In V. de Paiva & L. Moss (Eds.), Natural language and computer science (LICS 2013 Satellite Workshop). New-Orleans.
[27] Mery, B., Moot, R., & Retoré, C. (2013). Plurals: Individuals and sets in a richly typed semantics. In Logic and engineering of natural language semantics 10 (LENLS 10), LNCS.
[28] Moot, R. (2010). Wide-coverage French syntax and semantics using Grail. In Proceedings of Traitement Automatique Des Langues Naturelles (TALN), Montreal.
[29] Moot, R., & Retoré, C. (2012). The logic of categorial grammars: A deductive account of natural language syntax and semantics, vol. 6850.LNCS Springer, http://www.springer.com/computer/theoretical+computer+science/book/978-3-642-31554-1. · Zbl 1261.03001
[30] Myiamoto, T. (1999). The light verb construction in Japanese: The role of the verbal noun. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[31] Oliveira, DCM, Nominalizações de evento/processo e nominalizações de resultado: diferenças estruturais, Estudos Linguísticos, 14, 491-502, (2006)
[32] Pazelskaya, A. (2007). When eventual semantics meets nominal form: Plural of russian event nouns. In Workshop on Plurality, UMR7023 Structures Formelles du Langage, CNRS: Paris.
[33] Picallo, MC, Nominals and nominalizations in Catalan, Probus, 3, 279-316, (1991)
[34] Pierrel, J. M. (2006). Le trésor de la langue française informatisé : Un dictionnaire de référence accessible à tous. Revue de l’association des membres de l’Ordre des palmes académiques. 17, 25-28. http://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00398661.
[35] Prochazkova, V. (2006). Argument structure of czech event nominals. Master’s thesis, CASTL, Universitetet i Tromsø.
[36] Retoré, C. (2012). Variable types for meaning assembly: A logical syntax for generic noun phrases introduced by “most”. Recherches Linguistiques De Vincennes 41, 83-102. http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00677312.
[37] Retoré, C. (2013). Sémantique des déterminants dans un cadre richement typé. In Morin E, Estève Y (Eds.) Traitement automatique du langage naturel, TALN RECITAL 2013, ACL anthology, vol 1. pp. 367-380. http://www.taln2013.org/actes/.
[38] Roodenburg, J. (2006). The role of number within nominal arguments: The case of french pluralized event nominalizations. work presented at the 36th linguistic symposium on romance language.
[39] Sleeman, P., & Brito, A. M. (2007). Nominalization, event, aspect and argument structure: A syntactic approach. In M. Duguine, S. Huidobro, & N. Madariaga (Eds.), Argument structure and syntactic relations: A cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
[40] Van de Cruys, T. (2010). Mining for meaning. the extraction of lexico-semantic knowledge from text. PhD thesis, University of Groningen, The Netherlands.
[41] Hout, A, Deverbal nominalization, object versus event denoting nominals: implications for argument and event structure, Linguistics in the Netherlands, 8, 71-80, (1991)
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.