• ETRI Journal
• /
• v.32 no.5
• /
• pp.740-749
• /
• 2010

In a machine translation system, word sense disambiguation has an essential role in the proper translation of words when the target word can be translated differently depending on the context. Previous research on sense identification has mostly focused on adjacent words as context information. Therefore, in the case of nominal compounds, sense tagging of unit nouns mainly depended on other nouns surrounding the target word. In this paper, we present a practical method for the sense tagging of Korean unit nouns in a nominal compound. To overcome the weakness of traditional methods regarding the data sparseness problem, the proposed method adopts complement-predicate relation knowledge that was constructed for machine translation systems. Our method is based on a sentential form recovery technique, which recognizes grammatical relationships between unit nouns. This technique makes use of the characteristics of Korean predicative nouns. To show that our method is effective on text in general domains, the experiments were performed on a test set randomly extracted from article titles in various newspaper sections.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.163-178
• /
• 2003

Korean displays an interesting construction (so-called possessor agreement construction), where a possessor nominal and its possessum nominal are marked with the same case as shown in the example Mary-ka John-ul tali-lul cha-ss-ta ‘Mary kicked John's leg’ More interestingly, not all possessors in possessive construction are marked the same case with its possessum as shorn in the ungrammatical sentence ＊Mary-ka John-ul cha-lul cha-ss-ta ‘Mary kicked John's car’. Hence, a simple but non-trivial question arises: In what situation are both possessors and possessums marked with the same case\ulcorner In this paper, we advance three claims: (i) Possessor agreement appears in the situation where entailment is satisfied as follows: If Mary kicked John's leg, it entails that Mary kicked John, (ii) entailment in possessor agreement results from theta-feature sharing; specifically, the whole DP and the possessor DP share the same theta role, and (iii) Possessor nominals are marked with accusative (or nominative) case when they are assigned internal theta role from the predicate directly.

• Russian Language and Literature
• /
• no.60
• /
• pp.347-374
• /
• 2018

Эта работа посвящена выявлению семантических-функциональных свойств неспециализированных связочных форм и обсуждению о эволюции и развитии категории связки в русском языке. Предложения с именным сказуемым представляют значительный, динамично развивающийся фрагмент грамматической системы современного русского языка. Рост числа связок русского языка отражает динамизм развития связочной систем, поиск новых средств для выражения грамматических значений в составном именном сказуемом. И развитие категории связки связано с тенденцией к языковому аналитизму, и с грамматикализацией. Связка определяется как обязательный компонент составного именного сказуемого. Связка соединяет подлежащее с именным компонентом и выражает значение установления, наличия связи между предметом и его пассивным предикативным признаком. Категория связки представляет собой систему, имеющую центр и периферию, определённую иерархию значений. В периферии находятся неспециализированные связочные формы как знаменательные глаголы и частицы-связки. Знаменательные глаголы, которые могут выполнять функции связки, разделяются на четыре лексико-семантические группы: глагол движения, глагол позиции, глагол состояния и глагол самоощущения. Эти глаголы выражают фазисные и модальные оттенки кроме логического значения тождества. Развитие связочных частиц отражает внутрисистемные отношения языковых единиц, поскольку эти элементы выполняют функции соединения и актуализации, которые не могут быть выражены нулевой формой связки. Частицы-связки являются важнейшим средством реализации коммуникативно-прагматической установки говорящего.

• Lingua Humanitatis
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.275-294
• /
• 2001

This article aims to define the nature of proverbs from a polyphonic point of view and examine different readings of the complement involved in the combination of a proverb with a verb of personal opinion. An utterer of a proverb is not himself the author of the proverb. He may well be a 'speaker' of a proverb, but from a polyphonic view point he is not an 'enunciator' of the principle that underlies it. When we say that a speaker of a proverb is not its enunciator, we do not simply mean that he is not the author of the 'content' of the proverb he speaks: we mean that he is not the author of its 'form' either. The fact that a proverb loses its proverbial character when one paraphrases it proves that its form is not at the speaker's disposal. But a single factor cannot be held responsible for what a proverb is. As an indicator of the 'wisdom of the nation,' or vox populi, a proverb is the achievement of the 'collective enunciator.' The polyphony inherent in the proverb pits a particular speaker against a collective enunciator. This collective character of the proverb as a vox populi comes from its character as a phrasal denomination. Given that a proverb reflects a collective judgment and not a personal opinion, how do we interpret the combination of a proverb with a verb of personal opinion such as I think that ...\ulcorner Such a combination gives rise to readings at distinct levels: two types of metalinguistic reading and a reading based on the content of the proverb. The first level of reading, being applicative in nature, can be local or general, depending on the speaker's opinion as to the applicability of the proverb to a situation, particular or general. These applicative readings always involve polyphonic dissociation between the speaker and the enunciator. The second level of reading, which depends on the content of the proverb, is the result of the operation of deproverbialization, which makes the proverb lose its denominative status to preserve only its status as a generic phrase. The proverb, thus deproverbialized, looks like the series 'NP + VP.' For this reading, the speaker of the proverb takes into consideration the possibility of attributing a predicate to a nominal syntagm. Here occurs an identity between the speaker and the enunciator. It is not the case, however, that one can deproverbialize just any proverbs. In approaching to a locally typifying generic phrase, a proverb admits of being deproverbialized by an opinion verb only when its form does not render it difficult, either syntactically or metaphorically, to incorporate that proverb into the relevant combination, and when the proverb intrinsically possesses the traits that meet the conditions for the use of the opinion verb at hand. One can also maintain, based on the notion of deproverbialization, that a proverb expresses a collective judgment, a deproverbialized individual judgment.