Chapter 18 Lexical Functions: Description of Lexical Relations in a ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

—Chapter 18. Lexical Functions— 24 2. Standard vs. non-standard LFs. These are different in two major respects: i) Quantitatively: a standard LF has many possible keywords and many possible value elements, while a non-standard LF has very few keywords and very few value elements. ii) Qualitatively: in principle, a standard LF (with a few exceptions) participates in the general rules for synonymic DSynt-paraphrasing, while a non-standard LF never does For more on the difference between standard and non-standard LFs, see Polguère 200?. 3. Simple vs. complex LFs. Standard LFs are divided into simple and complex. A simple standard LF f can be of one of two types: • Either f is elementary, i.e., within the existing system of LFs it cannot be represented in terms of other LFs. Such are, for instance, Anti, Conv, Magn, Oper 1, Incep, Caus, Son. • Or f is not elementary, that is, it can be represented in terms of other standard LFs, but it is introduced anyway as a convenient abbreviation—because f is often used in natural language as one simple unit. Such are, for instance: —Oper 2, which can be represented as Conv 321Oper 1; —Degrad, representable as IncepPredPejor; —Liqu, which corresponds to CausFin. Several syntactically linked simple standard LFs may form a combination—product of several LFs—called a complex LF, such as AntiMagn, IncepOper 1, CausFunc 0, CausPred- Plus, etc. (see 4.5.1, p. 00). The borderline between simple and complex LFs is drawn based on the convenience of the description and manipulation: simple standard LFs tend to have more frequently independent lin- guistic expressions and are associated with relatively simple meanings. As we will see later, there are also mixed LFs (combinations of syntactically linked standard and non-standard LFs) and configurations of LFs (= combinations of syntactically non-linked LFs that share the keyword). 4. LFs according to their part of speech. At the DSynt-level of representation, where LFs appear, four deep-syntactic parts of speech are distinguished: Nouns (notation: S, from ‘substantive’), Adjectives [notation: A], Adverbs [notation: Adv], the latter covering genuine adverbs of all types, prepositions, conjunctions, and interjections, and Verbs [notation: V]. As a result, LFs are readily classified into nominal, adjectival, adverbial (including prepositional), and verbal ones.
—Chapter 18. Lexical Functions— 25 5. 10 semantic groupings of (simple standard) LFs can be distinguished: Paradigmatic LFs 1) Basic LFs: Syn(onym), Anti [= antonym], and Conv(ersive) ij . They correspond to the main three semantic relations that play a special role in MT-theory—synonymy, negation, and con- verseness (X precedes Y ≡ Y follows X). 2) (Semantic) derivations are of two subtypes: —Structural derivations represent nominalization S 0 (REJECTION from REJECT), adjectivali- zation A 0 (URBAN from CITY), adverbialization Adv 0 (WELL from GOOD, FIVE TIMES from FIVE), and verbalization V 0 (ATTACKV from ATTACKN). —Meaningful derivations are, roughly speaking, agent noun S 1, patient noun S 2, active adjectival A 1 (in search [of N] from LOOK [for N]), passive adjectival A 2 (under construction from BUILD), place noun S loc (bedroom from SLEEP), instrument noun S instr, (syringe from INJECT), active potential adjective Able 1 (inquisitive from ASK: ≈ (who tends to ask)), passive potential adjective Able 2 (reliable from RELY), etc. 3) Generics: hyperonym Gener (LIQUID substance) and metaphoric denotation Figur (flame of PASSION). Syntagmatic LFs 4) Quantifiers: singulative Sing (speck of DUST) and collective Mult (pride of LIONS). 5) Modifiers: cliché Epit (proud PARENTS), intensifier Magn, Plus/Minus ((more Magn), as in growing CONCERN, and (less Magn), as in falling DISCIPLINE), objective qualifier Ver (restful SLEEP, (healthy, nutricious MEAL), and subjective qualifier Bon (valuable CONTRIBUTION, exquisite MEAL). 6) Semi-auxiliaries (= support, or light, verbs): semantically empty, or emptied, verbs linking a DSynt-Actant [= DSyntA] of L to L, namely Oper 1/2 (give/take an EXAM), Func 0/1/2 (A CHANGE occurs/comes from the boss/affects our plans) and Labor 12/21 (submit the thief to an INTERROGA- TION/leave Mary a WIDOW). 7) Phasals: verbs denoting the three phases of an event—the beginning (Incep), the end (Fin), and the continuation (Cont). These LFs are often used combined with other verbal LFs to produce complex LFs, e.g., IncepOper 1, ContFunc 0, etc.
Page 1 and 2: Chapter 18 Lexical Functions: Descr
Page 3 and 4: —Chapter 18. Lexical Functions—
Page 9 and 10: Means noun ((δ) = (means [for L]))
Page 13 and 14: Here are some examples of LFs. —C
Page 19 and 20: 2.3 Definition of Standard Lexical
Page 23: —Chapter 18. Lexical Functions—
Page 43 and 44: Examples —Chapter 18. Lexical Fun
Page 49 and 50: ! ! 38. Loc temp in = localization
Page 51: Remarks —Chapter 18. Lexical Func
Page 61 and 62: NB: CausFin(P) means—by definitio
Page 69: —Chapter 18. Lexical Functions—
Page 74 and 75:
—Chapter 18. Lexical Functions—
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
6.1.1 Lexical Functions Are Not Sem
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
6.1.3 Different Semantic ‘Facets
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
LF-Sem-Rule 3 (intensely) 1 ! —Ch
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Bibliographic Remarks —Chapter 18
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104:
show all

Chapter 18 Lexical Functions: Description of Lexical Relations in a ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?