Semantik
Refine
Year of publication
- 2010 (7) (remove)
Document Type
- Part of a Book (5)
- Article (1)
- Contribution to a Periodical (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (7)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (7)
Keywords
- Semantik (4)
- Deutsch (3)
- Logische Partikel (2)
- Antonym (1)
- Computerunterstützte Lexikographie (1)
- Electronic dictionary (1)
- Gebrauchstheorie der Bedeutung (1)
- Lexikologie (1)
- Missverständnis (1)
- Morphologie (1)
Publicationstate
- Postprint (2)
- Veröffentlichungsversion (2)
Reviewstate
Publisher
- Benjamins (2)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (1)
- Lang (1)
- Stauffenburg (1)
Preface
(2010)
Connectives are conjunctions, prepositions, adverbs and other particles which share the function of encoding semantic relations between sentences, or rather, between semantic objects some of which can be meanings of sentences. The relata linked by any such relation will fall into one of four distinct categories: they will be physical objects, states of affairs, propositions, or pragmatic options (the atoms of human interaction). Physical objects constitute the conceptual domain of space, states of affairs the domain of time, propositions the epistemic domain, and pragmatic options the deontic domain. The relations encodable in any of these domains can be divided into four basic types: similarity relations, situating relations, conditional relations, and causal relations. Conceptual domains and types of relations define the universe of possible connections between semantic objects.
Connectives differ as to the interpretations they permit in terms of conceptual domains and types of relations. Very few connectives are specialized on relata of one certain category and relations of one certain type. Possible examples in German are später (‘later on’) and zwischenzeitlich (‘in the meantime’), which encode situating relations between states of affairs. Other connectives are specialized on relata of one certain category, but are underspecified with respect to the type of relation. An example is German sobald (‘as soon as’), which can only connect states of affairs, but accepts situating, conditional and causal readings. Connectives of a third group are specialized on relations of a certain type, but are underspecified with respect to the category of the relata. Examples of this kind are German weil (‘because’) and trotzdem (‘nevertheless’), which encode causal relations, but accept states of affairs, propositions and pragmatic options as their relata. Connectives of a fourth group are underspecified both for the category of relata and the type of relation. An example is German da (‘there’), which accepts relata of any category and allows for situating, conditional and causal readings. Connectives like und (‘and’) and oder (‘or’) exhibit an even higher degree of under specification, in that they allow for all kinds of relations and relata.
Antonymy is a relation of lexical opposition which is generally considered to involve (i) the presence of a scale along which a particular property may be graded, and hence both (ii) gradability of the corresponding lexical items and (iii) typical entailment relations. Like other types of lexical opposites, antonyms typically differ only minimally: while denoting opposing poles on the relevant dimension of difference, they are similar with respect to other components of meaning. This paper presents examples of antonymy from the domain of speech act verbs which either lack some of these typical attributes or show problems in the application of these. It discusses several different proposals for the classification of these atypical examples.
The representation of semantic relations between word senses of different entries in a dictionary is subject to a number of consistency requirements. This paper discusses the issue of maintaining and accessing consistent information on cross-references between sense-related items in electronic dictionaries from a mainly text-technological point of view. We present a number of consistency criteria for cross-referencing related senses and propose a practical approach to handling sense relations in an online dictionary. Our proposal is currently being tested in a large ongoing online dictionary project for German called elexiko. We focus on three different aspects of the dictionary development and editing process where consistency is an important issue: lexicographic data modelling, implementation of a lexicographic database system for an electronic dictionary, and development of practical tools for the lexicographer’s workbench.