1 / 72

Embodied Compositional Semantics

Embodied Compositional Semantics. Ellen Dodge edodge@berkeley.edu. Questions. What is the nature of compositionality in the Neural Theory of Language? How can it be best represented using Embodied Construction Grammar?. Examples. He bit the apple He was bitten (by a toddler)

khan
Télécharger la présentation

Embodied Compositional Semantics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Embodied Compositional Semantics Ellen Dodge edodge@berkeley.edu

  2. Questions • What is the nature of compositionality in the Neural Theory of Language? • How can it be best represented using Embodied Construction Grammar?

  3. Examples • He bit the apple • He was bitten (by a toddler) • He bit into the apple • His white teeth bit into the apple. • He shattered the window • The window was shattered • The window shattered

  4. Outline • Compositionality • Neural Theory of Language and ECG • Assumptions • Overview • Examples: • Representation of constructions and meaning • Simulation • Concluding Remarks

  5. Compositionality • Put the parts together to create the meaning of the whole.

  6. Compositionality • Put the parts together to create the meaning of the whole. • Questions: • what is the nature of the parts? • How and why do they combine with one another? • What meaning is associated with this composition?

  7. Short answers • Parts = constructions, schemas • Combination = binding, unification • Meaning of the whole = simulation of unified parts

  8. Constructions Construction Grammar • Constructions are form-meaning pairings • A given utterance instantiates many different constructions Embodied Construction Grammar • Construction meaning is represented using schemas • Meaning is embodied

  9. Key assumptions of NTL • Language understanding is simulation • Simulation involves activation of neural structures

  10. Comments • Language understanding • Understanding process is dynamic • “Redundancy” is okay

  11. Conceptual structure • Embodied • Schematic • (Potentially) language-independent • Highly interconnected

  12. Simulation parameters • Constructions unify to create semantic specification that supports a simulation • Two types of simulation parameters for event descriptions: • Event content • Event construal

  13. Putting the parts together • Bindings • Unification

  14. “Pre-existing” structure schema Cxn schema schema Cxn schema Cxn schema

  15. Unification schema Cxn schema schema Cxn schema Cxn schema

  16. Summary • Parts = constructions, schemas • Combination = binding, unification • Meaning of the whole = simulation of the combined parts

  17. First example • He bit the apple.

  18. Schemas schema MotorControl subcase of Process roles Actor↔ Protagonist Effector Effort Routine constraints Actor ← animate

  19. schema Contact subcase of SpatialRelation roles Entity1: entity Entity2: entity schema MotorControl subcase of Process roles Actor↔ Protagonist Effector Effort Routine constraints Actor ← animate schema ForceTransfer evokes Conact as C roles Supplier ↔ C.entity1 Recipient ↔ C.entity2 Force schemaForceApplication subcase ofMotorControl evokesForceTransfer as FT roles Actor ↔ FT.Supplier ↔ Protagonist Acted Upon↔ FT.Recipient Effector Routine Effort ↔ FT.Force.amount

  20. Schema networks Contact MotorControl ForceTransfer Motion Effector Motion SelfMotion ForceApplication CauseEffect MotionPath Effector MotionPath SelfMotion Path SPG Agentive Impact SpatiallyDirectedAction Contact

  21. Verb Constructions Construction BITE1 subcase of Verb form: bite meaning: ForceApplication constraints: Effector ← teeth Routine ← bite // close mouth schemaForceApplication subcase ofMotorControl evokesForceTransfer as FT roles Actor↔ FT.Supplier ↔ Protagonist Acted Upon ↔ FT.Recipient Effector Routine Effort↔ FT.Force.amount

  22. Verb Constructions cxn BITE meaning: ForceApplication schema MotorControl cxn GRASP meaning: ForceApplication schema ForceApplication subcase of MotorControl cxn PUSH meaning: ForceApplication cxn SLAP meaning: AgentiveImpact schema Agentive Impact subcase of ForceApplication cxn KICK meaning: AgentiveImpact cxn HIT meaning: AgentiveImpact

  23. Argument Structure Construction construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm

  24. Argument Structure Construction construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF meaning:CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm

  25. CauseEffect schema schemaCauseEffect subcase of ForceApplication; Process roles Causer ↔ Actor Affected ↔ ActedUpon ↔ Process.Protagonist Instrument ↔ Effector

  26. Schema Network Contact MotorControl ForceTransfer Process Motion Effector Motion SelfMotion ForceApplication CauseEffect MotionPath Effector MotionPath SelfMotion Path SPG Agentive Impact SpatiallyDirectedAction Contact

  27. Argument Structure Construction construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF meaning:CauseEffect evokes:EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected↔ NPm

  28. Schema Network Contact MotorControl ForceTransfer Process Motion Effector Motion SelfMotion ForceApplication CauseEffect MotionPath Effector MotionPath SelfMotion Path SPG Agentive Impact SpatiallyDirectedAction Contact

  29. Important points • Compositionality does not require that each component contain different information. • Shared semantic structure is not viewed as an undesirable redundancy

  30. Argument Structure Construction construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm

  31. Event Descriptor schema schema EventDescriptor roles EventType: Process ProfiledProcess: Process ProfiledParticipant: Entity ProfiledState(s): State SpatialSetting TemporalSetting

  32. Argument Structure Construction Construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Affected ↔ NPm

  33. Bindings with other cxns construction NPVP1 constituents: Subj: NP VP : VP form Constraints Subj f before VPf meaning: EventDescriptor ProfiledParticipant ↔ Subjm construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V ; NP form: VF before NPF meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant Affected ↔ NPm

  34. Bindings with other cxns Construction NPVP1 constituents: Subj: NP VP : VP form constraints Subj f before VPf meaning: EventDescriptor ProfiledParticipant ↔ Subjm construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V ; NP form: VF before NPF meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant Affected ↔ NPm schema EventDescriptor roles EventType ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant ProfiledState(s) SpatialSetting TemporalSetting

  35. Bindings with other cxns construction NPVP1 constituents: Subj: NP VP : VP form Constraints Subj f before VPf meaning: EventDescriptor ProfiledParticipant ↔ Subjm construction ActiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V ; NP form: VF before NPF meaning: CauseEffect evokes; EventDescriptor as ED constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant Affected ↔ NPm schema EventDescriptor roles EventType ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant ProfiledState(s) SpatialSetting TemporalSetting

  36. Unification Meaning Constructions EventDescriptor EventType ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant NPVP1 CauseEffect causer affected TransitiveAction2 ForceApplication actor actedupon BITE NP2 ReferentDescriptor THE APPLE ReferentDescriptor NP1 HE

  37. Unification Meaning Constructions EventDescriptor EventType ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant NPVP1 CauseEffect causer affected TransitiveAction2 ForceApplication actor actedupon BITE NP2 ReferentDescriptor THE APPLE ReferentDescriptor resolved referent NP1 HE

  38. Unification Meaning Constructions EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant NPVP1 CauseEffect causer affected TransitiveAction2 Verb ForceApplication actor actedupon BITE NP2 ReferentDescriptor THE APPLE ReferentDescriptor resolved referent NP1 HE

  39. Unification Meaning Constructions EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant NPVP1 subj CauseEffect causer affected TransitiveAction2 ForceApplication actor actedupon BITE NP2 ReferentDescriptor THE APPLE ReferentDescriptor NP1 HE

  40. Unification Meaning Constructions EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant NPVP1 CauseEffect causer affected TransitiveAction2 NP ForceApplication actor actedupon BITE NP2 ReferentDescriptor THE APPLE ReferentDescriptor NP1 HE

  41. Semantic SpecificationHe bit the apple EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant CauseEffect causer affected ForceApplication actor actedupon routine  bite effector  teeth RD27 category Person RD55 category Apple

  42. Simulation - He bit the apple CauseEffect Protagonist = Causer ↔ Actor ForceApplication Protagonist = Affected ↔ ActedUpon Process

  43. Simulation - He bit the apple CauseEffect Protagonist = Causer ↔ Actor ForceApplication Protagonist = Affected ↔ ActedUpon Process

  44. Passive voice He was bitten (by a toddler)

  45. Argument Structure ConstructionHe was bitten (by a toddler) construction PassiveTransitiveAction2 subcase of VP constituents: V : PassiveVerb (PP: agentivePP) form constraints: VF before PPF meaning: CauseEffectAction evokes; EventDescriptor as ED; ForceApplication as FA constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Affected ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant FA ↔ Vm Causer ↔ FA.Actor Affected ↔ FA.ActedUpon Causer ↔ PP.NPm

  46. Semantic SpecificationHe was bitten (by a toddler) EventDescriptor eventtype ProfiledProcess ProfiledParticipant CauseEffect causer affected ForceApplication actor actedupon routine  bite effector  teeth RD27 category Person RD48 category Person

  47. Simulation - He was bitten (by a toddler) CauseEffect Action = Bite Protagonist =Causer ↔ Actor Protagonist = Affected ↔ ActedUpon Effect = Process

  48. Variations on a theme • He shattered the window • The window was shattered • The window shattered

  49. Verb Construction -- shatter Construction SHATTER1 subcase of Verb form: shatter meaning: StateChange constraints: Initial :: Undergoer.state ← whole Final :: Undergoer.state ← shards schemaStateChange subcase of Process roles Undergoer ↔ Protagonist

  50. Argument Structure ConstructionHe shattered the window construction ActiveTransitiveAction3 subcase of VP constituents: V : verb NP: NP form constraints: VF before NPF meaning:CauseEffect evokes:EventDescriptor as ED; StateChange as SC constraints: {Selfm ↔ ED.EventType} {Vm ↔ ED.ProfiledProcess} Causer ↔ ED.ProfiledParticipant SC ↔ Vm Affected ↔ SC.Undergoer Affected↔ NPm

More Related