[ParSem] semantic roles for LFG grammar engineering

[Ackerman, Farrell]

There are, of course, non-atomic versions of argument encoding inspired by Fillmore's early work and Dowty 1990 on
proto-properties.  I don't know of computational implementations, but there's the work that John Moore and I did, John
Beavers, Beatrice Primus and other literature that follows this tradition.  -Farrell


On Feb 2, 2014, at 2:22 PM, "Emily M. Bender" <ebender at UW.EDU<mailto:ebender at UW.EDU>>
 wrote:

Dear Adam,

I looked into this some for my recent book, and from what I could find, no one has ever produced a fully comprehensive set of semantic roles (see Ch 8, thing #68).  I'm not familiar with Sowa's system, but I think what's going on in VerbNet is that role names are re-used across predicates but not meant to carry the same content in those different uses.

Emily

Bender, Emily M. 2013. Linguistic Fundamentals for Natural Language Processing: 100 Essentials from Morphology and Syntax<http://dx.doi.org/10.2200/S00493ED1V01Y201303HLT020>. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies #20. Morgan & Claypool Publishers.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2200/S00493ED1V01Y201303HLT020


On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 1:45 PM, Adam Przepiorkowski <adamp at ipipan.waw.pl<mailto:adamp at ipipan.waw.pl>> wrote:
Dear All,

[Apologies for cross-posting.]

In the context of enriching the Polish LFG grammar with semantic
representation, we are looking for a set of semantic roles (Agent,
Patient, Beneficiary, etc.) that could be used to mark arguments (and
possibly adjuncts) of verbs and other predicates.  This set should be
exhaustive in the sense that it should be possible to assign – more or
less deterministically – a semantic role to any argument (and possibly
adjunct) of any predicate.  For this reason the standard – in LFG
textbooks – sets of some 7 semantic roles do not seem sufficient.
Instead, we are looking at larger repertoires proposed in VerbNet, in
FrameNet and in John W. Sowa's work on Knowledge Representation.

We don't have any strong views about any particular set of semantic
roles, as long as it is exhaustive and applicable to real texts (as
opposed to being merely theoretically interesting).  Has anybody in the
LFG community faced a similar task?  If so, what set of semantic roles
would you recommend?  At the moment, we are wavering between VerbNet and
Sowa's system, both being more manageable than numerous roles offered
in FrameNet, but we are open to other solutions.

Many thanks, best regards,

Adam P.

--
Adam Przepiórkowski                          ˈadam ˌpʃɛpjurˈkɔfskʲi
http://clip.ipipan.waw.pl/ ____ Computational Linguistics in Poland
http://jlm.ipipan.waw.pl/ ___________ Journal of Language Modelling
http://zil.ipipan.waw.pl/ ____________ Linguistic Engineering Group
http://nkjp.pl/ _________________________ National Corpus of Polish
_______________________________________________
ParSem mailing list
ParSem at mailman.uni-konstanz.de<mailto:ParSem at mailman.uni-konstanz.de>
https://mailman.uni-konstanz.de/mailman/listinfo/parsem



--
Emily M. Bender
Associate Professor
Department of Linguistics
Check out CLMS on facebook! http://www.facebook.com/uwclma

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lfg/attachments/20140203/7f8a5fa5/attachment.htm>