[Lexicog] Semantic parsing

[Patrick Hanks]

David Frank wrote:

> What am I missing?

Nothing  -- Well not much, anyway.

The problem in this case is the word 'resemble', not FrameNet. You could not have chosen a less instructive frame than the Similarity Frame in FN (of which "resemble" is a member).  Anything can resemble anything, so semantic tagging of valences isn't going to shed much light on the meaning.  

To be fair, this frame does mention that there is a [[Dimension]] in respect of which similarity is measured. That seems somewhat helpful. (The [[Dimension]] may be mentioned explicitly, or left to the imagination -- but it's still there in the semantics of "resemble", even when not explicit.) 

FN says:
     
      Dimension []
     This FE marks constituents which express a property in respect to which the similarity of the entities is assessed.  
               The disc announced Friday is physically SIMILAR to current music CDs  


* * 
 
Comparison with "represent", which is in the Communicate_categorization frame, is quite thought-provoking.

I guess all this reinforces the point that semantic tagging is more problematic than part-of-speeech tagging.  

Patrick


----- Original Message ----- 
  From: David Frank 
  To: lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 5:01 PM
  Subject: Re: [Lexicog] Semantic parsing


  from David Frank:

  I was interested to hear about FrameNet. I am doing a study that includes an analysis of the word "resemble," and I have been wondering how Fillmore would analyze the case frame for that verb, as compared with, for example, "represent," and I wasn't sure how to find out.

  However, after looking at the FrameNet web site, I am disappointed. The analysis of "resemble" I found at http://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/index.php?option=com_wrapper&Itemid=118&le=7974& is something like the following (using my own example):

  That cloud resembles a bear = [[Entity_1]] resembles [[Entity_2]].

  Additionally, there is a definition given for "resemble": "have a similar appearance to or features in common with." "Entity" as a frame is defined as "A thing (either abstract or physical) that exists with some degree of permanence." There are no insights as to the relationship between Entity_1 and Entity_2.

  To me this is not very helpful. What am I missing?


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: <rtroike at email.arizona.edu>
  To: <lexicographylist at yahoogroups.com>
  Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 4:01 AM
  Subject: [Lexicog] Semantic parsing


  Patrick's excellent and very clear exposition of the problem of semantic
  parsing is exactly what is being addressed in Charles Fillmore's seemingly
  little known Framenet project, which is using frame semantics to set up an
  automatic semantic annotation system. The url for the project is:

          http://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/


  SPONSORED LINKS Science kits  Science education  Science kit for kid  
        Cognitive science  Science education supply  My first science kit  


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS 

    a..  Visit your group "lexicographylist" on the web.
      
    b..  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     lexicographylist-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
      
    c..  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lexicography/attachments/20060531/2596fdf2/attachment.htm>