Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
To account for valence alternations of the ‘spray-load’ sort, we propose an underspecification analysis that first posits, for example, a load-frame and a spray-frame, which are subtypes of a cause-to-go-to-fr. The latter in turn inherits from both a go-to-frame and a cause-frame. The goto-fr is a subtype of the go-fr. These inheritance relations among frames are pictured in (1). (1) frame cause-fr go-fr go-to-fr cause-to-go-to-fr (cgt-fr) load-fr spray-fr Using the load-fr and spray-fr in the appropriate places, we want to build the lexemes whose appropriately inflected word forms will appear in expressions such as those in (2). (2) a. load hay onto the truck (incremental theme) b. load the truck with hay (incremental goal) c. spray paint on the wall (incremental theme) d. spray the wall with paint (incremental goal) e. build a house (incremental theme) f. fill a jar (incremental goal) We accomplish this by elaborating part of the LEXEME hierarchy, as shown in (3). We define a subtype of transitive-verb-lexeme, the transport-verb-lexeme type, which obeys the additional constraints shown in (4). These include a three-element ARG-ST and the cause-to-go-to frame, whose ACTOR, THEME, and GOAL participants are indexed to the three arguments. Transportverb-lxm has two subtypes (among others not shown), load-lxm and spray-lxm. Their additional defining constraints are shown in (5) and (6), respectively, which mention the appropriate frames. There are also two additional subtypes of transitive verbs of relevance: incrementaltheme-(verb)-lexeme and incremental-goal-(verb)-lexeme, whose additional constraints are shown in (7) and (8). The two types each of the load and spray lexeme, along with the single types of the fill and build lexemes, inherit from incremental-goal-(verb)-lexeme and incrementaltheme-(verb)-lexeme in the pattern shown at the bottom of (3). The maximal lexemes, which are represented by the terminal nodes in (3), are exemplified by incr-goal-load-lxm, whose additional constraints are shown in (9). In (9) “withn” indicates that there will be more than one lexeme whose form is <with>. Unresolved here, is the issue whether, for example, to posit two 1 different incremental theme lexemes load, one taking on and the other onto, to allow disjunction in LID values, or to seek another solution. (3) transitive-verb-lexeme transport-verb-lxm spray-lxm load-lxm incr-goal-lxm incr-theme-lxm inc-go-spray-lxm inc-th-spray-lxm inc-go-load-lxm inc-th-load-lxm fill-lxm build-lxm (4) transport-verb-lxm ARG - ST SYN | CAT | XARG SEM FORM SEM | FRAMES (5) load-lxm (6) spray-lxm (7) incr-theme-lxm (8) incr-goal-lxm (9) incr-goal-load-lxm FORM SEM | FRAMES ARG - ST VAL ARG - ST VAL VAL [1]NPi,XPj ,XPk [1] TOP [2] e INDEX cgt fr ACTOR FRAM ES [2]THEM E GOAL EVENT i j k e load fr load spray fr spray NPi ,XPJ ,XPk NPi ,NPJ ,PPk NPi ,XPJ ,XPk NPi ,NPk ,PPj NPi , NPk , PP[LID with n ] 2