Choices for Lexical Semantics

The modern computational lexical semantics reached a point in its development when it has become useful to compare the goals and methods of the various approaches to it. This article proposes several choices in terms of which these goals and methods can be discussed. It is argued that the central qu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Computational intelligence 2001-02, Vol.17 (1), p.157-177
Main Authors: Nirenburg, Sergei, Raskin, Victor
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
architectural methodology
behavior-based
fuzzy logic
motivation
reasoning
topological representation
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-ff13ac80f08d8a0c10a1be6727afd383b9d4f8e1e784c2033fbbf52ce45c454d3
cites
container_end_page 177
container_issue 1
container_start_page 157
container_title Computational intelligence
container_volume 17
creator Nirenburg, Sergei
Raskin, Victor
description The modern computational lexical semantics reached a point in its development when it has become useful to compare the goals and methods of the various approaches to it. This article proposes several choices in terms of which these goals and methods can be discussed. It is argued that the central questions include the use of lexical rules for generating word senses; the role of syntax and formal semantics in the specification of lexical meaning; the use of a world model, or ontology, as the organizing principle for lexical‐semantic descriptions; the relation between static and dynamic resources; the commitment to descriptive coverage; the tradeoff between generalization and idiosyncracy; and finally, the adherence to the “supply side” (method‐oriented) or “demand side” (task‐oriented) ideology of research. The discussion is inspired by, but not limited to, the comparison between the generative lexicon approach and the ontologic semantic approach to lexical semantics.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/0824-7935.00137
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_26650630</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>26650630</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-ff13ac80f08d8a0c10a1be6727afd383b9d4f8e1e784c2033fbbf52ce45c454d3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1PAjEQhhujiYiePZlw8rYw3X5yNBtBAllM1OCt6XbbWF1YbCHAv5d1DVfnMod5nkneF6FbDH18nAHIlCZiSFgfABNxhjqYcpFITuEcdU7XS3QV4yc0DJUddJd91N7Y2HN16M3s3htd9V7sUq823sRrdOF0Fe3N3-6it9Hja_aUzObjSfYwSwxhRCTOYaKNBAeylBoMBo0Ly0UqtCuJJMWwpE5abIWkJgVCXFE4lhpLmaGMlqSL7tu_61B_b23cqKWPxlaVXtl6G1XKOQNO4AgOWtCEOsZgnVoHv9ThoDCopgbVBFVNUPVbw9GgrbHzlT38h6tsPslbLWk1Hzd2f9J0-FJcEMHUIh-r6fQ5Z6P3XC3ID2HcbJI</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>26650630</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Choices for Lexical Semantics</title><source>Business Source Ultimate【Trial: -2024/12/31】【Remote access available】</source><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Nirenburg, Sergei ; Raskin, Victor</creator><creatorcontrib>Nirenburg, Sergei ; Raskin, Victor</creatorcontrib><description>The modern computational lexical semantics reached a point in its development when it has become useful to compare the goals and methods of the various approaches to it. This article proposes several choices in terms of which these goals and methods can be discussed. It is argued that the central questions include the use of lexical rules for generating word senses; the role of syntax and formal semantics in the specification of lexical meaning; the use of a world model, or ontology, as the organizing principle for lexical‐semantic descriptions; the relation between static and dynamic resources; the commitment to descriptive coverage; the tradeoff between generalization and idiosyncracy; and finally, the adherence to the “supply side” (method‐oriented) or “demand side” (task‐oriented) ideology of research. The discussion is inspired by, but not limited to, the comparison between the generative lexicon approach and the ontologic semantic approach to lexical semantics.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0824-7935</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1467-8640</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/0824-7935.00137</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Boston, USA and Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Inc</publisher><subject>architectural methodology ; behavior-based ; fuzzy logic ; motivation ; reasoning ; topological representation</subject><ispartof>Computational intelligence, 2001-02, Vol.17 (1), p.157-177</ispartof><rights>Blackwell Publishers, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-ff13ac80f08d8a0c10a1be6727afd383b9d4f8e1e784c2033fbbf52ce45c454d3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nirenburg, Sergei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raskin, Victor</creatorcontrib><title>Choices for Lexical Semantics</title><title>Computational intelligence</title><description>The modern computational lexical semantics reached a point in its development when it has become useful to compare the goals and methods of the various approaches to it. This article proposes several choices in terms of which these goals and methods can be discussed. It is argued that the central questions include the use of lexical rules for generating word senses; the role of syntax and formal semantics in the specification of lexical meaning; the use of a world model, or ontology, as the organizing principle for lexical‐semantic descriptions; the relation between static and dynamic resources; the commitment to descriptive coverage; the tradeoff between generalization and idiosyncracy; and finally, the adherence to the “supply side” (method‐oriented) or “demand side” (task‐oriented) ideology of research. The discussion is inspired by, but not limited to, the comparison between the generative lexicon approach and the ontologic semantic approach to lexical semantics.</description><subject>architectural methodology</subject><subject>behavior-based</subject><subject>fuzzy logic</subject><subject>motivation</subject><subject>reasoning</subject><subject>topological representation</subject><issn>0824-7935</issn><issn>1467-8640</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2001</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkE1PAjEQhhujiYiePZlw8rYw3X5yNBtBAllM1OCt6XbbWF1YbCHAv5d1DVfnMod5nkneF6FbDH18nAHIlCZiSFgfABNxhjqYcpFITuEcdU7XS3QV4yc0DJUddJd91N7Y2HN16M3s3htd9V7sUq823sRrdOF0Fe3N3-6it9Hja_aUzObjSfYwSwxhRCTOYaKNBAeylBoMBo0Ly0UqtCuJJMWwpE5abIWkJgVCXFE4lhpLmaGMlqSL7tu_61B_b23cqKWPxlaVXtl6G1XKOQNO4AgOWtCEOsZgnVoHv9ThoDCopgbVBFVNUPVbw9GgrbHzlT38h6tsPslbLWk1Hzd2f9J0-FJcEMHUIh-r6fQ5Z6P3XC3ID2HcbJI</recordid><startdate>200102</startdate><enddate>200102</enddate><creator>Nirenburg, Sergei</creator><creator>Raskin, Victor</creator><general>Blackwell Publishers Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200102</creationdate><title>Choices for Lexical Semantics</title><author>Nirenburg, Sergei ; Raskin, Victor</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-ff13ac80f08d8a0c10a1be6727afd383b9d4f8e1e784c2033fbbf52ce45c454d3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2001</creationdate><topic>architectural methodology</topic><topic>behavior-based</topic><topic>fuzzy logic</topic><topic>motivation</topic><topic>reasoning</topic><topic>topological representation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nirenburg, Sergei</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Raskin, Victor</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts – Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><jtitle>Computational intelligence</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nirenburg, Sergei</au><au>Raskin, Victor</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Choices for Lexical Semantics</atitle><jtitle>Computational intelligence</jtitle><date>2001-02</date><risdate>2001</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>157</spage><epage>177</epage><pages>157-177</pages><issn>0824-7935</issn><eissn>1467-8640</eissn><abstract>The modern computational lexical semantics reached a point in its development when it has become useful to compare the goals and methods of the various approaches to it. This article proposes several choices in terms of which these goals and methods can be discussed. It is argued that the central questions include the use of lexical rules for generating word senses; the role of syntax and formal semantics in the specification of lexical meaning; the use of a world model, or ontology, as the organizing principle for lexical‐semantic descriptions; the relation between static and dynamic resources; the commitment to descriptive coverage; the tradeoff between generalization and idiosyncracy; and finally, the adherence to the “supply side” (method‐oriented) or “demand side” (task‐oriented) ideology of research. The discussion is inspired by, but not limited to, the comparison between the generative lexicon approach and the ontologic semantic approach to lexical semantics.</abstract><cop>Boston, USA and Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishers Inc</pub><doi>10.1111/0824-7935.00137</doi><tpages>21</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0824-7935
ispartof Computational intelligence, 2001-02, Vol.17 (1), p.157-177
issn 0824-7935
1467-8640
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_26650630
source Business Source Ultimate【Trial: -2024/12/31】【Remote access available】; Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects architectural methodology
behavior-based
fuzzy logic
motivation
reasoning
topological representation
title Choices for Lexical Semantics
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T05%3A38%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Choices%20for%20Lexical%20Semantics&rft.jtitle=Computational%20intelligence&rft.au=Nirenburg,%20Sergei&rft.date=2001-02&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=157&rft.epage=177&rft.pages=157-177&rft.issn=0824-7935&rft.eissn=1467-8640&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/0824-7935.00137&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E26650630%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3537-ff13ac80f08d8a0c10a1be6727afd383b9d4f8e1e784c2033fbbf52ce45c454d3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=26650630&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true