Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Role and Reference Grammar
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Role and Reference Grammar
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Pedagogical Guide to The Cambridge Handbook of Role and Reference Grammar
- Introduction
- Part One Overview
- Part Two Topics in RRG: Simple Sentences
- 2 Lexical and Grammatical Categories in RRG
- 3 A Conceptually Oriented Approach to Semantic Composition in RRG
- 4 Semantic Macroroles
- 5 Grammatical Relations
- 6 Argument Structure Alternations
- 7 Case Assignment
- 8 Morphology in RRG
- 9 Adverbs, Mimetics and Ideophones
- 10 Adposition Assignment and Adpositional Phrase Types in RRG
- 11 The RRG Approach to Information Structure
- 12 Information Structure and Argument Linking
- Part Three Topics in RRG: Complex Sentences
- Part Four Applications of RRG
- Part Five Grammatical Sketches
- Index
- References
3 - A Conceptually Oriented Approach to Semantic Composition in RRG
from Part Two - Topics in RRG: Simple Sentences
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 June 2023
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Role and Reference Grammar
- Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics
- The Cambridge Handbook of Role and Reference Grammar
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Pedagogical Guide to The Cambridge Handbook of Role and Reference Grammar
- Introduction
- Part One Overview
- Part Two Topics in RRG: Simple Sentences
- 2 Lexical and Grammatical Categories in RRG
- 3 A Conceptually Oriented Approach to Semantic Composition in RRG
- 4 Semantic Macroroles
- 5 Grammatical Relations
- 6 Argument Structure Alternations
- 7 Case Assignment
- 8 Morphology in RRG
- 9 Adverbs, Mimetics and Ideophones
- 10 Adposition Assignment and Adpositional Phrase Types in RRG
- 11 The RRG Approach to Information Structure
- 12 Information Structure and Argument Linking
- Part Three Topics in RRG: Complex Sentences
- Part Four Applications of RRG
- Part Five Grammatical Sketches
- Index
- References
Summary
One of the major concerns of Role and Reference Grammar (RRG) has always been the development of a theory of semantic composition for both state and activity predicates. Over the last thirty years, there have been a variety of proposals aimed at the formulation of a semantic representation system that accounts for the interface between syntax and semantics. Proposals to enrich the RRG semantic representation system involve notations such as the use of internal variables, lexical functions and qualia structure, among others, in an effort to link syntax to conceptual or semantic meaning. Nevertheless, another solution could lie in a more ontologically oriented model of semantic representation that provides a conceptual framework for the formalization of meaning construction. This chapter outlines and describes a semantic representation system in the form of conceptual logical structures (CLSs), based on the FunGramKB ontology.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Role and Reference Grammar , pp. 218 - 241Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Amsler, Robert A. 1980. The Structure of the Merriam-Webster Pocket Dictionary. PhD dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
Amsler, Robert A. 1981. A taxonomy for English nouns and verbs. In Proceedings of the 19th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 133–138. Morristown, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bentley, Delia. 2019. The logical structure of verbs of quantized and non-quantized change. International RRG Conference, 19–21 August 2019. University at Buffalo (SUNY).Google Scholar
Butler, Christopher S. 2012. An ontological approach to the representational lexicon in Functional Discourse Grammar. Language Sciences 34: 619–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cortés, Francisco, González, Carlos and Jiménez, Rocío. 2012. Las clases léxicas. Revisión de la tipología de predicados verbales. In Mairal Usón, Ricardo, Guerrero, Lilián, and González, Carlos (eds.), El funcionalismo en la teoría lingüística. La Gramática del Papel y la Referencia. Introducción, avances y aplicaciones, 59–84. Madrid: Akal.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2012. Verbs: Aspects and Causal Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dummett, Michael. 1991. Frege and Other Philosophers. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Faber, Pamela and Mairal Usón, Ricardo. 1999. Constructing a Lexicon of English Verbs. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1977. Scenes-and-frames semantics. In Zampolli, Antonio (ed.), Fundamental Studies in Computer Science, 55–88. Dordrecht: North Holland.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1982. Frame Semantics. In Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.), Linguistics in the Morning Calm, 111–137. Seoul, South Korea: Hanshin Publishing.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 2006. Frame Semantics. In Geeraerts, Dirk (ed.), Cognitive Linguistics: Basic Readings, 373–400. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foley, William A. and Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. 1984. Functional Syntax and Universal Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Goddard, Charles and Wierzbicka, Anna. 2002. Meaning and Universal Grammar: Theory and Empirical Findings. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele. 2010. Verbs, constructions and semantic frames. In Hovav, Malka Rappaport, Doron, Edit and Sichel, Ivy (eds.), Lexical Semantics, Syntax, and Event Structure, 39–58. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gruber, Jeffrey S. 1976. Lexical Structures in Syntax and Semantics. New York: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Havasi, Catherine, Pustejovsky, James and Rumshisky, Anna. 2007. An evaluation of the Brandeis semantic ontology. Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Generative Approaches to the Lexicon. Paris, France.Google Scholar
Hirst, Graeme. 2009. Ontology and the lexicon. In Staab, Steffen and Studer, Rudi (eds.), Handbook on Ontologies, 269–292. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray. 1997. The Architecture of the Language Faculty. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lamb, Sydney M. 1998. Pathways of the Brain: The Neurocognitive Basis of Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Levy, Jacob T. 2003. Language rights, literacy, and the modern state. In William Kymlicka and Alan Patten (eds.), Language Rights and Political Theory, 230–249. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mairal Usón, Ricardo and Faber, Pamela. 2007. Lexical templates within a functional cognitive theory of meaning. Annual Review of Cognitive Linguistics 5: 137–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mairal Usón, Ricardo and Pascual, Carlos Periñán. 2009. The anatomy of the lexicon component within the framework of a conceptual knowledge base. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada 22: 217–244.Google Scholar
Martín Mingorance, Leocadio. 1984. Lexical fields and stepwise lexical decomposition in a contrastive English-Spanish verb valency dictionary. In Hartmann, Reinhardt (ed.), LEX’eter ’83 Proceedings. Papers from the International Conference on Lexicography at Exeter, 226–236. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Martín Mingorance, Leocadio. 1990. Functional Grammar and Lexematics. In Tomaszczyk, Jerzy and Lewandowska-Tomaszczyk, Barbara (eds.), Meaning and Lexicography, 227–253. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martín Mingorance, Leocadio. 1995. Lexical logic and structural semantics: methodological underpinnings in the structuring of a lexical database for natural language processing. In Hoinkes, Ulrich (ed.), Panorama der Lexikalischen Semantik, 461–474. Tübingen: Gunter Narr.Google Scholar
Mel’cuk, Igor. 1989. Semantic primitives from the viewpoint of the Meaning–Text Linguistic Theory. Quaderni di Semantica 10(1): 65–102.Google Scholar
Mel’cuk, Igor. 2012. Semantics: From Meaning to Text. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nirenburg, Sergei and Raskin, Victor. 2004. Ontological Semantics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Periñán Pascual, Carlos and Arcas-Túnez, Francisco. 2005. Microconceptual-knowledge spreading in FunGramKB. In 9th IASTED International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing, 239–244. Anaheim-Calgary-Zurich: ACTA.Google Scholar
Periñán Pascual, Carlos and Arcas-Túnez, Francisco. 2007. Cognitive modules of an NLP knowledge base for language understanding. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 39: 197–204.Google Scholar
Periñán Pascual, Carlos and Arcas-Túnez, Francisco. 2010. The architecture of FunGramKB. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pp. 2667–2674. Marrakech, Morocco: LREC.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, Carlos and Mairal Usón, Ricardo. 2010. La gramática de COREL: un lenguaje de representación conceptual. Onomazein 21: 11–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, Carlos and Mairal Usón, Ricardo. 2011. The Coherent Methodology in FunGramKB. Onomazein 24: 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, Carlos and Mairal Usón, Ricardo. 2012. La dimensión computacional de la RRG: la estructura lógica conceptual y su aplicación en el procesamiento del lenguaje natural. In Vergara, Carlos González, Valenzuela, Lilián Guerrero and Mairal Usón, Ricardo (eds.), El funcionalismo en la teoría lingüística: la Gramática del Papel y la Referencia: Introducción, avances y aplicaciones, 333–348. Madrid: Akal.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, James. 2001. Type construction and the logic of concepts. In Bouillon, Pierrette and Busa, Federica (eds.), The Language of Word Meaning, 91–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, James and Batiukova, Olga. 2019. The Lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pustejovsky, James, Havasi, Catherine, Littman, Jessica, Rumshisky, Anna and Verhagen, Marc. 2006. Towards a generative lexical resource: The Brandeis semantic ontology. Proceedings of the Fifth Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, LREC 2006, 1702–1705. www.cs.brandeis.edu/~arum/publications/lrec-bso.pdf.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. 1993. A synopsis of Role and Reference Grammar. In Amsterdam Studies in Theory and History of Linguistic Science Series 4: 1–1.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. 2005. Exploring the Syntax–Semantics Interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. 2018. Some issues regarding (active) Accomplishments. In Kailuweit, Rolf, Künkel, Lisann and Staudinger, Eva (eds.), Applying and Expanding Role and Reference Grammar, 71–93. Freiburg; Universität Freiburg.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. and LaPolla, Randy J.. 1997. Syntax: Structure, Meaning and Function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. and Mairal Usón, Ricardo. 2014. Interfacing the lexicon and an ontology in a linking algorithm. In Gómez, María Ángeles, de Mendoza, Francisco Ruiz and Gonzálvez-García, Francisco (eds.), Theory and Practice in Functional-Cognitive Space, 205–228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. and Wilkins, David P.. 1993. Predicting syntax from semantics. In Van Valin, Robert D. Jr., (ed.), Advances in Role and Reference Grammar, 499–534. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Vendler, Zeno. 1967. Linguistics in Philosophy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1996. Semantics: Primes and Universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar