Ontology and the Lexicon: week.2

..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Background of the OntoLex Research OntoLex Resources Lab

Ontology and the LexiconWeek 2: An Introduction

Shu-Kai Hsieh

Lab of Ontologies, Language Processing and e-HumanitiesGIL, National Taiwan University

February 26, 2014

Ontology and the Lexicon Shu-Kai Hsieh

..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


..1 Background of the OntoLex ResearchSemantic WebWhat is OntologyOntology for Linguistics

..2 OntoLex Resources

..3 Lab


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web



..3 Lab


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web

Semantic Web and Web Semantics


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web

The Need and Trend of Shared Semantics


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web

Your Agent or Enemy needs this

注意！

我們需要共享的 Conceptual Schema 才能逮到⼈人類


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web

Ontology-based Applications

We need a shared and common understanding (of a domain) thatcan be communicated across people and machines (applications),and it will play a major role in supporting information exchangeand discovery, we well as many applications:

• e-Government, e-Health, e-Commerce,..• open data integration and interoperability.• ontology-backboned search engine


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web

Languages representing Ontologies


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web

Languages representing Ontologies

Can we use Glossaries, Terminologies, Meta data orother Controlled Vocabulary instead? No: they are just notprecise enough to capture linguistic and cognitive complexity.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web

Ontological Precison (Bechhofer, 2011)


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Semantic Web

Why do we need Linguists for Ontology?

• ambiguity, polysemy, underspecification,...OH, 沒有語言學的

介入，知識整理工作好無趣也無頭緒。


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


What is Ontology



..3 LabOntology and the Lexicon Shu-Kai Hsieh

..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


What is Ontology

What is Ontology

• In Philosophy (dating back to Artistotle), → Ontos (thatwhich exists) + logos (knowledge of).

• In Computer Science, → ”an explicit specification of aconceptualization (Gruber (1995))”, ”an engineering artefactthat represents the shared conceptualisation of objects in adomain of interest”.

explicit specification : Written in logic, as a set of axioms.conceptualization : the set of objects and relations in a

domain. <Objects,Relations,Functions>


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


What is Ontology

What is Ontological Representation

• Not what it is (ontology) but how it is represented(ontological representation).

• There are many ways to represent ontologies (recall that it isan engineering artefact) → that at best approximate our realconcepts and conceptualisations, even we don’t quiteunderstand what we are approximating.

• The evaluation of an engineering artefact turns out to bewhether it is fit for purpose or not.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Ontology for Linguistics




..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Cognitive-Functional Take

Linguistic meaning is ultimately a matter ofconceptualizing the things we talk about: when we putthings into words, we are not just giving a one-to-onemapping of what the world is like - we make a choice byputting things in the particular way we do. [2].


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Empirical Epistimological Stance

• OntoLex (Lexicalized Ontology) is exclusively concerned withthe ”conceptual meanings” of lexical units (that can beempirically represented), NOT with the those of actions orphenomena.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Language, Meaning and Reality• [單位-意義]可以切割出來觀察嗎？


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Language, Meaning and Reality

跨語言觀察可能更接近


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Meaning(s)

• Meaning has many readings!• 他的意思應該是如果不給他意思一下就很沒有意思


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Meaning(s): levels

Linguistic approach to meaning requires us to break down thenotion of meaning into different levels at which we interpretelinguistic expressions [2].

expression level the meaning of a simple or complex expressiontaken in isolation.

utterance level the meaning of an expression when used in a givencontext of utterance resulting from fixing reference.

communication level the meaning of an utterance as acommunicative act in a given social setting.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Meaning(s): levels

Example

I don’t need your bicyle.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Meaning(s): dimensions

[2] provides three dimensions of meaning:

• descriptive dimension: propositional meaning; related toreference and truth.

• social dimension: related to honorifics.• expressive dimension: conventionally serves the expression

of subjective sensations, emotions, affections, evaluations orattitudes.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



A clear boundary in the Study of Meaning?

• Lexical Semantics: the investigation of expression meaningsstored in the mental lexicon.

• Semantics vs. Pragmatics: Semantics ends wherecontextual knowledge comes in? (i.e., utterance meaning andcommunicative meaning are beyond semantics?)

• Meanings are Concepts?


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



為什麼我們相信詞意 (word meaning; sense) "不是"詞彙概念

(concept)?e.g.,http://lope.linguistics.ntu.edu.tw/cwnvis_beta/index.php/senses?lid=066992


http://lope.linguistics.ntu.edu.tw/cwnvis_beta/index.php/senses?lid=066992

..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



For the sake of communication, we perceive the world (entities,events, relations) linguistically via sound and/or orthographic form,which trigger our MENTAL SOMETHING for further processingand production.

• A Concept is a general mental description of something that isstored in our mental lexicon.

• Word Sense is the instantiation and differentiation of Conceptin varied contexts.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



From Meanings to Concepts and Back

usage-based exercise

我小時候養了13條狗；狗是人類的好朋友；她看到狗就

怕；狗仔隊毀了這個社會的善良風俗


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



From Semantics to Cognitive Semantics, and Back?


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Exercise

What can be opened? (Searle, 1983)

Examplea. John opened the window.b. John opened his mouth.c. John opened his book.d. John opened his briefcase.e. John opened the curtains.f. The carpenter opened the wall.g. The surgeon opened the wound.h. The sapper opened the dam.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Underspecified Meanings: ExerciseWhat can be opened? more figurative ... (Evans, 2009)

Examplea. The discussant opened the conversation.b. John opened a bank account.c. John opened the meeting.d. John opened a dialogue.e. John opened the curtains.f. The Germans opened hostilities against the Allies in 1940.g. The skies opened.h. He opened his mind to a new way of thinking.g. He finally opened up to her.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Underspecified Meanings: Exercise

What can be opened again, in Chinese?


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Underspecified Meanings: Exercise

My two cents ..

Example車,穴,店,窗,會,視野,燈,口,頭,花,槍,心,源,天,門,箱,戶,工,瓶,國,同學

會,隧道,玩笑...

Each relates to distinct sorts of actions, events, and situations.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



In sum, open appears to be a function of (1) (sentential) contextwhich guides the (2) encyclopedic and conceptual knowledge(ontology) to which open relates in a given instance of use. (wordmeaning)


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



In the Context of Cognitive Science ...

Cognitive linguistics practice can be divided approximately into twoareas: (Evans, 2009)

..1 Cognitive semantics: the study of semantic representation,the human conceptual system,and meaning constructionprocesses as revealed by language.

..2 Cognitive (approaches) to grammar: the study of thesymbolic linguistic units that comprise language, and theirprinciples of organization.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Cognitive Lexical Semantics

To develop a cognitive linguistic account of

..1 lexical concept: the linguistic knowledge that word encode.

..2 cognitive model: the conceptual system, i.e., thenon-linguistic knowledge that words facilitate access to. →This provides a level of non-linguistic knowledge which isspecialized for being accessed via lexical concepts.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Ontology-based Linguistic Studies [1]A variety of polysemy that gets a fair amount of linguisticattention is regular (or systematic) polysemy. This refers to wordsenses that are distinct, but which follow a general pattern or rulein the language.

• container/contents:I put some sand into a box/bottle/tin/canister.I dumped the whole box/bottle/tin/canister onto the floor.

• location/government/inhabitants:city• physical object/information: book• .......


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Ontology-based Linguistic Studies [2]

Example (組合的概念痕跡)

schoolboy (小中学校の)男子生徒 a boy attending school.schoolmate 学校の友達 a person who attends or attended the

same school as oneself.schoolhouse 校舍 a building used as a school, especially in a small

community or village.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



Non-hierarchical Ontologies: Qualia Structure

Pustejovsky (1995,p76,85-86): qualia as information about ”fouressential aspects of a word’s meaning”, should enter into individualitems’ meaning representations. These are:

• Formal: the basic category which distinguishes it within alarger domain;

• Constitutive: the relation between an object and itsconstituent parts;

• Telic: its purpose and function;• Agentive: factors involved in its origin or ”bringing it about”.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .





..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


OntoLex Resources

• Wiki Family (today)• Lexical Resources• Ontological Resources


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Wiki: its role

• A good review of current state-of-arts can be found in [1].• Resolving the Knowledge acquisition bottleneck: The

creation of very large knowledge bases has been made possibleby the availability of collaboratively-curated online resourcessuch as Wikipedia and Wiktionary.

• structured, semi-structured, unstructured resources.• what are the advantages and disadvantages, respectively?


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Wiki as semi-structured content for Ontologies

• Transforming Wikipedia into machine-readable knowledge• Acquiring related terms: thesaurus extraction• Relation extraction

• Leitmotif: generating semantics by exploiting the shallowstructure found in Wikipedia.

• Building and enriching ontologies from Wikipedia: YAGO,WikiNet and BabelNet.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Multilingual case of collaboratively-generatedsemi-structured resources


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


• WikiTaxonomy (Ponzetto and Strube, 2007; Ponzetto andStrube, 2011)(100k is-a relations)

• WikiNet: (Nas- tase et al., 2010; Nastase and Strube, 2013)is a project which heuristically exploits different aspects ofWikipedia to obtain a multilingual concept network by derivingnot only is-a relations, but also other types of relations.

• MENTA (de Melo and Weikum, 2010), creates one of thelargest multilingual lexical knowledge bases by interconnectingmore than 13M articles in 271 languages.


..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .





..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Homework

• Install Protégé http://protege.stanford.edu/, and• Read the tutorials

Next class: Creating your first (Pizza) ontology following http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/Protege4Pizzas10Minutes


http://protege.stanford.edu/

http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/Protege4Pizzas10Minutes

http://protegewiki.stanford.edu/wiki/Protege4Pizzas10Minutes

..........

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

.....

.....

......

.....

......

.....

.....

.

. . . . . . . .

. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


Eduard Hovy, Roberto Navigli, and Simone Paolo Ponzetto.Collaboratively built semi-structured content and artificialintelligence: The story so far.Artificial Intelligence, 194:2–27, 2013.Sebastian Löbner.Understanding semantics.Routledge, 2013.


Ontology and the Lexicon: week.2

Education

Transcript of Ontology and the Lexicon: week.2