-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4
LexsemMapping
Some thoughts on mapping MRSs to Wordnet sense (mainly illustrated with the ERG and PWN). Examples use a variant of the indexed MRS to save space.
Contents
In straight forward cases like this, each open class predicate maps to a wordnet sense.
The cat_{cat_n1} ate_{eat_v1} a dog_{dog_n1}.
e3:
_1:_the_q⟨0:3⟩[BV x6]
x6:_cat_n_1⟨4:7⟩[]
e3:_eat_v_1⟨8:11⟩[ARG1 x6, ARG2 x9]
_2:_a_q⟨12:13⟩[BV x9]
x9:_dog_n_1⟨14:18⟩[]
Mapping the predicates to lemmas gives us directly:
x6:_cat_n_1 = cat_n1
e3:_eat_v_1 = eat_v1
x9:_dog_n_1 = dog_n1
Note that quantifiers are sometimes in wordnet, sometimes not:
Each_{each_a1} cat_{cat_n1} ate_{eat_v1} a dog_{dog_n1}.
e3:
_1:_each_q⟨0:4⟩[BV x5]
x5:_cat_n_1⟨5:8⟩[]
e3:_eat_v_1⟨9:12⟩[ARG1 x5, ARG2 x9]
_2:_a_q⟨13:14⟩[BV x9]
x9:_dog_n_1⟨15:19⟩[]
Here we also have:
_1:_each_q = each_a1
(with a non matching pos a <> q)
For proper nouns (and numbers and a few others), the predicate is an abstraction like named_rel, and the value is in the CARG:
Bast_{Bast_n1} ate_{eat_v1} a dog_{dog_n1}.
e3:
_1:proper_q⟨0:4⟩[BV x6]
x6:named⟨0:4⟩("Bast")[]
e3:_eat_v_1⟨5:8⟩[ARG1 x6, ARG2 x9]
_2:_a_q⟨9:10⟩[BV x9]
x9:_dog_n_1⟨11:15⟩[]
We want:
x6:named = Bast_1
Some words are given complex semantics:
A cat_{cat_n1} ate_{eat_v1} here_{here_a1}
e3:
_1:_a_q⟨0:1⟩[BV x6]
x6:_cat_n_1⟨2:5⟩[]
e3:_eat_v_1⟨6:9⟩[ARG1 x6]
e10:loc_nonsp⟨10:15⟩[ARG1 e3, ARG2 x11]
x11:place_n⟨10:15⟩[]
_2:def_implicit_q⟨10:15⟩[BV x11]
e16:_here_a_1⟨10:15⟩[ARG1 x11]
here is given semantics equivalent to "in this place". Ideally, we would like a mapping such as:
e10:loc_nonsp = here_a1
x11:place_n = here_n1
with "e16:_here_a_1" unmapped. "in this place" = here_a1 and "this place" = hear_n1
There are not so many of these, it should be possible to do them with exception handling
Wordnet has some superlatives (linked through domain usage to superlative_n_1): best, worst, least, ...
As far as I can tell, they are not actually linked to the relevant adjectives!
I think we should tag these with the relvant adjective (good, bad, less; , ...) and distinguish if need be by the presence of the superlative predicate.
Sometimes both the ERG and PWN treat a MWE as a single concept, and then it is easy.
The cat_{cat_n1} gobbled_{gobble up_v1} a dog_{dog_n1} up_{gobble up_v1}.
e3:
_1:_the_q⟨0:3⟩[BV x6]
x6:_cat_n_1⟨4:7⟩[]
e3:_gobble_v_up⟨8:15⟩[ARG1 x6, ARG2 x9]
_2:_a_q⟨16:17⟩[BV x9]
x9:_dog_n_1⟨18:21⟩[]
The character mapping is a bit less direct, but the final mapping should be just:
x6:_cat_n_1 = cat_n1
e3:_gobble_v_up = gobble_up_v1
x9:_dog_n_1 = dog_n1
PROBLEM sometimes they will disagree. Postpone mapping for now.
The cat_{cat_n1} ate_{eat_v1} a guard_{guard_n1&guard_dog_n1} dog_{dog_n1&guard_dog_n1}.
e3:
_1:_the_q⟨0:3⟩[BV x6]
x6:_cat_n_1⟨4:7⟩[]
e3:_eat_v_1⟨8:11⟩[ARG1 x6, ARG2 x9]
_2:_a_q⟨12:13⟩[BV x9]
e15:compound⟨14:23⟩[ARG1 x9, ARG2 x14]
_3:udef_q⟨14:19⟩[BV x14]
x14:_guard_n_1⟨14:19⟩[]
x9:_dog_n_1⟨20:23⟩[]
NTU WN tags both the single and MWE in this case, SemCor maps only the MWE I think we want:
x6:_cat_n_1 = cat_n1
e3:_eat_v_1 = eat_v1
x9:_dog_n_1 = guard_dog_n1
x14:_guard_n_1 = guard_n1
A guard dog is a dog, which has something to do with a guard, so we imply x9:_dog_n_1 = dog_n1 through the magic of hypernymy.
One could think of something like:
x6:_cat_n_1 = cat_n1
e3:_eat_v_1 = eat_v1
x9:_dog_n_1 = dog_n1
x14:_guard_n_1 = guard_n1
e15:compound = guard_dog_n1
But this isn't quite right (works better for A&B}.
The cat_{cat_n1} ate_{eat_v1} a guard_{hot_dog_n1} dog_{hot_dog_n1}.
e3:
_1:_the_q⟨0:3⟩[BV x6]
x6:_cat_n_1⟨4:7⟩[]
e3:_eat_v_1⟨8:11⟩[ARG1 x6, ARG2 x9]
_2:_a_q⟨12:13⟩[BV x9]
e14:_hot_a_1⟨14:17⟩[ARG1 x9]
x9:_dog_n_1⟨18:21⟩[]
Here, we don't want the semantics "a dog that is hot", so:
x6:_cat_n_1 = cat_n1
e3:_eat_v_1 = eat_v1
x9:_dog_n_1 = hot_dog_n1
Ideally, the ERG should contain "hot dog" as a single entry, so that things map even better.
X keeps tabs on Y
We don't really know how to mark the whole idiom (although the ERG recognizes it)
X doesn't know X's arse from X's elbow "X is an idiot."
How should we show this?
Many more corner cases to come :-): "Sleeping Beauty: is sleep v or n", more complex MWEs, ... .
Home | Forum | Discussions | Events