File size: 71,302 Bytes
6fa4bc9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 | {
"paper_id": "P87-1024",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T09:13:26.170991Z"
},
"title": "On the Acquisition of Lexical Entries: The Perceptual Origin of Thematic Relations",
"authors": [
{
"first": "James",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pustejovsky",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {
"laboratory": "",
"institution": "Brandeis University Waltham",
"location": {
"postCode": "02254",
"region": "MA"
}
},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "This paper describes a computational model of concept acquisition for natural language. We develop a theory of lexical semantics, the Eztended Aspect Calculus, which together with a ~maxkedness theory\" for thematic relations, constrains what a possible word meaning can be. This is based on the supposition that predicates from the perceptual domain axe the primitives for more abstract relations. We then describe an implementation of this model, TULLY, which mirrors the stages of lexical acquisition for children.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "P87-1024",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "This paper describes a computational model of concept acquisition for natural language. We develop a theory of lexical semantics, the Eztended Aspect Calculus, which together with a ~maxkedness theory\" for thematic relations, constrains what a possible word meaning can be. This is based on the supposition that predicates from the perceptual domain axe the primitives for more abstract relations. We then describe an implementation of this model, TULLY, which mirrors the stages of lexical acquisition for children.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "In this paper we describe a computational model of concept acquisition for natural language making use of positive-only data, modelled on a theory of lexical semantics. This theory, the Eztende~t Aspect Calculus acts together with a maxkedness theory for thematic roles to constrain what a possible word type is, just as a grammar defines what a well-formed tree structure is in syntax. We argue that linguistic specific knowledge and learning principles are needed for concept acquisition from positive evidence alone: Furthermore, this model posits a close interaction between the predicates of visual perception and the early semantic interpretation of thematic roles as used in linguistic expressions. In fact, we claim that these relations act as constraints to the development of predicate hierachies in language acquisition. Finally, we describe TULLY, an implementation of this model in ZETALXSP and discuss its design in the context of machine learning research.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "There has been little work on the acquisition of thematic relation and case roles, due to the absence of any consensus on their formal properties. In this research we begin to address what a theory of thematic relations might look like, using learnabUity theory as a metric for evaluating the model. We claim that there is an important relationship between visual or imagistic perception and the development of thematic relations in linguistic usage for a child. This has been argued recently by Jackendoff (1983, 1985) and was an assumption in the pioneering work of Miller and Johnson-Laird (1976) . Here we argue that the conceptual abstraction of thematic information does not develop arbitrarily but along a given, predictable path; namely, a developmental path that starts with tangible perceptual predicates (e.g. spatial, causative) to later form the more abstract mental and cognitive predicates. In this view thematic relations are actually sets of thematic properties, related by a partial ordering. This effectively establishes a maxkedness theory for thematic roles that a learning system must adhere to in the acquisition of lexical entries for a larlguage.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 507,
"end": 513,
"text": "(1983,",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 514,
"end": 519,
"text": "1985)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 568,
"end": 599,
"text": "Miller and Johnson-Laird (1976)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We will discuss two computational methods for concept development in natural language:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(1) F~ature Relaxation of particular features of the arguments to a verb. This is performed by a constraint propagation method. (2) Thematic Decoupling of semantically incorporated information from the verb. When these two learning techniques are combined with the model of lexical semantics adopted here, the stages of development for verb acquisition are similar to those acknowledged for child language acquisition.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Work in machine learning has shown the usefulness to an inductive concept-learning system of inducing \"bias\" in the learning process (cf. [Mitchell 1977 [Mitchell , 1978 , [Michalski 1983] ). An even more promising development is the move to base the bias on domain-intensive models, as seen in [Mitchell et al. 1985] , [Utgoff 1985] , and [Winston et al. 1983 I. This is an important direction for those concerned with natural language acquisition, as it converges with a long-held belief of many psychologists and linguists that domain-specific information is necessary for learning (cf. [Slobin 1982] , [Pinker 1984 ], {Bowerman 1974], [Chomsky 1980] ). Indeed, Berwick (1984) moves in exactly this direction. Berwick describes a model for the acquisition of syntactic knowledge based on a restricted X-syntactic parser, a modification of the Marcus parser ( [Marcus 1980] ). The domain knowledge specified to the system in this case is a parametric parser and learning system that adapts to a particular linguistic environment, given only positive data. This is just the sort of biasing necessary to account for data on syntactic acquisition.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 138,
"end": 152,
"text": "[Mitchell 1977",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 153,
"end": 169,
"text": "[Mitchell , 1978",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
},
{
"start": 172,
"end": 188,
"text": "[Michalski 1983]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 295,
"end": 317,
"text": "[Mitchell et al. 1985]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 320,
"end": 333,
"text": "[Utgoff 1985]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 590,
"end": 603,
"text": "[Slobin 1982]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF21"
},
{
"start": 606,
"end": 618,
"text": "[Pinker 1984",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 639,
"end": 653,
"text": "[Chomsky 1980]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 665,
"end": 679,
"text": "Berwick (1984)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 862,
"end": 875,
"text": "[Marcus 1980]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Learnabillty Theory and Concept Development",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "One area of language acquisition that has not been sufficiently addressed within computational models is the acquisition of conceptual structure. For language acquisition, the problem can be stated as follows: How does the child identify a particular thematic role with a specific grammatical function in the sentence? This is the problem of mapping the semantic functions of a proposition into specified syntactic positions in a sentence. Pinker (1984) makes an interesting suggestion (due originally to D. Lebeaux) in answer to this question. He proposes that one of the strategies available to the language learner involves a sort of ~template matching\" of argument to syntactic position. There are canonical con-j~gurat{orts that are the default mappings and non-cano-nicoJ mappings for the exceptions. For example, the template consists of two rows, one of thematic roles, and the other of syntactic positions. A canonical mapping exists if no lines joining the two rows cross. Figure 1 shows a canonical mapping representing the sentence in (1), while Figure 2 illustrates a noncanonical mapping representing sentence (2).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 440,
"end": 453,
"text": "Pinker (1984)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 983,
"end": 991,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 1058,
"end": 1066,
"text": "Figure 2",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Learnabillty Theory and Concept Development",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "Syntactic roles: SUBJ OBJ OBL (1) Mary hit Bill.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "~~L",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(2) Bill was hit by Mary.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "~~L",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "With this principle we can represent the productivity of verb forms that are used but not heard by the child. We will adopt a modified version of the canonical mapping strategy for our system, and embed it within a theory of how perceptual primitives help derive linguistic concepts. As mentioned, one of the motivations for adopting the canonical mapping principle is the power it gives a learning system in the face of positive-only data. In terms of learnability theory, Berwick (1985) (following [Angluin 1978] ) notes that to ensure successful acquisition of the language after a finite number of positive examples, something llke the Subset Principle is necessary. We can compare this principle to a Version Space model of inductive learning( [Mitchell 1977 [Mitchell , 1978 ), with no negative instances. Generalization proceeds in a conservative fashion, taking only the narrowest concept that covers the data.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 474,
"end": 488,
"text": "Berwick (1985)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
},
{
"start": 500,
"end": 514,
"text": "[Angluin 1978]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 749,
"end": 763,
"text": "[Mitchell 1977",
"ref_id": "BIBREF14"
},
{
"start": 764,
"end": 780,
"text": "[Mitchell , 1978",
"ref_id": "BIBREF15"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "~~L",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "How does this principle relate to lexical semantics and the way thematic relations are mapped to syntactic positions? We claim that the connection is very direct. Concept learning begins with spatial, temporal, and causal predicates being the most salient. This follows from our supposition that these are innate structures, or are learned very early. Following Miller and Johnson-Laird (1976) , [Miller 1985] , and most psychologists, we assume the prelinguistic child is already able to discern spatial orientations, causation, and temporal dependencies. We take this as a point of departure for our theory of markedness, which is developed in the next section.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 362,
"end": 393,
"text": "Miller and Johnson-Laird (1976)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 396,
"end": 409,
"text": "[Miller 1985]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "~~L",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In this section we outline the semantic framework which defines our domain for lexical acquisition. In the current linguistic literature on case roles or thematic relations, there is little discussion on what logical connection exists between one e-role and another. Besides being the workhorse for motivating several principles of syntax (cf. [Chomsky 1981 Similarly, the first argument position of the predicate GO is interpreted as Theme, as in GO(=,y,z). The second argument here is the SOURCE and the third is called the GOAL.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 344,
"end": 357,
"text": "[Chomsky 1981",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Extended Aspect Calculus",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "The model we have in mind acts to constrain the space of possible word meanings. In this sense it is similar to Dowty's aspect calculus but goes beyond it in embedding his model within a markedness theory for thematic types. Our model is a first-order logic that employs symbols acting as special operators over the standard logical vocabulary. These are taken from three distinct semantic fields. They are: causal, spatial, and aspectual.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Extended Aspect Calculus",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "The predicates associated with the causal field are",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Extended Aspect Calculus",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "Cau~e, (C,), C~se~ (C2), and l.stru,ne.t (I) . The spatial field has only one predicate, Locatiue, which is predicated of an object we term the Th~me. Finally, the aspectual i CfiJackendoff (1972, 1976 ) for a detailed elaboration of this theory. field has three predicates, representing the three temporal intervals t~, beginning, t2, middle, and t3, end. From the interaction of these predicates all thematic types can be derived. We call the lexical specification for this aspectual and thematic information the Thematic Mapping Indez.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 41,
"end": 44,
"text": "(I)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 190,
"end": 196,
"text": "(1972,",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 197,
"end": 201,
"text": "1976",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Extended Aspect Calculus",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "As an example of how these components work together to define a thematic type, consider first the distinction between a state, an activity (or process), and an accomplishment. A state can be thought of as reference to an unbounded interval, which we will simply call t2; that is, the state spans this interval. 3 An activity or protess can be thought of as referring to a designated initial point and the ensuing process; in other words, the situation spans the two intervals tt and t2. Finally, an event can be viewed as referring to both an activity and a designated terminating interval; that is, the event spans all three intervals, it, t2, and is, Now consider how these bindings interact with the other semantic fields for the verb run in sentence (8) and give in sentence (9) . (8) John ran yesterday. (9) John gave the book to Mary. We associate with the verb run an argument structure of simply rim(=}. For give we associate the argument structure ~v,(=, v, =). The Thematic Mapping Index for each is given below in (10) and (11) .",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 754,
"end": 757,
"text": "(8)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 779,
"end": 782,
"text": "(9)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
},
{
"start": 1034,
"end": 1038,
"text": "(11)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF10"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Extended Aspect Calculus",
"sec_num": "3.1"
},
{
"text": "L/!,",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "00)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "(11) Th t ,!) tt t 2",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "00)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The sentence in (8) represents a process with no logical culmination, and the one argument is linked to the named case role, Theme. The entire process is associated with both the initial interval t~ and the middle interval t2. The argument = is linked to C~ as well, indicating that it is an Actor as well as a moving object (i.e. Theme). This represents one TMI for an activity verb. The structure in (9) specifies that the meaning of give carries with it the supposition that there is a logical This is a simplication of our model, but for our purposes the difference is moot. A state is actually interpreted as a primitive homogeneous event-sequence, with downward closure. Cf. [Pustejovsky, 1987] culmination to the process of giving. This is captured by reference to the final subinterval, is. The linking between = and the L associated with tt is interpreted as Source, while the other linked arguments, y and z are Theme (the book) and Goa/, respectively. Furthermore, = is specified as a Causer and the object which is marked Theme is also an affected object (i.e. Patient). This will be one of the TMIs for an accomplishment.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 681,
"end": 700,
"text": "[Pustejovsky, 1987]",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "00)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In these examples the three subsystems are shown as rows, and the configuration given is lexically specified. 4 ",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 110,
"end": 111,
"text": "4",
"ref_id": "BIBREF3"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "00)",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "As mentioned above, the theory we are outlining here is grounded on the supposition that all relations in the language are suffiently described in terms of causal, spatial and aspectual predicates. A thematic role in this view is seen as a set of primitive properties relating to the predicates mentioned above. The relationship between these thematic roles is a partial ordering over the sets of properties defining them. It is this partial ordering that allows us to define a markedness theory for thematic roles. Why is this important?",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Markedness Theory for Thematic Roles",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "If thematic roles are assigned randomly to a verb, then one would expect that there exist verbs that have only Patient or Instrument, or two Agents or Themes, for example. Yet this is not what we find. What appears to be the case is that thematic roles are not assigned to a verb independently of one another, but rather that some thematic roles are fixed only after other roles have been established. For example, a verb will not be assigned a GOAL if there is not a THEME assigned first. Similarly, a LOCATIVE is dependent on there being a THEME present. This dependency can be viewed as an acquisition strategy for learning the thematic relations of a verb. Now let us outline the theory. We begin by establishing the most unmarked relation that an argument can bear to its predicate. Let us call this role Them,~. The only semantic information this carries is that of an existential quantifier. It is the only named role outside of the three interpretive systems defined above. Normally, we think of Them, as an object in motion. This is only half correct, however, since statives carry a Theme readings as well. It is in fact the feature [\u00b1motion] that distinguishes the role of Mary in (1) and (2) below.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Markedness Theory for Thematic Roles",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "(1) Stative: l-motion I Mary sleeps. (3) Themery-..Themes/ [-motior=] where ThemeA is an \"activity\" Theme, and Themes is a stative.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 59,
"end": 69,
"text": "[-motior=]",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Markedness Theory for Thematic Roles",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Within the spatial subsystem, there is one variable type, Location, and a finite set of them L1, L~... L~. The most unmarked location is that carrying no specific aspectual binding. That is, the named variables are Ls and Lz and are commonly referred to as Source and Goal. Thus, Lu is the unmarked role. The limitations on named locative variables is perhaps constrained only by the aspectual system of the language (rich aspectual distinction, then more named locative variables). The markedness conventions here are:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Markedness Theory for Thematic Roles",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "(4) Lu -* S/B (",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "A Markedness Theory for Thematic Roles",
"sec_num": "3.2"
},
{
"text": "Within the causal subsystem there are three predicates, Cl, C2, and I. We call C2, (the traditional Patient role) is less marked than c~, but is more marked than I.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "s) L~ --C/E",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "These conventions give us the core of the primitive semantic relations. To be able to perform predicate generalization over each relation, however, we define a set of features that applies to each argument within the semantic subsystems. These are the abstraction operators that allow a perceptual-based semantics to generalize to nonperceptual relations. These features also have marked and unmarked values, as we will show below. There are four features that contribute to the generalization process in concept acquisition: The first feature, abttract, distinguishes tangible objects from intangible ones. Direct will allow a gradience in the notion of causation and motion. The third feature, cornplete, picks out the extension of an argument as either an entire object or only part of it. Ani~v~ac~l has the standard semantics of labeling an object as alive or not.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "s) L~ --C/E",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Let us illustrate how these operators abstract over primitive thematic roles. By changing the value of a feature, we can alter the description, and hence, the set of objects in its extension. Assume, for example, that the predicate C1 has as its unmarked value, [+Direct].",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "s) L~ --C/E",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "By changing the value of this feature we allow CI, the direct agent of an event, to refer to an indirect causer. Similarly, we can change the value of the default setting for the feature I+Complet~] to refer to a subcausation (or causation by part).",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(6) C,[UDir,,tl --[+Vir,ctl",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "These changes define a new concept, \"effector', which is a superset of the previous concepts given in the system. The same can be done with C'~ to arrive at the concept of an \"effected object.\" We see the difference in interpretation in the sentences below. Given the manner in which the features of primitive thematic roles are able to change their values, we are defining a predictable generalization path that relations incorporating these roles will take. In other words, two concepts may be related thematically, but may have very different extensional properties. For example, give and take are clearly definable perceptual transfer relations. But given the abstractions available from our markedness theory, they are thematically related to something as distant as \"experiencer verbs\", e.g. please, as in \"The book pleased John.\" This relation is a transfer verb with an incorporated Theme; namely, the \"pleasure.\" s If we apply these features in the spatial subsystem, we can arrive at generalized notions of location, as well as abstracted interpretations for Theme, Goal and Source. For example, given the thematic role Th -A with the feature [-Abstract] in the default setting, we can generalize to allow for abstract relations such as like, where the object is not affected, but is an abstract Theme. Similarly, the Theme in a sentence such as (a) can be concrete and direct, or abstract, as in (b). In conclusion, we can give the following dependencies between thematic roles: Pustejovsky (1987) for an explanation of this term and a full discussion of the extended aspect calculus.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 1490,
"end": 1508,
"text": "Pustejovsky (1987)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(8) Agent{+CompleU] <~ Agent[-CompleteJ",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "{r~eme} {~} {s, c} {c,} s Cf.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(8) Agent{+CompleU] <~ Agent[-CompleteJ",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The generaliztion features apply to this structure to build hierarchical structures (Cf. {Keil 1979], [Kodratoff 1986] ). This partial ordering allows us to define a notion of covcrs'ng, as with a semi-lattice, from which a strong principle of functional uniqueness is derivable (of. [Jackendoff 1985] ). The mapping of a thematic role to an argument follows the following principle: (9) Maximal Assignment Principle An argument will receive the maximal interpretation consistent with the data.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 102,
"end": 118,
"text": "[Kodratoff 1986]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 284,
"end": 301,
"text": "[Jackendoff 1985]",
"ref_id": "BIBREF8"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(8) Agent{+CompleU] <~ Agent[-CompleteJ",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This says two things. First, it says that an Agent, for example, will always have a location and theme role associated with it. Furthermore, an Agent may be affected by its action, and hence be a Patient as well. Secondly, this principle says that although an argument may bear many thematic roles, the grammar picks out that function which is mazimall!; specific in its interpretation, according to the markedness theory. Thus, the two arguments might be Themes in \"John chased Mary\", but the thematic roles which maximally characterize their functions in the sentence are A and P, respectively.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "(8) Agent{+CompleU] <~ Agent[-CompleteJ",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The input is a data structure pair; an event sequence expression and a sentence describing the event. The event-sequence is a simulated output from a middlelevel vision system where motion detection from the lowlevel input has already been associated with particular object types. 6",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Form of the Input",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "The event-sequence consists of three instantaneous descriptions (IDa) of a situation represented as intervals. These correspond to the intervals t~, t2, and ts in the aspect calculus. The predicates are perceptual primitives, such as those described in Miller and Johnson-Laird (1976) V(,,, d t, ,4,,,,,.~t,(,, The second object is a linguistic expression (i.e. a sentence), parsed by a simple finite state transducer. ~ s For a detailed discussion of how the visual processing and linguistic systems interact, cf. Maddox and Pustejovsky (1987).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 253,
"end": 284,
"text": "Miller and Johnson-Laird (1976)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 285,
"end": 310,
"text": "V(,,, d t, ,4,,,,,.~t,(,,",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Form of the Input",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "We are not addressing any complex interaction between syntactic and semantic acquisition in this system. Ideally, we would like to integrate the concept acquisition mechanisms here with a parser such as Berwick's, Cf. Berwick 1985.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Form of the Input",
"sec_num": "4.1"
},
{
"text": "We now turn to the design of the learning program itself. TULLY can be characterized as a domain-intensive inductive learning system, where the generalizations possible in the system are restricted by the architecture imposed by the semantic model. We can separate clearly what is given from what is learned in the system, as shown in Figure 1 . In order to better understand the learning mechanism, we will step through an example run of the system. First, however, we will give the rule execution loop which the system follows.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 335,
"end": 343,
"text": "Figure 1",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Acquisition Procedure",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "Rule Execution Loop",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "The Acquisition Procedure",
"sec_num": "4.2"
},
{
"text": "INSTANTIATE: Attempt to do a semantic analysis of word given using existing Thematic Mapping Indexes. If the analysis fails then go to 2.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Instantiate Existing Thematic Indexes",
"sec_num": "1."
},
{
"text": "Note failure: Credit assignment. Link arguments to roles according to Canonical Mapping.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Concept.acquisition phase.",
"sec_num": "2."
},
{
"text": "LINK and SHIFT: Constructs new index according to the Extended Aspect Calculus using information from credit assignment in (2) . If this fails then go to (4).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 123,
"end": 126,
"text": "(2)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF1"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Build new Thematic Mapping Index",
"sec_num": "3."
},
{
"text": "If (3) fails to build a mapping for the lexical item in the input, then the rule INTERSECT is invoked. This allows the lines to cross from any of the interpretive levels to the argument tier.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Invoke Noncanonical Mapping Principle.",
"sec_num": "4."
},
{
"text": "Step. This is where the markedness theory is invoked. Induction follows the restrictions in the theory, where generalization is limited to one of the stated types.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "Assume that the first input to the system is the sentence ~Mary hit the cat,\" with its accompanying event sequence expression, represented as a situation calculus expression. INSTANTIATE attempts to map an existing Thematic Mapping [ndez onto the input, but fails. Stage (2) is entered by the failure of (1), and credit assignment indicates where it failed. Heuristics will indicate which thematic properties are associated with each argument, and stage (3) links the arguments with the proper roles, according to Canonical Mapping. This links Mary to Agent and the cat to Patient.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "One important point to make here is that any information from the perceptual expression that is not grammatically expressed will automatically be assumed to be part of the verb meaning itself. In this case, the instrument of the hitting (e.g. Mary's arm) is covered by the lexical semantics of hit.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "There are two forms of generalization performed by the system in step (5): constraint propagation and thematic decoupling. In a propagation procedure (Cf. [Waltz, 1975] ), the computation is described as operating locall!/, since the change has local consistency. To illustrate, consider the verb entry for have, as in (1), (I) John has a book. have(z =/;, y = Th)",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 155,
"end": 168,
"text": "[Waltz, 1975]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 324,
"end": 327,
"text": "(I)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "where the object carries the feature [-abstract] . Now, consider how the sense of the verb changes with a feature change to [~abetract] , as in (2).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 37,
"end": 48,
"text": "[-abstract]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 124,
"end": 135,
"text": "[~abetract]",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "(2) John has an idea. In other words, there is a propagation of this feature to the subject, where the sense of locative becomes more abstract, e.g. menta/. These types of extensions give rise to other verbs with the same thematic mapping, but with ~relaxed\" interpretations. *",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "The other strategy employed here is that of thematic decoupling, where thematic information becomes disassociated from the lexical semantics for a verb. ' The narrower interpretation of a verb's meaning will be arrived at after enough training instances are given; for example, from cut as meaning a particular action with a knife, to cut as an action that results in a certain state.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "It is interesting to speculate on how these strategies facilitate the development from perceptual relations to more abstract ones. The verb tell, for example, can be viewed as a transfer verb with a [+abstract] Theme, and the accompanying contraint propagation (Cf. [Pinker, 1984] and [Jackendoff, 1983] ). Similarly, experiencer verbs such as please, upset, and anger can be seen as combining both strategies: they are similar to transfer verbs, but with leas For further discussion of constraint propagation as a learning strategy, cf. Pustejovsky (1987b).",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 266,
"end": 280,
"text": "[Pinker, 1984]",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 285,
"end": 303,
"text": "[Jackendoff, 1983]",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "9 Results given in Nygren (1977) indicate that children have fully incorporated instruments for verbs such as hammer, cut, and saw, and only at a later.age do they abstract to a verb sense without a particular and constant instrument interpretation. ture relaxation on the Theme, together with propagated constraints to the Source and Goal (the subject and object, respectively); the difference is that the Theme is incorporated said is not grammatically expressed.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 19,
"end": 32,
"text": "Nygren (1977)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "John pleased his mother. please(z ~ ~, y ffi G, Th : incorporated)",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Generalization",
"sec_num": "5."
},
{
"text": "In this paper we have outlined a theory of acquisition for the semantic roles associated with verbs. Specifically, we argue that perceptual predicates form the foundation for later conceptual development in language, and propose a specific algorithm for learning employing a theory of markedness for thematic types and the two strategies of thematic decoupling and constraint relazation and propagation. The approach sketched above will doubtless need revision and refinement on particular points, but is claimed to offer a new perspective which can contribute to the solution of some long-standing puzzles in acquisition.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This is now roughly the common assumption in GB, GPSG, and LFG.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "I would like to thank Sabine Bergler who did the first implementation of the algorithm, as well as Anthony Maddox, John Brolio, Ken Wexler, Mellissa Bowermxn, and Edwin Williams for useful discussion. All faults and errors are of course my own.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Acknowledgements",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Inductive Inference of formal Languages from positive data",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Angluin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "In[ormation and Control",
"volume": "45",
"issue": "",
"pages": "117--135",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Angluin, D. \"Inductive Inference of formal Lan- guages from positive data.\" In[ormation and Con- trol 45:117-135.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF1": {
"ref_id": "b1",
"title": "The Acquisition of Syntactic Information",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Berwick",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Berwick, Robert C. The Acquisition of Syntactic Information, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. 1985.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Learning from Positive-Only Examples: The Subset Principle and Three Case Studies",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Berwick",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "Michalski et al",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Berwick, Robert C., \"Learning from Positive-Only Examples: The Subset Principle and Three Case Studies,\" in Michalski et al, 1986.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "Learning the Structure of Cau satire Verbs",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Mellissa",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bowerman",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1974,
"venue": "Stanford University Committee on Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Bowerman, Mellissa \"Learning the Structure of Cau satire Verbs,\" in Clark (ed) Papers and reports on child language development, No. 8, Stanford Uni- versity Committee on Linguistics. 1974",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "Role of Thematic Relations in Linguistic Theory",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ray",
"middle": [],
"last": "Jackendoff",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Jackendoff, Ray, ~The Role of Thematic Relations in Linguistic Theory,\", ms. Brandeis University, 1985",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Improving the Generalization Step in Learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Yves",
"middle": [],
"last": "Kodratoff",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "J-G",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ganascia",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "Machine Learning II",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Kodratoff, Yves, and J-G. Ganascia, \"Improving the Generalization Step in Learning\", in Michal- skiet el (eds.), Machine Learning II, Morgan Kauf- mann,",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "A Theory of Syntactic Recognition for Natural Language",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Mltch",
"middle": [],
"last": "Marcus",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1980,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Marcus, Mltch, A Theory of Syntactic Recogni- tion for Natural Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1980",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF11": {
"ref_id": "b11",
"title": "A Theory and Methodology of Inductive Learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "R",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Michalski",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "Machins Learning L",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Michalski, R.S., \"A Theory and Methodology of Inductive Learning,\", in Michalski et al (eds.), Ma- chins Learning L",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Dictionaries of the Mind",
"authors": [
{
"first": "George",
"middle": [],
"last": "Miller",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Miller, George, \"Dictionaries of the Mind\" in Pro- ceedings of the 23rd Annual Meeting of the As- sociation for Computational Linguistics, Chicago, 1985.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF14": {
"ref_id": "b14",
"title": "Version Spaces: A Candidate Elimination Approach to Rule Learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Tom",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mitchell",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1977,
"venue": "IJCAI",
"volume": "77",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Mitchell, Tom, \"Version Spaces: A Candidate Elim- ination Approach to Rule Learning,\" in IJCAI-77, 1977",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF15": {
"ref_id": "b15",
"title": "Version Spaces: An Approach to Concept Learning",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Tom",
"middle": [],
"last": "Mitchell",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1978,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Mitchell, Tom, Version Spaces: An Approach to Concept Learning, Ph.D. thesis Stanford, 1978.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF16": {
"ref_id": "b16",
"title": "Results of Experiments with Instrumentals",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Carolyn",
"middle": [],
"last": "Nygren",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "ms. UMASS",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Nygren, Carolyn, \"Results of Experiments with In- strumentals,\" ms. UMASS, Amherst, MA.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF17": {
"ref_id": "b17",
"title": "Reversible Automata and Induction of the English Auxiliary System",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Samuel",
"middle": [
"F"
],
"last": "Pilato",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "C",
"middle": [],
"last": "Robert",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Berwick",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1985,
"venue": "Proceedings of the 23rd Annum Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Pilato, Samuel F. and Robert C. Berwick, \"Re- versible Automata and Induction of the English Auxiliary System\", in Proceedings of the 23rd An- num Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Chicago, 1985.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF19": {
"ref_id": "b19",
"title": "A Theory of Lexical Semantics for Concept Acqusition in Natural Language",
"authors": [
{
"first": "James",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pustejovsky",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Pustejovsky, James, \"A Theory of Lexical Seman- tics for Concept Acqusition in Natural Language\", to appear in /n~ernatioaa/Journal of Intelligent Systems",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF20": {
"ref_id": "b20",
"title": "On the Acquisition of the Conceptual Lexicon",
"authors": [
{
"first": "James",
"middle": [],
"last": "Pustejovsky",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Sabine",
"middle": [],
"last": "Bergler",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Pustejovsky, James and Sabine Bergler, \"On the Acquisition of the Conceptual Lexicon\", paper sub- mitted to AAAI-1987, Seattle, WA.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF21": {
"ref_id": "b21",
"title": "Universals and Particulars in Language Acqusition",
"authors": [
{
"first": "D",
"middle": [],
"last": "Slobin",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "Gleitmann, Language Acquisition",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Slobin , D. \"Universals and Particulars in Lan- guage Acqusition\", in Gleitmann, Language Ac- quisition, Cambridge, 1982",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF22": {
"ref_id": "b22",
"title": "Understanding line drawings of scences with shadows",
"authors": [
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Waltz",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "The Psychology of Computer Vision, P. Winston ed",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "19--92",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Waltz, David \"Understanding line drawings of sce- nces with shadows,\" in The Psychology of Com- puter Vision, P. Winston ed. New York, McGraw- Hill, pp. 19-92.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF23": {
"ref_id": "b23",
"title": "Event Space Descriptions",
"authors": [
{
"first": "David",
"middle": [],
"last": "Waltz",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1982,
"venue": "Proceedings of the AAAI",
"volume": "82",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Waltz, David \"Event Space Descriptions,\" Pro- ceedings of the AAAI-82, 1982",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF24": {
"ref_id": "b24",
"title": "Predication",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Edwin",
"middle": [],
"last": "Williams",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1980,
"venue": "Linguistic Inquiry",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Williams, Edwin, \"Predication\", Linguistic Inquiry, 1980",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF25": {
"ref_id": "b25",
"title": "Learning by Augmenting Rules and Accumulating Censors",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Patrick",
"middle": [
"H"
],
"last": "Winston",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1986,
"venue": "Michalski et al",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Winston, Patrick H., \"Learning by Augmenting Rules and Accumulating Censors,\" in Michalski et al, 1986.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF26": {
"ref_id": "b26",
"title": "Learn ing Physical Descriptions from Functional Definitions, Examples, and Precedents",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Patrick",
"middle": [],
"last": "Winston",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Katz",
"middle": [],
"last": "Binford",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Lowry",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1983,
"venue": "Proceedings of AAAI",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Winston, Patrick, Binford, Katz, and Lowry, \"Learn ing Physical Descriptions from Functional Defini- tions, Examples, and Precedents, Proceedings of AAAI, Washington, 1983",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Figure 1",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF1": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "], [Willi~ms 1980]) the most that is claimed is that Universal Grammar specifies a repertoire of thematic relations (or case roles), Agent, Theme, Patient, Goal, Source, Instrument, and that every NP must carry one and only one role. It should be remembered, however, that thematic relations were originally conceived in terms of the argument positions of semantic predicates such as CAUSE and DO. * That is a verb didn't simply have a list of labelled arguments 2 such as Agent and Patient, but had an interpretation in terms of more primitive predicates where the notions Agent and Patient were defined. The causer of an event (following Jackendoff (1976)) is defined as an Agent, for example, c ,4u s E(=, ,) -. Ag,.~(=).",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF2": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Active: [+motion] Mary fell. This gives us our first markedness convention: Therr=ee--Theme.~/[+motion]",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF4": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Ae,.t[+D~rect I <@ Aee,~tl-Dir,ct ]",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF5": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "a. John intentionally broke the chair. (Agent-direct) b. John accidentally broke that chair when he sat down. (Agent-indirect) c. John broke the chair when he fell. (Effector)",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF6": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "(a) have(L, rh) Mary has a book. (b) have(L, Yh) Mary has a problem with Bill.",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF7": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "and Maddox and Pustejovsky (1987), such as [Ar(t~, ~) ~ ~ = [O,",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF8": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": ") ~, Mo,,,~(~,) ~, ...]].",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF9": {
"type_str": "figure",
"text": "Figure 1 In order to better understand the learning mechanism, we will step through an example run of the system. First, however, we will give the rule execution loop which the system follows.",
"num": null,
"uris": null
},
"TABREF0": {
"type_str": "table",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"content": "<table/>",
"text": "Jacl~endoff tOSS] develops a similar idea, but vide in/ra for discussion."
}
}
}
} |