词语形成竞争的分布评价

IF 0.7 N/A LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Word Structure Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.3366/word.2023.0222
Matı́as Guzmán Naranjo, Olivier Bonami
{"title":"词语形成竞争的分布评价","authors":"Matı́as Guzmán Naranjo, Olivier Bonami","doi":"10.3366/word.2023.0222","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We contrast two views of rivalry in word formation. Under the classical, categorical view, two processes are rivals if they are semantically equivalent. Under the more nuanced, gradient view, two processes can be rivals at different degrees, depending on how frequently they are amenable to be deployed as alternatives to one another. We propose to use methods from distributional semantics to explore the usefulness of both views. Building on data from French, we first show that distributional differences between average difference vectors capture semantic similarity across derivational processes in a manner comparable to the expectations of expert morphologists. We then propose an operational implementation of the classical view of rivalry based on computational classifiers: processes are rivals if and only if a classifier is unable to discriminate between them. Experimentation with French data shows that this operationalization correctly captures the broad brushes of rivalry, but also reveals finer, gradient aspects of competition in the spirit of gradient rivalry.","PeriodicalId":43166,"journal":{"name":"Word Structure","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A distributional assessment of rivalry in word formation\",\"authors\":\"Matı́as Guzmán Naranjo, Olivier Bonami\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/word.2023.0222\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We contrast two views of rivalry in word formation. Under the classical, categorical view, two processes are rivals if they are semantically equivalent. Under the more nuanced, gradient view, two processes can be rivals at different degrees, depending on how frequently they are amenable to be deployed as alternatives to one another. We propose to use methods from distributional semantics to explore the usefulness of both views. Building on data from French, we first show that distributional differences between average difference vectors capture semantic similarity across derivational processes in a manner comparable to the expectations of expert morphologists. We then propose an operational implementation of the classical view of rivalry based on computational classifiers: processes are rivals if and only if a classifier is unable to discriminate between them. Experimentation with French data shows that this operationalization correctly captures the broad brushes of rivalry, but also reveals finer, gradient aspects of competition in the spirit of gradient rivalry.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Word Structure\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Word Structure\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2023.0222\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Word Structure","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/word.2023.0222","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

我们对比了两种关于单词构成竞争的观点。在经典的范畴观点下,如果两个过程在语义上等价,那么它们就是竞争对手。在更微妙的梯度观点下,两个过程可以在不同程度上成为竞争对手,这取决于它们作为彼此替代品的部署频率。我们建议使用分布语义的方法来探索这两种观点的有用性。基于来自法语的数据,我们首先表明,平均差异向量之间的分布差异以与专业形态学家的期望相当的方式捕捉了衍生过程中的语义相似性。然后,我们提出了一种基于计算分类器的竞争经典观点的操作实现:当且仅当分类器无法区分进程时,进程才是竞争对手。对法国数据的实验表明,这种操作正确地捕捉到了竞争的全貌,但也以梯度竞争的精神揭示了竞争的更精细、梯度方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A distributional assessment of rivalry in word formation
We contrast two views of rivalry in word formation. Under the classical, categorical view, two processes are rivals if they are semantically equivalent. Under the more nuanced, gradient view, two processes can be rivals at different degrees, depending on how frequently they are amenable to be deployed as alternatives to one another. We propose to use methods from distributional semantics to explore the usefulness of both views. Building on data from French, we first show that distributional differences between average difference vectors capture semantic similarity across derivational processes in a manner comparable to the expectations of expert morphologists. We then propose an operational implementation of the classical view of rivalry based on computational classifiers: processes are rivals if and only if a classifier is unable to discriminate between them. Experimentation with French data shows that this operationalization correctly captures the broad brushes of rivalry, but also reveals finer, gradient aspects of competition in the spirit of gradient rivalry.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Word Structure
Word Structure LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
期刊最新文献
Studying negative evidence in Finnish language corpora The structuralist tradition meets empirical data: Corpus data enhancing the Czech Internet Language Reference Book Uncertainty in the production of Czech noun and verb forms Realised overabundance in Estonian noun paradigms: A corpus study Front matter
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1