lexical and semantie relations

124 LEXICAL MEANI G
The mo t extreme the aurus- tyle approache hold that there are no definition for
word in the lexicon, as the mean ing of a word can be derived from "the company
it keeps" - i.e. which other word it is linked to. The following sub ection exemplify
the e po itions in turn, though it mu t be pointed out that many lexicologi t
take a middle ground, expecting that both definitional (dictionary) and relational
(the aurus) information i needed for a complete emantic repre entation of a
lexeme.
6.3.1 Lexicon as dictionary
In chapter3 we di eu ed the lexicon-a -dictionary metaphor in term
of how componential theories, like dictionarie , break down the meaning of
lexeme into smaller parts. This mean that the information needed for predicting
synonym, hyponym or antonym relation among word i available in their
componential definition . Thus mo t componential theo ri ts take the view that
the relations themselves do not need to be explicitly mentioned in the words'
lexical entrie. In other word, these theori t think that arepre entation like that
in (20) is ufficient, so that the additional information in (21) is not nece sary.
(20) man [HUMA, ADULT, MALE]
(21) man HUMA, ADULT, MALE
SEX ANTONYM = woman
AGE A TONYM = boy
E R- Y O YM = gentleman, guy, chap.fetlow
HYPONYM (MARITAL TAT ) = bachelor
HYI'ONYM (JOB) = {fireman, postman, handyman ... }
Approache that do not include the relational information in (21) require
another mean of determining which lexeme are ynonyms, antonyms, and
hyponyms. This i done by pecifying rule that determine these relation, uch
a tho e in (22):
(22) a.
b.
c.
X and Y are synonym iff [i.e, 'ir and only ir'] thcy hare all the same components
X and Y are an tonym (and/or co-hyponyms) iff only one of their componenl di ffer ,
X is the hyponym of Y iff it has all of the arne component a Y plu at lea t one more.
Using the e rules, we can tell that lady (in the sense that denotes 'female
adult ' generally) is a ynonym of woman, man i the oppo ite of woman, and
fireman i a hyponym of man, a hown in figure 6.4.
Evaluating the dictionary approach
The dictionary approach i attractive becau e it explain why particular word
are related to one another - that is, because they have semantic components
in common. On the other hand, becau e it only concem the word' emantic
components, non-denotational propertie (like the ound of a word or it ocial
register) cannot contribute to these relation . So, according to the information
[
sa me componen
-7
flwo
synonyms
lady
HUMA HU
ADULT AD
FEMALE FE
Figure 6.4 eOin
in figure 6.4, lady i a go
classical componential th
and not for relation that
There have been attem
non-denotational issue I
matic approach, in whicl
hare all relevant propen
except one. In the case c
i their form, and in the (
meaning. The tricky part
relevant or not within a CI
6.3.2 Lexicon as ti
Theorie that
entries (or en se ubentr
to other lexical entrie (Ol
high would somehow rep
roots in Structurali t view
thinkers - e.g. Co eriu a
orne computationally in
1996' WordNet, Fellbaun:
forgo componential sen e
words that constrain one I
are in the antonym relatir
end of whatever cale tt
different, but related, to te
Diagrammim
One the aurus-type appn
enne Lehrer (1974). Thi:
in figure 6.5, in which ear
fieJd - an organization of