06.08.2015 Views

A Wordnet from the Ground Up

A Wordnet from the Ground Up - School of Information Technology ...

A Wordnet from the Ground Up - School of Information Technology ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

3.4. Measures of Semantic Relatedness 691. only adjectival words, adverbial words, numerals or punctuation occur betweenN and A (only iterates across tokens and applies <strong>the</strong> specified condition),2. <strong>the</strong>re is an occurrence of być (to be) between N and A (an attributive use ofbyć) and <strong>the</strong>re is no o<strong>the</strong>r noun between N and A, which could be <strong>the</strong> real headfor <strong>the</strong> modification by A.The second condition is also constrained by <strong>the</strong> requirement of N not being in <strong>the</strong>genitive case: a noun in genitive can also be a modifier, so predictions may be lessaccurate.VsbC is based on <strong>the</strong> nominal case of <strong>the</strong> target LU N – a potential subject and <strong>the</strong>agreement on number and gender or only gender, depending on <strong>the</strong> verb form, betweenN and a lexical element V – a potential predicate for N. Such an agreement is tooweak evidence, so <strong>the</strong> presence of any o<strong>the</strong>r potential subject N ′ intervening in thispossible association is tested. N ′ can occur at any position in <strong>the</strong> sentence, so a rangeof possibilities is tested.NcC depends only on <strong>the</strong> case of <strong>the</strong> two nominal LUs which may be coordinate:<strong>the</strong> target LU N and <strong>the</strong> lexical element M. We identify M’s position and we check<strong>the</strong> equality of case values of N and M. Next, <strong>the</strong> tokens occurring between N andM are also tested for representing only a limited number of grammatical classes.and(rlook(1,end,$B,and(in(flex[$B],{nominal grammatical classes }),equal(base[$B],{particular base form }),equal(cas[$B],{gen}) )),only(1,$-1B,$Ad, or(in(flex[$Ad],adverbial grammatical classes ),and(in(flex[$Ad],{nominal grammatical classes }),equal(cas[$Ad],{gen})),and(in(flex[$Ad],{adverbial grammatical classes and numerals }),agrpp(0,$Ad,{nmb,gnd,cas},3)))) )Figure 3.6: Parts of a morphosyntactic constraint which describes nominal LUs via <strong>the</strong> modification bya nominal LU in <strong>the</strong> genitive case (NmgC)NmgC, presented schematically in Figure 3.6, identifies modification by a specificnoun in genitive, which represents an ambiguous or even vague semantic relation. Theconstraint does not depend on any morphosyntactic agreement; that makes it hard to

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!