Search (3 results, page 1 of 1)

0.018634612 = product of:
  0.037269223 = sum of:
    0.037269223 = product of:
      0.07453845 = sum of:
        0.07453845 = weight(_text_:n in 103) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.07453845 = score(doc=103,freq=6.0), product of:
            0.18067603 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041904088 = queryNorm
            0.41255307 = fieldWeight in 103, product of:
              2.4494898 = tf(freq=6.0), with freq of:
                6.0 = termFreq=6.0
              4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=103)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

There have been many attempts at classifying the semantic modification relations (R) of N + N compounds but this work has not led to the acceptance of a definitive scheme, so that devising a reusable classification is a worthwhile aim. The scope of this undertaking is extended to other binominal lexemes, i.e. units that contain two thing-morphemes without explicitly stating R, like prepositional units, N + relational adjective units, etc. The 25-relation taxonomy of Bourque (2014) was tested against over 15,000 binominal lexemes from 106 languages and extended to a 29-relation scheme ("Bourque2") through the introduction of two new reversible relations. Bourque2 is then mapped onto Hatcher's (1960) four-relation scheme (extended by the addition of a fifth relation, similarity , as "Hatcher2"). This results in a two-tier system usable at different degrees of granularities. On account of its semantic proximity to compounding, metonymy is then taken into account, following Janda's (2011) suggestion that it plays a role in word formation; Peirsman and Geeraerts' (2006) inventory of 23 metonymic patterns is mapped onto Bourque2, confirming the identity of metonymic and binominal modification relations. Finally, Blank's (2003) and Koch's (2001) work on lexical semantics justifies the addition to the scheme of a third, superordinate level which comprises the three Aristotelean principles of similarity, contiguity and contrast.

0.012910438 = product of:
  0.025820876 = sum of:
    0.025820876 = product of:
      0.05164175 = sum of:
        0.05164175 = weight(_text_:n in 1623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.05164175 = score(doc=1623,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.18067603 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041904088 = queryNorm
            0.28582513 = fieldWeight in 1623, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.3116565 = idf(docFreq=1611, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=1623)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Type

n

0.0040091653 = product of:
  0.008018331 = sum of:
    0.008018331 = product of:
      0.048109982 = sum of:
        0.048109982 = weight(_text_:authors in 539) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.048109982 = score(doc=539,freq=2.0), product of:
            0.19103295 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.041904088 = queryNorm
            0.25184128 = fieldWeight in 539, product of:
              1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
                2.0 = termFreq=2.0
              4.558814 = idf(docFreq=1258, maxDocs=44218)
              0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=539)
      0.16666667 = coord(1/6)
  0.5 = coord(1/2)

Abstract

This paper is concerned with the issue of scope in topic maps. Topic maps are a form of knowledge representation suitable for solving a number of complex problems in the area of information management, ranging from findability (navigation and querying) to knowledge management and enterprise application integration (EAI). The topic map paradigm has its roots in efforts to understand the essential semantics of back-of-book indexes in order that they might be captured in a form suitable for computer processing. Once understood, the model of a back-of-book index was generalised in order to cover the needs of digital information, and extended to encompass glossaries and thesauri, as well as indexes. The resulting core model, of typed topics, associations, and occurrences, has many similarities with the semantic networks developed by the artificial intelligence community for representing knowledge structures. One key requirement of topic maps from the earliest days was to be able to merge indexes from disparate origins. This requirement accounts for two further concepts that greatly enhance the power of topic maps: subject identity and scope. This paper concentrates on scope, but also includes a brief discussion of the feature known as the topic naming constraint, with which it is closely related. It is based on the authors' experience in creating topic maps (in particular, the Italian Opera Topic Map, and in implementing processing systems for topic maps (in particular, the Ontopia Topic Map Engine and Navigator.