重新审视和评估可解析性

IF 0.8 2区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Sergei Monakhov
{"title":"重新审视和评估可解析性","authors":"Sergei Monakhov","doi":"10.1017/s0022226723000385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>This paper provides evidence that the inveterate way of assessing linguistic items’ degrees of analysability by calculating their derivation to base frequency ratios may obfuscate the difference between two meaning processing models: one based on the principle of compositionality and another on the principle of parsability. I propose to capture the difference between these models by estimating the ratio of two transitional probabilities for complex words: P (affix | base) and P (base | affix). When transitional probabilities are comparably low, each of the elements entering into combination is equally free to vary. The combination itself is judged by speakers to be semantically transparent, and its derivational element tends to be more linguistically productive. In contrast, multi-morphemic words that are characterised by greater discrepancies between transitional probabilities are similar to collocations in the sense that they also consist of a node (conditionally independent element) and a collocate (conditionally dependent element). Such linguistic expressions are also considered to be semantically complex but appear less transparent because the collocate’s meaning does not coincide with the meaning of the respective free element (even if it exists) and has to be parsed out from what is available.</p>","PeriodicalId":47027,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Linguistics","volume":"141 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Parsability revisited and reassessed\",\"authors\":\"Sergei Monakhov\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/s0022226723000385\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>This paper provides evidence that the inveterate way of assessing linguistic items’ degrees of analysability by calculating their derivation to base frequency ratios may obfuscate the difference between two meaning processing models: one based on the principle of compositionality and another on the principle of parsability. I propose to capture the difference between these models by estimating the ratio of two transitional probabilities for complex words: P (affix | base) and P (base | affix). When transitional probabilities are comparably low, each of the elements entering into combination is equally free to vary. The combination itself is judged by speakers to be semantically transparent, and its derivational element tends to be more linguistically productive. In contrast, multi-morphemic words that are characterised by greater discrepancies between transitional probabilities are similar to collocations in the sense that they also consist of a node (conditionally independent element) and a collocate (conditionally dependent element). Such linguistic expressions are also considered to be semantically complex but appear less transparent because the collocate’s meaning does not coincide with the meaning of the respective free element (even if it exists) and has to be parsed out from what is available.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47027,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Linguistics\",\"volume\":\"141 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Linguistics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226723000385\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226723000385","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文提供的证据表明,通过计算派生词与基频词的频率比来评估语言项目可分析程度的惯用方法可能会混淆两种意义加工模型之间的差异:一种是基于构词法原则的模型,另一种是基于可解析性原则的模型。我建议通过估算复杂词的两种过渡概率之比来捕捉这些模型之间的差异:P (affix | base) 和 P (base | affix)。当过渡概率相当低时,进入组合的每个元素都同样可以自由变化。说话人认为这种组合本身在语义上是透明的,其派生成分往往更有语言效果。相反,过渡概率差异较大的多词素词类似于搭配,因为它们也由一个节点(条件独立要素)和一个搭配(条件依赖要素)组成。这类语言表达也被认为是语义复杂的,但显得不那么透明,因为搭配词的意义与相应的自由元素(即使存在)的意义不一致,必须从现有的意义中解析出来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Parsability revisited and reassessed

This paper provides evidence that the inveterate way of assessing linguistic items’ degrees of analysability by calculating their derivation to base frequency ratios may obfuscate the difference between two meaning processing models: one based on the principle of compositionality and another on the principle of parsability. I propose to capture the difference between these models by estimating the ratio of two transitional probabilities for complex words: P (affix | base) and P (base | affix). When transitional probabilities are comparably low, each of the elements entering into combination is equally free to vary. The combination itself is judged by speakers to be semantically transparent, and its derivational element tends to be more linguistically productive. In contrast, multi-morphemic words that are characterised by greater discrepancies between transitional probabilities are similar to collocations in the sense that they also consist of a node (conditionally independent element) and a collocate (conditionally dependent element). Such linguistic expressions are also considered to be semantically complex but appear less transparent because the collocate’s meaning does not coincide with the meaning of the respective free element (even if it exists) and has to be parsed out from what is available.

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
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
9.10%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: Journal of Linguistics (JL) has as its goal to publish articles that make a clear contribution to current debate in all branches of theoretical linguistics. The journal also provides an excellent survey of recent linguistics publications, with around thirty book reviews in each volume and regular review articles on major works marking important theoretical advances. View a FREE collection of JL papers, highlighting the Journal"s broad coverage
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信