{
"paper_id": "J77-4003",
"header": {
"generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0",
"date_generated": "2023-01-19T02:50:17.934592Z"
},
"title": "Theories of Action Sentences, in Working Papers in",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Norman",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Sondheimer",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Michael",
"middle": [
"L"
],
"last": "Geis",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "\"",
"middle": [],
"last": "Two",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "R0derick",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Jacobs",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": ""
},
{
"first": "Peter",
"middle": [
"S"
],
"last": "Rosenbaum",
"suffix": "",
"affiliation": {},
"email": ""
}
],
"year": "",
"venue": null,
"identifiers": {},
"abstract": "This paper presents an analysis in a semantic net formalism of the semantic structure of English sentences containing references to spatial-location. Spatial reference, hereafter-SR, provides either static location or motional information John is at home, Fred ran across the street to the store. .The task for the semantic analysis of sentences with SR's is to,make clear what is being positioned. THis has been difficult to do. Previous proposals have left unanalyzed many phenomena including important motional references. This paperv* main conclusion is that a much improved analysis can be obtained by representing the SR's as positioning abstract events and states of affairs. The analysis in semantic nets has the location of an event or state of affairs represented as a node which is linked to the node showing the event or D. C.: ~e o r~e t o~~n i v e r s i t~ Press, 1971, 35-56. Geie, Michael L., \"English Time and Place Adverbials,\" in Working Papers in linguistic^, No.",
"pdf_parse": {
"paper_id": "J77-4003",
"_pdf_hash": "",
"abstract": [
{
"text": "This paper presents an analysis in a semantic net formalism of the semantic structure of English sentences containing references to spatial-location. Spatial reference, hereafter-SR, provides either static location or motional information John is at home, Fred ran across the street to the store. .The task for the semantic analysis of sentences with SR's is to,make clear what is being positioned. THis has been difficult to do. Previous proposals have left unanalyzed many phenomena including important motional references. This paperv* main conclusion is that a much improved analysis can be obtained by representing the SR's as positioning abstract events and states of affairs. The analysis in semantic nets has the location of an event or state of affairs represented as a node which is linked to the node showing the event or D. C.: ~e o r~e t o~~n i v e r s i t~ Press, 1971, 35-56. Geie, Michael L., \"English Time and Place Adverbials,\" in Working Papers in linguistic^, No.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Abstract",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"body_text": [
{
"text": "state by arcs: indicating its staus as the spatial attribute. A few SR's are shown as naming these locational entities, which we call place ,object. These SR' s involve examples with \"where\", \"here\", and \"there\" However, most SRts are represented as relating place objects to the position of objects in the manner of prepositional phrases. This primacy ok prepositions is argued for in the paper. Motional references are allowed for by functions represented in the nets which produce parts of place objects which are then positioned by prepositional f c m s . The necessary ordering that'comes with motional references is allowed for by associating temporal elements with the functions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "While the positioned elements are simple, the overall semantic structure of the sentences containing SR's is often complicated by the involvement of more than one event or state of affairs. The paper includes a survey of the sentential semantic structures necessary to deal with SR's.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "A similar complexity is necessary to deal with the informakion on the location of objects which is gained from sentences with SR's. The paper suggests-the use of inference rules to allow for this.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The most surprising of the paper's oonclusions is that a strong tie exists between referehces to space and temporal information. In fact, the locations of all events and states of affairs placed by SR's are argued to be locations in both space and time. The effect of this conclusion is most clearly seen in a formalized definition of the primitives of the semantic seructures , which is also presented in semantic nets. There, as ane possible interpretation of the place object, it is shown as a set of pairs of volumes in space and points in time. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": ". . . . ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VIf.3 Semantic Structures for Motion",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This paper presents an analpis in a semantic net formalism of the semantic structure of English sentence8 containing references to spatial location.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Spatial referefnce, hereafter -SR, provides either'static location or motional information :",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "1.1 John is at home 1.2 Fred ran across the street to the store.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The task for the semantic analysis of sentences with SR's is to make clear what is being positioned. This has been difficult to do. Previous proposals have left unanalyzed many phenomena including important motional references. This paper's main conclusion is that a much.improved analysis can be obtained by representing the SR's as positioning ab~tract events and states of affairs.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The analysis in semantic nets has the location of an event or state ~f affairs represented as a node which is linked to the node showing the event or state by arcs indicating its status as the spatial attribute. A few SR's are shown as naming these locational entities, which we call pLaee object. These SR's involve examples with \"where\", \"here\", and \"therei'. However, most SR' s are represented as relating place objects to the position of objects in the manner of prepositional phrases. This primacy of prepositions is argued for in the paper.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Motional references are allowed for by functions represented in the nets which produce parts of place objects which are then positioned by prepositional forms.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The necessary ordering that comes with motional references is allowed for by associating temporal elements with the functions.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "While the positioned elements are simple, the overall semantic structure of the sentences containing SR's is often complicated by the involvement of more than one event or state of affairs. The paper includes a survey of the sentential There is available a discussion in greater detail of a preliminary analysis to the one given here (~ondheimer, 1975) . There is also available for comparison an analy is by this authbr of the same meaning phenomena, in the competing paradigm of model-theoretic semantics (Sondheimer , 1978) The current.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 334,
"end": 352,
"text": "(~ondheimer, 1975)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 507,
"end": 526,
"text": "(Sondheimer , 1978)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF7"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "paper is distinguishable by its better developed semantic net formalism nnd i t n emphasis 3n producing computationally j u s t i f i e d structures.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "I. Introduction",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Ihe pazt has seen many studies of SR phenomena. There ha8 been interest in connecting. language and scenes, e. g. , Coles ( 19681, Kochen ( 19691, Winograd (1972) ",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 122,
"end": 162,
"text": "( 19681, Kochen ( 19691, Winograd (1972)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "XI. Prev ous Efforts",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "are claimed to locate. In some cases, the SR'B apply to only physical objects..",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Studies of our soet tend to be distinguishable by the type of entities SR'S",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In athers, they apply to only abstract forme identifying events and states o affairs. A broad third type of analysis shows different sorts of entities being modified. Each has.its limitations.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Studies of our soet tend to be distinguishable by the type of entities SR'S",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The paradigmatic phenomenon for tte analyses that claim physical objects as the referents of S R 1 s is the noun phrase modifier: This figure shows \"the man\" being located (LOCI at a time, indicated by the T -link, and at a location which was in \"the car\". This style of analysis seems simple and direct. It appeals to the intuition that only physical objects take up space. It promises t~ be easy to apply, FIGURE 2 . I \"The man i n t h e c a r l e f t \" i n t h e st-yle o f Schubert (1936) . s i n c e a l l t h a t i s required i s t o a s s o c i a t e SR's with t h e s e n t e n t i a l elements which a r e modified which r e f e r e n c e physical o b j e c t s . Unfortunately, t h e r e are problems.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 477,
"end": 492,
"text": "Schubert (1936)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Analyses using Physical.Objects",
"sec_num": "11.1"
},
{
"text": "Often t h e r e i s more t o an event than. j u s t i t s partiripahts' l o c a t i o n s :",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "It can be d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d a l l or any o b j e c t s with which t o a s s o c i a t e an SR.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "2.2 John i s playing s o l i t a i r e i n the basement.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "It can be d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d a l l or any o b j e c t s with which t o a s s o c i a t e an SR.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "If we hear example 2.2 t h e n more than John i s known t o be i n the basement. His c a r d s a r e , for. example. F u r t h e r , t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e a c t i o n i s more than t h e i n s t a n t a n e o u s p o s i t i o n of John and his c a r d s . For example, space where t h e cards may, p o t e n t i a l l y be plaoed m u s t be included. S i m i l a r l y , t h e following does not Here, successive changes seem to be appropriate. However, one class of references to motion seems to defeat this entire approach:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "It can be d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d a l l or any o b j e c t s with which t o a s s o c i a t e an SR.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "2.8 The man walked across the puddle. 2.9 The man walked around the puddle.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "It can be d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d a l l or any o b j e c t s with which t o a s s o c i a t e an SR.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The man walked through the puddle.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2.10",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Examples like the above involve duration in a key way and can not be shown with reference to one position. For example, at no time was the man \"across\" the puddle like ~aleigh's cloak was across it. Similarly, two points showing the man's change of position are inadequate since the same initial and final positions are a'cceptable in all three cases. Finally, adding an intermediate point will not be adequate, since the man might reach that point while on a path that otherwise holds a different relation to the puddle. As shall be seen, the lesson to be learned from these examples is that in allowing for motion, it is the entire path that must be considered and not selected positions of objects. 2.12 John walked from his car across the yard to the ilouse.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "2.10",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "How the event of 2.12 can be \"from\", \"across\", and \"to\" simultaneously and also have these aspects temporally ordered is nowhere explained in these analyses.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Analyses Using Events and States of Affairs",
"sec_num": "11.2"
},
{
"text": "Finally, even if SR's are associated with events and states of affairs, the fact that something is often learned about participants' location must be explained. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Analyses Using Events and States of Affairs",
"sec_num": "11.2"
},
{
"text": "The t h i r d s t y l e of SR a n a l y s i s i s nonuniform i n nature. These e i t h e r mix the two uniform analyses or e l a b o r a t e on the simple event o r s t a t e a n a l y s i s .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Mixed analyses claim t h a t some SR's l o c a t e concrete o b j e c t s while some l o c a t e events or s t a t e s of a f f a i r s (see for example, Winograd, 1972, and Schank, 1973) By s a c r i f i c i n g the s i m p l i c i t y t h a t comes from uniformity , these analyses avoid the uniform analyses' complementary problems. However, the mutual problems, e s p e c i a l l y motion, are l e f t unsolved.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 154,
"end": 173,
"text": "Winograd, 1972, and",
"ref_id": "BIBREF12"
},
{
"start": 174,
"end": 187,
"text": "Schank, 1973)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The nonuniform analyses t h a t e l a b o r a t e on the nature of events and s t a t e s of a f f a i r s a r e best represented by Case analyses, see Bruce (1975) . . I n terms of events and s t a t e s of a f f a i r s , t h e f i r s t case can e i t h e r be used f o r overall event o r s t a t e l o c a t i o n o r i t may be used t o l o c a t e an a s p e c t of t h e event. The f i n a l t h r e e c a s e s a l l r e l a t e t o d i f f e r e n t a s p e c t s of a motional event. This allows f o r examples l i k e 2.12, with i n h e r e n t temporal o r d e r i n g among t h e cases allowing f o r t h e o r d e r i n g of t h e SR's.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 152,
"end": 164,
"text": "Bruce (1975)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The Case a n a l y s e s s t i l l has problems The underlined phrases r e f e r t o motion ordered i n time, e . g . , he walked t h e h i l l before t h e b r i d g e . However, Case a n a l y s i s g i v e s no way t o order i n s t a n c e s of the same c a s e . Gruber (1965) p o i n t s out t h e same problem with t h e Goal case:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "2.14 I walked t o New York t o my mother's.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "F i n a l l y , t h e Case proposal rnuat be given some physical i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Any r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of meaning must a t some p o i n t be r e l a t e d t o a m~d e l of t h e world.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "I n t h i s i n s t a n c e t h e i d e a of a source, g o a l , and path must be somehow r e l a t e d t o models of motion.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This paper p r e s e n t s a proposal f o r an a n a l y s i s t h a t i s nonuniform i n t h e same way t h e Case a n a l y s i s i s . A uniform source for l o c a t i o n s modified by SR's i s",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "given, but t h e p r e d i c a t i o n of t h e s e spaces by SR's i s shown t o be much more complex than previously thought. F u t t h e r , sentences are not seen as being as simple with respect to SR's as previously supposed.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Before presenting the analysis, two sections will be devoted to preliminary topics: our semantic net formalism and the eyntactic status o f the phenomena considered. (19751, Shapiro (,1971), Simmons (19731, and Woods (1975) All this information is essential to any artificially intelligent entity, just as the model is essential'to any analysis in the predicate calculur. However, for showing the semntic relations in which we are mainly interested, an abbreviation is sufficient just as only the formulas are sufficient in most studies using symbolic logic. Hence a special abbreviation will be used in all sections except fX where the definitional level wili be discwsed.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 166,
"end": 210,
"text": "(19751, Shapiro (,1971), Simmons (19731, and",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 211,
"end": 223,
"text": "Woods (1975)",
"ref_id": "BIBREF13"
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "W . 3 Nonuniform Analyses",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Central to our abbreviation will be nodes that collapse types and tokens.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic Nets",
"sec_num": "111."
},
{
"text": "These will identigy the verbal concepts that characterize the events and states of affairs. We will call them \"event/state\" nodes. They will be circled and capital letters will be used for abstract types, such as CAUSING. Nonabstract forms will be shown with names that suggest the interpretation, e.g., Sleeping will suggest the sleeping state. When a node represent8 a physical object, identifying information will be included in quotes, e.g., \"the bus\". Names placed on ascs will abbreviate and suggest the functional roles of attributes.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic Nets",
"sec_num": "111."
},
{
"text": "For example, -ANTE for antecedent and -CONS for consequence will be used with CAUSING. Case names will be used with many event and state of affairs types.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic Nets",
"sec_num": "111."
},
{
"text": "T for \"Time\" showing the time an event occurred or state held.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "These will include:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "-A for \"Agent\" showing the instigator of an event or state.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "These will include:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "-0 for \"Object\", the neutral case (as Fillmore (1971) explains it \"the wastebasket\") .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "These will include:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Restrictions on types of entities which will be necessary will be shown by nonoval shapes for nodes. For example, time instances will be shown in parentheses and time intervals in square brackets. Finally, because it is not essential for our purposes, specification of time will often be left out of most semantic structures. Similarly, ire will consider only declarative statements. Some concepts that act as functions will also be used. Each of these will look like a relation associating parameters with a value. The value will be identifiied by a -VALUE arc. Inference rules will be presented in the form of",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "These will include:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Loving \\ \\ (I I MOryl l ) [ 1.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "These will include:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "11 ] FIGURE 3 . 1 \"John loved Mary all last year.\" \"subnetll' 2 \"subnet2\", where on seeing slibnet 1' subnet* is to 'be added to the semantic net. These rules will include variables within nodes, where the variables are to be bound on matching and referenced on inferencing. These variables will be in the form of capital letters, e.g., X.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "These will include:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To summarize, our semantic net formalism uses concept names, descriptions of objects, mnemonic arc names, and mnemonic shapes for nodes to abbreviate the two levels in a semantic net. Also used are functions and inference ruLes. This will be enough to represent the semantic relations involving reference to space that are being considered. Unfortunately, it is one more unique formalism. However, it sdds no new structures, only abbreviating others. We leave as an unproven claim that it will fit in with any formalism which shows identifiable event and state of affairs nodes such as Norman add Rumelhart (1975) and Schank (1973) . In this sectian, the syntax function of prepositional phraees will be considered and arguments for their primacy will be presented.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 618,
"end": 631,
"text": "Schank (1973)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "These will include:",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Our main interest in syntax is in structuring our didcussion of semantics.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IV. The Syntactic",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "However, the problems of parsing and generation make the syntax of' SR's independently imprtant. These are not our topics here. However, in an earlier issue of this journal we presented a parsing scheme that produces semantic from syntactic structure and applied the scheme to current clags of phenomena (Sondheimer and Perry, 1975). There is some controversy on the distinction between these two types. We can present two syntactic and one semantic classification procedures. First, adjuncts are never required for granrmaticality, while locative objects can be: These are the four primary uses of locative prepositions. We claim that the semantic structure of other SK'B can be represented through these forms. We will now show this. In general, this will be done by observing the SR's structure or by paraphrase arguments.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IV. The Syntactic",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Some spatial terms can have syntactic and semantic functions similar to prepositions in that they directly serve to relate two forms:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IV.2 Other Spatial References as Locative Prepositions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "These examples can immediately be given prepositional-like semantic structures.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "San Francisco is north of Los Angeles. 4.31 The car is to the left of the building.",
"sec_num": "4.30"
},
{
"text": "In other sentences, these terms appear as nouns and adjectives: ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "San Francisco is north of Los Angeles. 4.31 The car is to the left of the building.",
"sec_num": "4.30"
},
{
"text": "A diverse variety of non-prepositional locative adverbs can be handled with Bennett (1975) points out, the \"across1' and \"from\" phrases combine in euch a way that we understand that it is the way that must be travelled in starting from home and going to John that is \"across the streetB'.* This can be allowed for in semantic nets with a function, -WAY, producing a path through space joining two points identified by INIT for Initial and FIN for Final links, see ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Up what did he pick it?",
"sec_num": "4.39"
},
{
"text": "In our semantic net model, the locations of events and states of affairs will be shown as attributes of e v e n t h a t e nodes through arcs leading from the nodes to locational entities. For each event/state node involved with an SR there will be only one such arc and locational entity. Theee atcs will be labelled -P to suggest a spatial attribute or \"Place\" case. The locational entities will be referred to as place objects. They are the basis of our analysis. These place objects can be taken for the time being as volumes in space. The sort of ~o l u m e they are will be ela6orated upon. Place objects will be identified by boxes. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "V. 1 Basic Structures",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We are finally far away from New York.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5.7",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Finally, direct analysis can be given to qualifier usages which either apply with a static sense to nouns describing physical objects (5.8) or act like static adjuncts with respect to verbal noun8 ( 5 . 9 ) :",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5.7",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "5.8 T k b man i n the car l e f t .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5.7",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "5.9 swimming i n the lake i s fun.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5.7",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "These qualifier usages can be contrasted with those that ahow motian (5.10), act l i k e locative objects to verbal nouns ( 5 . 1 1 ) or @how extent (5.12):",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5.7",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "5.10 The bus t o Chicago l e f t . 5.11 ~w i m i n g i n to a cave i s fun.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5.7",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The bridge from Ohio to Weet Virginia i e old.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "5.12",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "One t e s t for adjuncts i n the last section was to see i f it located the e n t i r e t y of the event or s t a t e discussed. The s t a t i c adjuncts are i d e n t i f i a b l e in t h i s way.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Applying the place object analysis t o s t a t i c adjuncts i s e a s i l y defendable.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Since the place object shows the location of that e n t i r e t y , static adjuncts can therefore be directly a p p l i e d t o them. The ice bag is to John's head, but both the ice bag and John are in the car. The first SR involves a locative object, the second an adjunct. With a simple approach to e v e n t h a t e location, they would not be differentiated. There is a similar problem in some adjunct references to the location of only part of an event or state of affairs. For instance, in 6.2, only the boy isplaced which the hawk is definitely physically present:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Applying the place object analysis t o s t a t i c adjuncts i s e a s i l y defendable.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "6.2",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Applying the place object analysis t o s t a t i c adjuncts i s e a s i l y defendable.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In an open field, a boy watched a hawk.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Applying the place object analysis t o s t a t i c adjuncts i s e a s i l y defendable.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In the latter case, although not the former, the use of inference rules might be suggested. However, a better answer can be found.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Applying the place object analysis t o s t a t i c adjuncts i s e a s i l y defendable.",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The I heard through t h e door.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VI.l Continuous Position and Perception Verbs",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "On these occasiow, an assumed e n t i t y can be added t o the semantic s t r u c t u r e : I heard ( sane thing) through the door.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VI.l Continuous Position and Perception Verbs",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Inference rules play an important part in these analyses. For example, the positioning of John and the ice bag must be derivable from the structure of ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VI.l Continuous Position and Perception Verbs",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "There are a number of other classes of verbs that take static locative objects, see Table 1 . We will survey their analysis in the remainder of the section and close with a comment on several related forms. : grab, hit, kick, kiss, kneel, punch, slap, slug , touch. : break, chop, cook, cut, fry, shatter, spill, 6 .4.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 84,
"end": 91,
"text": "Table 1",
"ref_id": "TABREF6"
},
{
"start": 207,
"end": 256,
"text": ": grab, hit, kick, kiss, kneel, punch, slap, slug",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 266,
"end": 312,
"text": ": break, chop, cook, cut, fry, shatter, spill,",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 313,
"end": 314,
"text": "6",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VI.2 Other Verb Classes",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "FIGGRE 6.4 He is j u s t now in the house.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "COMING-ABOUT",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Problems with motion arise in every analysis of SR considered in Section 11.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VII. Motion",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In Only \"take\" and \"bring\" show the same pattern. For this reason, an abstract concept of pure motion, called -GOING, will be used in our analysis. Figure 7.1 shows the sentential structure into which most movement SR's will t . The structures for \"take\" and \"bring\" will have Going and Coming, respectively, in place of the abstract form. For \"go\" and \"come\" themselves, the semantic structures will match the motional event/state shown wj th the other verbs with the exception of the type of eventhtate. The place objects of all the motional events can be considered the same, as can the way SR's apply to the different types of motion. We can also think of motional qualifiers as analyzable with the same structure. Because of this, the structure of movement predication will be considered in general and isolated from other forms.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 148,
"end": 158,
"text": "Figure 7.1",
"ref_id": "FIGREF28"
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VII. Motion",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Thinking About Motion r A s was pointed o u t i n Section 11, one reason t h a t motional SR1s are d i f f i c u l t i s the m u l t i p l e predications of different types which must be orderable i n t i m e . These problems can be overcome with a p p r o p r i a t e consideration of the motion and t h e place objects of motional events.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VZI . 2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The i n e i g h t for a b e t t e r a n a l y s i s comes from considering answers t o questions of where motion occurs.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VZI . 2",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Marathon was run. It i s probably some thing l i k e \"in Greece\" o r \"from Marathon t o ~t h e n s \" . These tend t o place the e n t i r e t y of motion. It i s u n l i k e l y t o be j u s t \"from ~a r a t h o n \" or \"to Athens\". These j u s t place, p a r t of t h e motioa. People tend I t t o locate motion as i f i t were a s i n g l e thing, a motion\" so t o speak. This is 7.9 He walked through t h e puddle.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "how",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "7.10 H e walked across t h e puddle. 7.11 He walked around the puddle. 7.12 He walked over the.puddle.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "As was pointed out i n Section 11, t h e aboue r e q u i r e a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t h a t considers every i n s t a n c e of movement. The t r a c e i d e a does t h i s i n such a sidewal k FIGURE 7.2 A ball rolling across a sidewalk to a porch.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "way that the SR's can be shown applying to the trace directly. Further, it does it in a way that allows the basic static use of the preposition to be used in the representation:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "7.13 The bridges across the Mississippi are closed.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This was pointed out in Section IV to be the same sense that applied in the I 1",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "across-from\" form:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "7.14 The man stopped across the street from here.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Hence three usages collapse into one with this representation.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This concept can be extended to allow for differentiating \"up\" and \"down\" by considering the solid traces to have an inherent ordering basedoon the direction of motion:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "7.16 He walked up the hill. 7.17 He walked down the hill.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Hence, the traces in 7.16 and 7.17 could be exactly the same except for the ordering and the preposition could be sensitive to this. This ordering s e n s i t i v i t y shows up with other uses of the prepositions and other prepositions:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "7.18",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The c a r o t i d arteries extend up the neck t o the head. 7.19 A woman stood a t the f r o n t of the l i n e while a man stood a t the rear. 7.21 He walked out of the house.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 144,
"end": 148,
"text": "7.21",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "W i t h the above we can not say t h a t the overall path of motion wao either \"into\"",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "the house or \"out of\" the house i n the s t a t i c sense of these prepositions Hoerever, there i s a way we could use the s t a t i c sense. I f we could r e f e r t o p o d t i o n e achieved by the moving object a s i t followed the path, we could say t h a t there were positions where the object f i r s t got t o be \"into t h e corner\" and \"out of the house\". This would be l i k e allowing reference discussed, then they too can be compared. For the phrase j u s t mentioned, a p a r t of t h e motional object t h a t~w a e across the yard could be compared t o a p a r t t h a t vas up the s t a i r s a s being l e e s f u r t h e r along it. The same could be done t o c a p a t e the parte involved with instantaneous reference.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To sunuuarize3 t h e idea i s t o think of movement as a t r a c e of the event over t b , vbich has an inherent o r i e n t a t i o n and which cah be predicated i n p a r t . W e can now almost present our representation. W e w i l l f i r s t present a s l i g h t l y i n c a p l e k e proposal and then r w l s e i t .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Consider t h e answer t o where the first",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Tentatively, we propose two different functions to produce parts from complete place objects. These are called SEGMENT and UNIT. - The temporal ordering of the partial traces is the one tentative part of the analysis. To have it be sensible, some scale of comparison must exist. The appropriate choice appears to be the temporal scale. -When the locations were achieved is, of course, what is being ordered. There must also be conventions on application of the comparison. This is because there must be a way to force the comparison on only the appropriate end points of segments. We might develop a way of making these conventions inherent, but I propose to make them explicit. Our final proposal for the structure of motional SR's is to include time parameters with the functions. In this way, both the end points of the segments and the temporal scale can be identified. For the SEGMENT function, two linkr, T1 and T2, will identify the times that initial and final points were occupied.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic Structures for Motion",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "They",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Semantic Structures for Motion",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "For the UNIT function, one link, T, will identify the time the final position war achieved. These structures are shown in Figure 7 .4 and 7.5.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 122,
"end": 130,
"text": "Figure 7",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "--",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "FIGURE 7.4 The motional elements in \"John walked acreas the yard.\" An interesting aspect of the semantic structure of Figure 7 .6 is the static representation of \"from\". It is to be understood as showing that up to some point in the journey the moving object was not away from the house, but that it eventually got to be away from it. \"Out of\" and \"off of\" are analyzed similarly.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 118,
"end": 126,
"text": "Figure 7",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "--",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Besides the ,durational and instantaneoue predications of motion, there can be overall predications of moving objects. These come in two forms. Adjuncts in movement sentences place the entirety of motion:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VII.4 Static Spatial References Applying to Motional Events",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "7.22 In Chicago, he walked around the downtown. of whole place objects. Therefore, we must show the over411 predication applying to different forms. these must be the complete place objects representing the entirety of motion. This is consistant with our other anlayees, as will shortly be seen in more detail. It .will also simplify the inference rules that bring down overall spatial predications from higher levels to the motional place objects.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VII.4 Static Spatial References Applying to Motional Events",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "This analysis is seen in Figure 7 .7 which essentially summarizes this section.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [
{
"start": 25,
"end": 33,
"text": "Figure 7",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VII.4 Static Spatial References Applying to Motional Events",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We have introduced twd new functions and types of place objects. These have allowed for movement locative objects. We must, however, realize that there are other uses-for this analysis. We will see why in the next section. ",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "VII.4 Static Spatial References Applying to Motional Events",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The last several sections presented the \"syntax\" of our semantic analysis.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX. Interpreting the Representation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The term syntax is appropriate since the form of the analysis was presented. The semantics or interpretation to be given the proposed structures was only informally discussed, as when the trace or path analogy for motion was introducld.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX. Interpreting the Representation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "We noted in Section I11 that semantic nets do not just allow for the syntactic In this case, the concept has two defining attributes since a placelet must have a space and a time. The two attributes are shown accordingly with the one in the role restricted to be a SPACE and one in the role calledt being a -TIME. The concepts of SPACE and TIME will be treated as primitive, here.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX. Interpreting the Representation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "aspect",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX. Interpreting the Representation",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "The structure we defined for place objects will be referenced whenevel place objects are used. One reference will be in eventlstatea where place objects are involved with the case P. Hence, with the conceptual definition of every type of event/state that has a location, there will be a definingattribute with role P and value-restriction Place Object.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX.2 Event/States and Place Objects",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "It is also the case that with each event/state, there will be a way to ehaw how the place object fits in with the .definition of the event/state. Thig will include the way in which the place object will be related to the participants in The everitlstate also has a structure identified by a special 5-C link, tor structural conditions, which is used to identify how the event/stete is struc- The above eqample a s s e r t s t h a t a t each i n s t a n c e during the walking, the walker was \"in\" with r@spect t o the p o s i t i o n of h i s shoes. Such examples r e q u i r e t h a t t h e o b j e c t ' s p o s i t i o n a t each i n s t a n t during t h e e v e n t l s t a t e be compared t o t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e event a t t h a t i n s t a n t .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX.2 Event/States and Place Objects",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Ulowing for the preporititma]. concepts applying to place objects produced by the UNIT function must be done differently: A s*le interpretation of the prepositional concept in the above may be problematic. Since your arm could be in motion, a stationary observer would include sare w t i o n attributable to your arm in the ant's path. Further, even if r wanted to take the position of the arm at erne one instant it is unclear wbich t o take. These problems, however, dieappear with. the realization that the motion refereaced is not with respect t o an arbitrary observer but to one on the am.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX.2 Event/States and Place Objects",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "For him, the SR can be treated as involving not a moving arm but one essentially static in space. This can be allowed for by requiring the conceptual definition of the prepositions to project the referenced objects' positions shown in the place object in. the P case onto the base object shown in the G case. This will be like taking the base as a static ground and the referenced object as a figure seen against it.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX.2 Event/States and Place Objects",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "*Since the change into the final state m y be gradual and not dramatic, fuzzy relatioucl (~a d e h , 1973) might be used. For instance, the degree of \"into\"' ednees could be quantified with the analysis showing that a certain degree was reached. proieqtion function which takes the place object in the F role and the object in the G role and produces the projection, shown by an arc of that name, and an abstract space to compare it to, shown by the Abstraction arc.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX.2 Event/States and Place Objects",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "To summarize, the section has shown how conceptual level interpretation can be given the semantic structures proposed earlier in the paper. Any system that uses the semantic structures can also use the interpretations. Of course, the interpretations are baaed on one way of structuring plade objects. Since there are other ways, other interpretations are possible.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "IX.2 Event/States and Place Objects",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "There are definite limits to the claims we wish to make. In this concluding section, we point out several half-solved and unsolved problems, one area where we could conceivably expand our claims, and then end with a summary and final defense.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Metaphorical usages are i~lportant but difficult subjects for semantic representation. Things like \"climbing the ladder of success\" are far enough away from spatial reference to be ignorable. However, some SR phenomena appear to be metaphors: 20.1 John yelled his greetings to John.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In the above, an imaginary object, \"his greetings\", seems to be sent through space. In the.following, a hypothetical journey is referenced: Others seem t o coordinate w i t h SR's:",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "10.5 Go s t r a i g h t i n t o t h e house.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Here \" s t r a i g h t \" c a n be shown a a p r e d i c a t i n g t h e p a r t of t h e journey up t o t h e t i m e t h e house was e n t e r e d . However, I do n o t know how many o t h e r terms remain t o b u t t h e l a t t e r s a y s t h a t a c e r t a i n type of e v e n t must occur when t h e person i s i n -New York. I have s o l u t i o n s f o r n e i t h e r problem. W e can o n l y a p p e a l t o t h e f a c t t h a t t h e s e phenomena do p r e s e n t problems i n many o t h e r a r e a s of s e m a n t i c s . e v e n t s w i t h space-time zones\" i n s t e a d of times and s p a c e s . How t h i s would be done remains t o be s e e n . However, i f w e have n o t a l r e a d y met our gdal of p u t t i n g s p a c e on a par with t i e , t h a t would c e r t a i n l y do i t .",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "be",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "In suampry, this paper has ahown how the .emantic rtructure of 8pati.l reference8 can be shown as locating events and states of affairs. within a semantic net, this has the form of showing a location ae an attribute of event/state nodes. In line with this, the concept of a place object, showing",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "where events and states of affairs held at instances of time, was developed.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Several functions were developed for use in predicating locations. Inferencing of spatial facts, the use of prepositional-like concepts for showing spatial relatibnships, and the overall semantic structure of utterances was also discussed.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Throughout the paper, the main jus tif ication has been that the analysis handles phenomena that other analyses do not. However, there are other j u r t i f ications. Only one source for space simplifies the modeling of spatial phenomena.",
"cite_spans": [],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
},
{
"text": "Using only static forms simplifies the interpretation of spatial terms. Also, the use of static forms fits in with proposals for state-based semantic representations (~ercone and Schubert, 1975) . Finally, we can see that the analysis of )I semantic structures, in general, fits in with deeper\" analyses of semantic structure such as Schank (1973) and Rumelhart (1975) . In sum, there appears to be a strong case for the analysis.",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 179,
"end": 194,
"text": "Schubert, 1975)",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 334,
"end": 351,
"text": "Schank (1973) and",
"ref_id": null
},
{
"start": 352,
"end": 368,
"text": "Rumelhart (1975)",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "X. Limitation, Summary, and Conclusions",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"back_matter": [
{
"text": "Abrahamron, Adele A. , \"Experimental Analyeia of the Semantic8 of Movement ,\" in Explorations in Cognition, eds., Donald A. Norman and David E. Rumelhart, and the LNR Reeearch c o u p , San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company, 1975, 247-276. Badler, Norman, \"The Conceptual Description of Physical Activi tier ,\" ",
"cite_spans": [
{
"start": 207,
"end": 242,
"text": "Freeman and Company, 1975, 247-276.",
"ref_id": null
}
],
"ref_spans": [],
"eq_spans": [],
"section": "Bibliography",
"sec_num": null
}
],
"bib_entries": {
"BIBREF0": {
"ref_id": "b0",
"title": "Identif icatign of Concep tualizations Underlying Natural Language",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Roger",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "Schank",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "-computer Models of Thought -and Language",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Schank, Roger C . , \"Identif icatign of Concep tualizations Underlying Natural Lang- uage,\" in -computer Models of Thought -and Language, eds . , Roger C. Schank and",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF2": {
"ref_id": "b2",
"title": "Extendink the Expressive Power of Semantic Net~orks",
"authors": [
{
"first": "L",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Schubert",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1976,
"venue": "Artificial Intelligence",
"volume": "7",
"issue": "",
"pages": "163--198",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Schubert, L. K., \"Extendink the Expressive Power of Semantic Net~orks,\" Artifi- cial Intelligence, 7, (1976), 163-198.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF3": {
"ref_id": "b3",
"title": "ANet Structure for Semantic Information Storage, Deduction, and Retrieval",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Stuart",
"middle": [
"C"
],
"last": "~hapiro",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1971,
"venue": "-2nd International joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence : Advance Papers Papers --bf the Conference",
"volume": "~ondrn",
"issue": "",
"pages": "512--523",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "~hapiro, Stuart C., \"ANet Structure for Semantic Information Storage, Deduction, and Retrieval,\" in -2nd International joint Conference on Artificial Intelli- gence : Advance Papers Papers -- bf the Conference, ~ondrn: British Computer Society, 1971, 512-523.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF4": {
"ref_id": "b4",
"title": "Semantic Networks: Their Computation and Use for Unders banding English Sentences",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Robert",
"middle": [
"F"
],
"last": "Simmons",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "Computer Models of Thought -and Language",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Simmons, Robert F., \"Semantic Networks: Their Computation and Use for Under- s banding English Sentences ,\" in Computer Models of Thought -and Language, eds . ,",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF6": {
"ref_id": "b6",
"title": "The Computational Semantics of Locative Prepositions, -Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of isc cons in-~adisz",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Norman",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Sondheimer",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1975,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sondheimer, Norman K., The Computational Semantics of Locative Prepositions, - Ph.D. Dissertation, The University of isc cons in-~adisz, 1975.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF7": {
"ref_id": "b7",
"title": "A Semantic Analysis of Reference to Spatial Properties",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Norman",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sondheimer",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1978,
"venue": "II Linguistics -and Philosophy",
"volume": "2",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sondheimer, Norman, \"A Semantic Analysis of Reference to Spatial Properties, II Linguistics -and Philosophy, 2, (1978).",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF8": {
"ref_id": "b8",
"title": "SPS: A Formalism for Semantic Interpretation Space",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Norman",
"middle": [],
"last": "Sondheimer",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Doy",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "Perry",
"middle": [],
"last": "",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1975,
"venue": "American Journal -of Computational Linguistics Microfiche",
"volume": "34",
"issue": "",
"pages": "49--63",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Sondheimer , Norman and Doy t Perry, \"SPS: A Formalism for Semantic Interpretation Space ,\" American Journal -of Computational Linguistics Microfiche 34, (1975), 49-63.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF9": {
"ref_id": "b9",
"title": "Semantics and Syntax of Motion",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Leonard",
"middle": [],
"last": "Talmy",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1975,
"venue": "Syntax -and Semantics",
"volume": "4",
"issue": "",
"pages": "181--238",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Talmy, Leonard, \"Semantics and Syntax of Motion,\" in Syntax -and Semantics, 4, ed., John P. Kimball, New York: Academic Press, 1975, 181-238.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF10": {
"ref_id": "b10",
"title": "A Prototype Motion Understanding S~~stern",
"authors": [
{
"first": "John",
"middle": [
"K"
],
"last": "Tsotsos",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": null,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Tsotsos, John K., A Prototype Motion Understanding S~~stern, Technical Report No.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF12": {
"ref_id": "b12",
"title": "Unders tandinq Natural L a n g u a~",
"authors": [
{
"first": "Ter",
"middle": [
"'"
],
"last": "Winograd",
"suffix": ""
},
{
"first": "",
"middle": [],
"last": "Ry",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1972,
"venue": "",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Winograd, Ter'ry , Unders tandinq Natural L a n g u a~, New York: Academic Press, 1972.",
"links": null
},
"BIBREF13": {
"ref_id": "b13",
"title": "What's in a Link: Foundations for Semantic ~etworks",
"authors": [
{
"first": "William",
"middle": [
"A"
],
"last": "Woods",
"suffix": ""
}
],
"year": 1975,
"venue": "Representation -and Understanding: Studies in Cognitive Science",
"volume": "",
"issue": "",
"pages": "35--82",
"other_ids": {},
"num": null,
"urls": [],
"raw_text": "Woods, William A., \"What's in a Link: Foundations for Semantic ~etworks,\" in Representation -and Understanding: Studies in Cognitive Science, eds., Daniel G. Bobrow end AJlan C o l l i n s , New York: ~c a d e x c Press, 1975, 35-82.",
"links": null
}
},
"ref_entries": {
"FIGREF0": {
"text": "Static Adjunct. Complement. and Qualifier Usages . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .V . 1 Basic Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V . 2 Applying the Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V . 3 . Allowing for Object Position . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI . Non-Movement Locative Object Usages . . . . . . . . . .VI.1 Continuous Position and Perception Verbs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VI.2 Other Verb Classes VII.Motion . . . . . . . . . m e . . . . m m e a r n . . * . -. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII.1 The Structure of Movement Sent'ences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . VII.2 Thinking About Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF1": {
"text": "with the information on the location of objects which is gained from sentences with SR's. The paper suggests the use of inference rules to allow for this. The most surprising of the paper's conclusions is that a strong tie exists between references to space and temporal information. In fact, the locations of all events and s tetes of af fairs placed by SR' s are argued to be locations in both space and time. The effect of this conclusion is most clearly seen in a formaIized definition of the primitives of the semantic structures, which is also presented in semantic nets. There, as one possible interpretation of the place object, it is shown as a set of pairs of volumes in space and pointe in time. The paper has nine sections following this one. In the first, the limitations of previous analyses of the semantic function of SR's is considered. Thea in one section, the semantic net formalism and, in the next, the syntactic distinctions used in the study are introduced. The next four sections present epcr more complex situations. The first section shows simple direct analyses involving one event or state. The next section presents complex sentehtial structures with non-movement SR's. Motional references are analyzed in the next. The connection between time and SR's is d i s w e d in the fourth section. Following these analyses of sentential semantic structures, a section hs given over to the formalization of the definition of the st tuctures used. The paper ends with a discussion of the limitations of the proposal and possible extensions to it.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF2": {
"text": "of the terms used in SR and the pragmatics of, evaluating them has been studied, e . g., Cooper (1968). Bennett (19751, and Denofsky (1976). Finally a number of studies have considered our topic: the position of a SR within the semantic structure of a sentence.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF3": {
"text": "try to show the relation of the SR to \"the iuan-\" directly.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF4": {
"text": "illustrates the typical structure in the style of Schubert (1976).",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF5": {
"text": "i n d i c a t e t h a t John i s next t o the school: 2.3 John i s playing b a s e b a l l next t o t h e school. Hemi.ght be p l a y i n g o u t f i e l d 300 f e e t from i t . I t can be d i f f i c u l t t o f i n d any o b j e c t s t o a s s o c i a t e with an SR: The man walked from New York to Chicago. Example 2.6 would be shown as a man's walking causing a change of location from New York to Chicago. Some sentences show intermediate points: 2.7 The man walked from New York to Chicago via Pittsburgh.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF6": {
"text": "second uniform type of analysis postulates events and states of aftairs as the subject of SR's (see for example, Davidson, 1967, Lakoff, 1970, and Harman, 1972). Events and states of affairs are said to be the two types of situations that utterances describe. Taking them 88 the subjects of SR' e claims that it is n o t the participants but the overall situation that is being referenced. This can be seen in Figure 2.2, which shows one of Davidson's analyses in a eemantfc net notation. The diagram shows that there is a strolling by John which has a particular time and space coordinate. The benefits of this analysis include the independence of event and state existence from discussion of spatial location, the ability to handle location of vaguely bounded events and states, and the simplicim of application. However, again the simple direct methods that have been proposed are unsatisfactory. It is often difficult to simply associate SR'S with a central event or state since SR's in some utterances must modify different entities: 2.11 John held the ice bag to his head in the car. In 2.11, only the ice bag is to John's head but John and the ice bag are in the car. Motion is still a proslerb:",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF7": {
"text": "Bologna is clear, but from the semantic structure only the location of the strolling is clear. No coherent way has been presented to allow for this kind of relationship. Strol ling, FIGURE 2.2 \"John s t r o l l e d through the s t r e e t s of Bologna a t 2 a.m.\" in the s t y l e of Davidson (1967).",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF8": {
"text": "They claim t h a t either the o v e r a l l l o c a t i o n o r specific aspects of events and s t a t e s are located.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF9": {
"text": "n~ Fillmore (19711, a s opposed t o the betterknown but e a r l i e r Fillmore (1968), as the model, four s p a t i a l cases can be seen. An SR can either reference a s t a t i c locatioh ( t h e Location c a s e ) , place of o r i g i n ( t h e Source c a s e ) , p l a c e of termination ( t h e Goal c a s e ) , o r l o c a t i o n of intermediate motion ( t h e Path c a s e",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF10": {
"text": ". The two uses of t h e s t a t i c c a s e c o n f l i c t i n sentences with two s t a t i c l o c a t i o n s such a s t h e one where the i c e bag i s h e l d t o t h e man's head while t h e man and ice bag a r e s a i d t o be i n t h e c a r . Two i n s t a n c e s of t h e Location case seem t o be r e q u i r e d , but i f both appear, t h e r e i s no way t o i d e n t i f y t h e i r d i f f e r i n g function. Also, motion i s s t i l l troublesome. A s Fillmore (1971) point^ o u t , i n s t a n c e s such a s t h e underlined phrases i n t h e following seem t c i n d i c a t e a need f o r an unbounded number of i n s t a n c e s of t h e Path case.: 2.13 He walked down t h e h i l l across t h e b r i d g e through t h e p a s t u r e t o the chapel.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF11": {
"text": "This section clarifies what is meant here by the formalism, which can be seen to most closely resemble that af Brachman (19773. Semantic nets have been used for representing many aspects of htelligence. Of ten they are used to represent factual information concerning ob jerts, actions, and states. They have separately been used to show the semantic structure of utterances It is this use that mainly interests us. However, there is a connection between the two uses. All semantic structures must he related to structures that represent facutal inbrmation and each use of a type of object, event, or state of affair must be related to a concept that explains it. This can be thought of as paralleling the relationship between a semantic structure shown i q the predrcate calculus and a model in which that structure has a truth value. In a complete net, the above translates into the necessity of nodes for concepts representing types of events, states of affairs, and objects and nodes for instances of tokens of these concepts. The \"token\" nodes must link to \"type\" nodes that define them. These definitions must include specification of a b t r ibutes of an instance in terms of restrictions on values, fuwtional role of thd attribute, and other things. The instance nodes must be connected to instantiations of the attributes. Concept nodes must also be related to dther concepts., have overall structural conditions, locate inference rules that map apply, etc.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF12": {
"text": "",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF13": {
"text": "Structure of Spathl References and the Primacy of Prepositions Semant'ic structure i a the topic of our paper, but the syntactic structure o f sentences with SR s is also important. Us consideration clarifies the range of phenomena k i n g etudied. With SR, the basic syntactic structures involve prepositional phrases. All other SR are analyzable in terms of these structures.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF14": {
"text": "table I put it on is broken. The discontiguous example can be taken as derivable from (reducible to) the cont iguous f o m s in generation ( interpretation). Hence only contiguous examples will be considered. These are primarily employed in four syntactic roles: complement, quhlifier, adjunct, and locative object. There is also one special dependent usage that will be described at the end of this section. The complement usage of locative prepositions arises only when they are the \"complement\" of the verb \"be\": 4.3 He is in the kitchen. Quirk et al., (1972)'distinguishes them from predicate adjective and nominal usages. Locative objects and adjuncts with copulative eentences can be distinguished f rw compl ements by the presence of these ad jec t i v e e and noun phrases : she took care of was John in Chicago. The asterisk \"*\" here and throughout marks ungrammatical sentences. The ungrammaticality of the above examples indicate that the strings in question are not noun phrases. Hence the prepositional phrases cannot be qualifiers.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF15": {
"text": "Chicago, John wrote to his mother. The Empire State Building's and John's mother's position are independent of the train and Chicago. However, we can claim there is still overall predication since the commenting and the writing were done on the train and in Chicago, prepositional forms show duration of the crying and sitting and should be taken as adjuncts. The first gives overall predication. The second example shows two phrases that individually give ~a r t i a l predication. However, together they give overall predication. Further, they cannot be used individually: 4.28 *He sat still from New Y~r k . 4.29 *He sat still to Chicago.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF16": {
"text": "He walked across ( a walkable space) to the blackboard. 4.41 He jumped from ( a jumpable place which was on) the table. Some adverbs can be straightforwardly treated as the equivalent of prepoaitiod phrases. These appear as the concatenation of a preposition and a noun and refer to the spatial relation referenced by the preposition with respect to the type of object referenced by the noun: 4.42 He ran uphill. 4.43 He is overseas.The suffix \"-ward1' following a preposition or preposition-like term produces an adverb that can be treated as having a destinationelor orientationel-like meaning as shown by the following,paraphrases: is at home.Finally, many noun phrases that indicate position can be seen as havipg prepoeitione subsumed by the verbs they appear with and hence can be represented as containing prepositional phrases, see Gruber (1965) for elaboration:4.50 He gave Susan the b a l l . 4.51 He gave the b a l l t o Susan. 4.52 H e jumped the fence. 4.53 He jumped over the fence. There are a few forms i n SR's t h a t I can not always claim t o be represented I1 by preposi t i d n a l f o m & Theq e a r e where\", \"here\", \"there\", and measures of distance. These w i l l be d e a l t with separately. I n general, we w i l l deal wit% p r e p o s i t i o~l a l phrases with the aseumption t h a t a l l SR phenomena are covered. Beyond the examples already g-n, i t i s hard t o say what should be considered an SR. Adjectivw such a s \"10ng\"~ and \"fat\" inwolve the abstract p r o p e r t i e s of ~b j e c t s more than t h e i r p r o p e r t i e s as objects momentarily s i t u a t e d a t a point i n space. Many examples apsear t o be metaphors of SR o r make oblique reference t o space: 4.54 I stood t r i a l . 4.55 I go t o Ohio S t a t e . A l l of these w i l l be ignored. Doubtlessly, there a r e unarguable cases of SR t h a t a r e being overlooked. For this, I can only apologize. IV.3 Semantic Structure of P r e~o s i t i o n a l Phrases Since prepositional forms a r e the b a s i c method of making SR, t h e i r represent a t i o n i s c e n t r a l t o t h i s analysis. They w i l l b e given a semantic representation as concepts r e l a t i n g what i s referenced by the SR t o t h e i r own complements, see",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF17": {
"text": "The referenced e n t i t y w i l l be i d e n t i f i e d by the -F l i n k f o r \"figure\" and the complement by the -G l i n k f o r \"ground\" (Talmy , 1975)*. Each prepositional concept w i l l be defined as comparing the f i g u r e ' s space t o the location of the ground's object a t the time associated with the f i g u r e (Section *There would have t o be a second ground l i n k f o r \"between\": I l e f t i t between the window and t h e dbor.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF18": {
"text": "prepositional semantic structure. VIfI contains more discussion on this point). Prepositional concepts will all be considered abstract and written in capital letters. The reason abstract forms are used will become clear in the following sections. One particular dependent use of the preposition \"from\" f all8 outside the simple pattern shown in Figure 4.1 as well as outside of the four claeeerr of prepositional usages: 4.56 John .is far from home. 4.57 John is acr-oss the street from home. In both of the above, John i p distant from home. But in 4.57, John is not across the street in the usual aenee of \"across\" stretching the width of the street. As",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF19": {
"text": "example 4.57, G would identify the cltreet, INIT the home, and FIN where John -e rame meaning also ariaer in sentences such as the following where there is an understood \"from point\" that muat be represented: He died acroae the river.is. How John's location i s to be shown i s explained i n the next section, where the baaic and simpler SR's are analyzed.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF20": {
"text": "our basic claim: the source of the locations being referenced by SB's can be represented as being the locations of events and states of affairs. In this section, this claim is associated with the amantic net model and applied to those types of SR's for which it works immediately. These are the static adjunct, complement and qualifier usages.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF21": {
"text": "gives a typical diagram. It must be askedwhether place objects are required in semantic representations or simply ad hoc creations. The answer is that they are required since speakers treat t b as existing byreferring directly to them with some user of \"where\" : 5.1 Where is John living? 5.2 I found it where John was sleeping.Place objects can not be outlined strictly in space like a solid can. This is not important, because there is no way in language to directly and completely locate any object. In the last section, it was argued that except -for \"where\", \"here\", and \"there\", every SR is like a preposition.Hence they all give relative position. With those that do not, \"where\" can be s h o w leeping T John is sleeping here. II as referencing place objects not definite locations. \"Here\" and \"there\" both predicate spatial qualities of place objects not specific locations: Chicago is far away from New York.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF22": {
"text": "gives a typical analpsir.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF23": {
"text": "\"~o h n i s sleeping i n the kitchen. I I This basic treatment ex-tends to static complement usages. These relate an object to some location in space and time. To show this an abstract predicate, BEING-AT, can be postulated whose object case shows an e n t i t y whose spstiotemporal location i a specified by Plaee and Time cases, see Figure 4.3. Proposing a state of affairs to show an object's existence in space and time slay at first seem artificial. But in fact, it provides representations ismorphic to the usual \"direct\" repreeentatioa of object location. For example, Schubert (1976) uses a concept -LOC which by a link . I A identifies an object, a link B the object s location, and a link T its time frame (see Figure 2is behind the house. II Static qualifiers parallel either the adjunct or complement analysis. As m adjunct to verbal noun, we can claim that an event/state correspondiag to the event or state described by the nouns can be located by the SR in the same way as an actual adjunct. With qualifiers applying to concrete nouns there can be a BEING-AT eventheate showing that the existence in space and time of the object is being discussed. The qudifier can then modify its place object. This would then show thefollowing equivalently: 5.13 The man in the car yesterday left. 5.14 The man d o was in the car yesterday left. The possibility of time modification as in 5.13 is good evidence for the treatment of qualifiers as having underlying complement structure (Winograd, adjunct and complement usages have been considered, our method of allowing for the positioning of objects while representing SR's as positioning eventlstates can be explained. As was discussed in Section 11, an event/state analysis must explain how ati artificially intelligent entity can discover that John vae somewhere from the representation of an event or state involving John being located there. This can be taken as being something like discovering the appropriateness of the complement form (5.16) from the truth of the ad j rules. Whenever the semantic analyses of a sentence like 5.15 is presented to a system, rules associated with the type of eventistate node involved can produce inferable information. This process allows for the human process of the deduction of specific information about participants in an event or s t a t e of a f f a i r s from k n~w l e d g e~o f t h e type of event o r s t a t e of a f f a i r s . This is a c t u a l l y what i s happening with SR's. From our knowledge of sleeping, we know t h a t someone i s where he i s sleeping. From our knowledge of \"working for\", we know t h a t B i l l but not n e c e s s a r i l y John i s a t the s t o r e i n the followirg: 5.17 B i U i s working f o r John a t the s t o r e . From our knowledge of contact cases such a s i n 5.18, we know t h a t the l o c a t i o n of the i n t e r s e c t i o n s of t h e o b j e c t s i s learnable: 5.18 The b a l l h i t Mary on the e a r .I n semantic n e t s , these f a c t s can be shown by inference r u l e s associated with t h e appropriate concepts. I n Figure 5.4, t h e \"subnetll' 9 \"subnet2\" form described i n Section 111 i s used t o allow f o r t h e sleeping case. Other r u l e s w i l l , of course, be needed f o r o t h e r concepts.* The predication of pLace o b j e c t s , h i c h a r e the l o c a t i o n s of events and s t a t e s of a f f a i r s , t h e r e f o r e stands a s the core of our a n a l y s i s . How i t d i r e c t l y a p p l i e s t o represent c e r t a i n SR's has beenshown i n t h i s section. I n t h e next, more i n d i r e c t analyses a r e conaidered. The encoding of t h e r u l e \"If you know where something i s sleeping, then you know where i t is\". *A p o t e n t i a l c r i t i c may argue t h a t the e x t r a processing involved with i n f e r e n c e r u l e s should be avoided i f a t a l l possible. However, no o t h e r a n a l y s i s of SR successfully avoids i t s use (~ondheimer , 1975).",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF24": {
"text": "locative object usages is not a8 simple as that of other forms. Looking back to Section T', most of the problems with earlier studies arise from this class. The solution to tthese problems is found in an elaboration on the basic form of our event/state analysis. This elaboration proceeds in two directions. First, the semantic structure of the sentences containing the troublesome SR's is seen to be more complex than otherwise thought. Second, the nature of the SK is seen as more complex. The first case is best seen with nonmovement and the second with movement sR's. This section covers the non-movement type of locative object. Section VII covers the movement type.We can review the problems with the use of event and skate location in the non-movement cases, briefly. There is a need to differentiate referents which can be seen in the following: 6.1 John held the ice bag to his head in the car.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF25": {
"text": "semantic structure of simple sentences have often been analyzed as involving multiple events and states of affairs, see far example, Schank (1973) and Norman and Rumelhart (1975). If we can see problematic sentences in this light, then perhaps we could assign the various SR1s to different event/states. Indeed, we can do both. Instances of calmative relations betweell events and states of affairs are found in many problem sentences. Change-of-state events applying to separate states of affairs are seen in others. Simple instances of embedded events and states of affairs are seen in yet others. \"Hold\" belongs to a c l a m of verbs that involve continuou~ position. Others in the class include \"adhere\", \"cling\", and \"keep\". With Locative objects, these can all be seen ar causations. Each ha8 an action which causes some entity to remain somewhere. In our example 6.1, John's holding-type action causes the ice bag to remain somewhere. ~e a l i z k g t h i r allows us to analyze the SR's as locating events and states. The overall SR, \"in the car1', can be seen, as adjuncts were explained in the laet section, as locating the highest event/etate within the causation. The \"to his head1' can be seen as locating the resuftant state. This is shown in Figure 6John held the ice bag to his head in the car. 1 ' an open In an open f i e l d , t h e boy watched a hawk.\" \"Watch\" belongs t o a c l a s s of verbs that includes \"hear\", \"see\", and \"taste\". These can a l l be seen a s involving the perception of another event or s t a t e of a f f a i r s . * I n our example 6.2, it is the being somewhere, t h e e x i s t i n g , of a hawk t h a t is watched. How t h i s allows f o r t h e SR to be a s s o c i a t e d with t h e correct e v e n t / s t a t e is evident from Figure 6.2.This analysis may seem somewhat forced h e r e , but o t h e r exmaples show more o v e r t event or state forms:6 . 3 I watched t h e mating of the doves 6 . 4 I saw t h e delivery of t h e baby. 6.5 I heard the cooing of the doves.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF26": {
"text": "occasionally appear without an object:",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF27": {
"text": "An inference rule must associate the position of the HOLDING-ACTION with their positions. Another rule must relate a place object for the HOLDING-ACTION as inside that of the CAUSING. Conversely, there should be no inference rule applying to the structure of Figure 6.2 to show the place object of the BEING-AT as being contained in that of the Watching.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF28": {
"text": "of coming-into-being that must be represented. The standard form for these sentences shows the action of an agent causing the bringing about of a state of affairs. The locative object is shown locating this state of affairs, see Figure 6.3. The coming-into-being concept in this structure is labelled COMING-ABOUT. The segment of the structure inside the dotted line is there to show the analysis these verbs take in the second type of usage they allow: In fact, this is the case with all prepositional forms used here. It is an important advantage of this analysis that it uses only static senses in semantic structures. On the surface, it is often said that the locative objects of the current set of verbs have dynamic senses. However, with a separate inchoative eventletate, this is unnecessary. This allows. tb+ representation of presuppositions like \"to\" or \"on to\" either through \"at\" or \"on\" as Cruber (1965) does, or through their own static bense as in example 6.10. e his is one in a series of reductions. It was shown in Section IV that some double prepositional phrase structures involved \"from\" can be reduced to a simpler form. It will be seen elsewhere that other simplications can be made. That underlying senses of the prepositions are being used explains why our prepositional concepts have been capitalized. Another class of verbs-shows contact. They take the two types of static form in each can again take the SR. In noncausative examples with thelse change of state verbs, SR's generally appear to act as locative objects, as a test from Section IV shows: 6.20 The cup broke on my knee. 6.21 *On my knee, the cup broke. The noncausative examples includes SR' s which reference ob jeats not inherently possessed by the changed object, such as 6.20, but which place the entire event. In these cases, the SR'r should be treated similarly to adjuncts and &own applying to the COMING-ABOUT event/state. Some verbe which take locative objects are like perception verbs in not requiring causative analyses to explain locative object usages. These lnclude discovery and thought verbs, such asl'spot\" and \"thought\". They can be ahown with embedded event/states. With locative object readings, 6.22 and 6.23 involve only locating of the direct objects: 6.22 I spotted her behind the dresser. 6.23 I thought of Mary at the seashore. These entities can be shown in an event/state claiming they existed in a certain time and space with the SR predicating that event/state. This treatment would parallel the structure of overt examples of embedded events as in the following: seen that the complexity associated with many SR's comes from their semantic environment, not themselves. With the exception of a class of verbs covered in the next section this covers the range of verbs that take nonmovement locative objects. Also covered but only indirectly are a few sensesleft from the last chapter. We can now see how qualifiers of verbal nouns that are acting as non-movement locative objects can be analyzed. We can also see that resultive senses of the copula can be shown with a COMING-ABOUT, seeFigure",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF29": {
"text": "this section, what is, as far as we know, an entirely unique approach to the semantics of motion is presented. Our analysisa centers on movement locative objects. As has been mentioned, this involves c m p l e x modification of the location of motional events. The section first presents a brief discussion of the structure of movement sentences, then motivates our view of motion predication, and finally presents the details of the representation.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF30": {
"text": "The basic structure for movement locative object sentences.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF31": {
"text": "we propose t o think of t h e place o b j e c t of motibnal events.Place o b j e c t s of motional events can be thought of a s showing t h a t motion, e s s e n t i a l l y showing a t r a c e of the path of motion. This t r a c e yould be similar t o t h e t r a c e a piece o f chalk leaves a s i t c r o s s e s a blackboard. But it should be the marks t h a t would be made by the e n t i r e chalk i f space was a three-dimeneional blackboard and the e n t i r e chalk could w r i t e . This idea is displayed p i c t o r i a l l y i n F i g u r e 7.2 with another example where something approaching an overexposedphotograph of a r o l l i n g b a l l shows a s o l i d c y l i n d e r t r a c i n g a b a l l ' s movement. It i s t h i s type of c y l i n d e r t h a t motional place o b j e c t s r e p r e s e n t . This t r a c e idea has one g r e a t merit. It allows d i r e c t analysis of the most troublesome class of movements SR1s:",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF32": {
"text": "b n c e i t s use is not a r b i t r a r y . The t r a c e or path idea does not provide an immediate explanation f o r other movement 5#'s, those t h a t reference instantaneous change: 7.20 He h i t the b a l l i n t o the cotner.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF33": {
"text": "t o the p o s i t i o n of t h e individual b a l l s displayed i n Figure 7.2. W e can conclude t h a t we ought t o be able t o reference p a r t s of place objects. Being able t o reference parts of motion a c t u a l l y leads t o a s o l u t i o n of the I 8 problem of temporal ordering inherent i n multiple SR, such a8 .. . across the yard up the s t a i r s . . .\". I f these durational forms e r e a l s o thought of a s modifying d i s c r e t e , bounded p a r t s of the kind of place objects t h a t are being",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF34": {
"text": "taken as picking off bounded parts of a place object. The instantaneous function can be assumed to pick off part of the trace beginning at the earliest point, and going up to the point of change. Both functions will have the place object they accept identified by an S link and the produced space identified by a VALUE link. To distinguish the two outputs, the SEGMENTized place object will have a colon inserted, and the UNITized one a period. The I I segments will be shown as ordered through numeric\" comparisdns. Pigcre 7.3 therefore gives a tentative analysis for the sentence \"The cat came across the yard up the stairs into the house\". One SEGMJ3NT function picks out the motion across the yard while another picks out motion up the stairs. A UNIT function picks out motion into the house. The segments are all ordered by less-than-orequal links.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF35": {
"text": "FIGURE 7.3 A tentative analysis of \"The cat came across the 1 I yard up the stairs into the house.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF36": {
"text": "The motional elements in \"I hit the ball into the khair.\"",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF37": {
"text": "The motion component of \"John walked from his house to the cat.\". I Now, in order to allow for multiple motional locative objects, two time instances can be related with a temporal relation, -LE, for less than or equal. This is done inFigure 7.6.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF38": {
"text": "John came to Chicago in a plane. One class of verbs, which allows both movement and non-movement locative objects, allows the moving object to be statically placed during movement: 7.24 He carried the dog onto the bus in a box. 7.25 He. brought John to Chicago in a plane. This class is the portability verbs left over from the last section. These verbs take causative analyses with a motional event/state as the caused event. In both of these kind of examples, the motional event must have its motional properties represented at the same time as its static properties.Instantaneous and dutational SR'S must be shown predicating special place objects which are parts",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF39": {
"text": "The motional component of the \"The c a t was brought across the 8 I yard up the s t a i r s into the house. . VIXI . Extending the Motional Analysis to Other Spatial References The last section may have given the reader the impression that the analyses for motiopal SR's are really different from those given other SR1s. Motional place objects have been set out as a history of movement in space and time. Nomotional place objects are left as \"just\" the location of certain events and states of affairs. In this section, we argue that this should definitely not be assumed. The place object of nonmotional SR's must be seen to have the same space-time structure as motional place objects. These are several arguments for this point. Relative motion has been considered only for sentences with movement verbs, but relative motion and references to motion are common as adjuncts of \"Jane sat on her purse from New York to Los Angeles. In each of tlie above examples two objects are statically related, i.e., John and the ice bag, and Jane and her purse, respectively. However, all are moving. One pair moves but remains static with respect to a car. The other pair is moving and changing with respect to -two cities. Hence, motion must somehow be allowed for in these \"nonmotional\" analyses. Further , change of relative position must be allowed for in at least one. No hint was given of how this last problem is to be solved in any of our diacussions of nonmotional SR's. Even when motion is not overt, time may have to be considered with SR1s: 8.3 He died in his car.As we have seen in the analyses of sentences like 8.3, the car is to be related to the event of the dying. Consider the fact that the car is moveable. If we were to check to see if this were true, we must have either a history of the car's location or have the ability to find its location at the time of death. In oher words, time must be available for even instantaneous events. She sat on her purge from New York to Los Angeles. .The way to extend our analysis to cover these facts is to recognize the connection between moti'onal and nonmotional place objects. Motional events involve the location over time of moving objects. Ndnmotional events and states of affairs do not necessarily involve moving objects, but they can involve location over time. This location is the space of spaces occupied by an event or state of affairs during its holding. To analyze the case8 of relative motion and motion with nonmotional events and states of affairs, these locations-over-time must be taken as the locations bf the events and states of affairs.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF40": {
"text": "of meaning structures, but also for the representation of the interpretation or definition of the concepts used in these structures. In this section, this property will be used to help formalize an interpretation of our analyses. This is only one of many possible interpretations, but showing it will help clarify the semantic structures. The formaloism for the conceptual definitions is based on Brachman (1977). Again, many abbreviations of a complete formalism are used. The center of our previous discussions was the place objecc. This must also be true in discussing conceptual definitions. The nature of the place objects must first be defined, followed by the definition of everything that relates to place objects. ~ventlatates will be discussed first, then the SEGMENT and UNIT functions, and then the prepositional concepts. the place object wiil be based on a discrete representation of time. Time can be considered as composed of arbitrarily densely packed time instances. A place object can show the location of an event/atate at one time for instantaneous events/states, a set of consecutive instances for durations1 event/states, and any set of instances for intermittent event/states. Structurally, we can take a place object to be a set of what we can call of which is an ordered pair whose first element is a volume in space and whose second is an instant in time. This is formalized in Figures 9 .la and b. In Figure 9.la, the node labelled Place Object stands for the concept of a place object. An arc with the special label DATTR points to its one defining attribute. This attribute and a11 others in this section are shown by a special node shaped as a square. The fact that placelets are members of the set that compose place objects is the defining attribute of place objects, This node captures this by using an arc labelled ROLE to point to the special name Membe'r",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF41": {
"text": "the eventlstate and structural restrictions on the place object Consider theabstract eventlstate GOING. GOING requires of its place object that the placelets showlwhe.re the moving object was at each instance during the movement., The placelets must refer to the time of the GOING. Since a discrete representation -of time is used, placelets for successive instances of time during the movement must show an overlap i n positions occupied. Further, since movement is FIGURE 9.2 Partial Definition of GOING. necessary at least two positions among the placelets must be different. All these facts will have to be shown in the definition of GOING. In order to show the flavor of eyent/state definition, we show in Figure 9.2 the relation between moving object and place object for GOING. The definitionshows that the event/state has three attributes corresponding to the cases, P, T, and 0 . Names have been added to the attribute nodes to make this easier to see.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF42": {
"text": "tured. The conditions for GOING are a set of conjuncts identified by the label in the diamond shaped node. This shape is an ald to the reader and indicates a logical operator. The structure necessary for the spatial relation is the leftmost of the conjuncta. It essentially takes the form of an implication statement eaying that for every placelet in the place object, the moving object, which is identified by the 0 role, will have a BEING-AT holding for the place and time in the placelet. The statement begins with a logic node, labelled EVERY, identifying a universal quantification. The domain of the quantified variable is shown by the link labelledx. By po3nting to the appropriate attribute node, the restriction is to the set of placelets in the place object. The link labelled -P identif ies the proposition within the scope of the quantifiet which shows that for Cach placelet BEING-AT is the case for the entity in the 0 role at the place and time of that placelet. The representation of this last depends on the ability to focus in on attributes of entities being quantified over, for which see the FOCUS-SUBFOCUS mechanism in Brachman (1977). This ability is indicated here by the special representation of the P attribute. IX.3 The SEGMENT and UNIT Functions -Formalizing the definitions of the SEGMENT and UNIT functions is fairly straightforward. Both can merely identify subsets of sets of placelets. The structural conditions for both can be shown with the same function which can be called GENERATE-RANGE. It can be asstuned to apply to any set and to produce the subset that fits a range defined by two limits and a measure. Since the definitions are similar, only the UNIT function will be shown, see Figure 9.3. The GENERATE-RANGE function for the UNIT definition can take as its input, identified by the SOURCE link, the place object marked by the S link of the UNIT function. The scale for measurement can be established by reference to a special Temporal scale. and apply to the time values in the set of placelets being operated on. The boundaries of the subset to be generated can be shown by FROM and -TO linke. The FROM value would be produced from the set of placelets by a special LOWEST function to produce the lowest time value from among the placelets. The TO value can be a placelet with time specified by the T role in the UNIT function and unspecified space. The RESULT link can show that the generated value should be connected to the VALUE role of the UNIT function. SPACE Figure 9.3 D e f i n i t i o n of t h e UNIT Function. IX,4 P r e~o s i t i o n s Prepositions a r e t h e f i n a l concepts whose x e l a t i o n t o place o b j e c t s w i l l be considered. It i s always t h e case t h a t p r e p o s i t i o n a l concepts r e l a t e place o b j e c t s which aFe l o c a t i o n s over time t o simple o b j e c t s . The suggestion i n the l a s t s e c t i o n was t h a t t h e l o c a t i o n s of t h e place o b j e c t s a r e r e l a t e d t o t h e p o s i t i o n of t h e referenced o b j e c t a t t h e times of the place o b j e c t . The nature of t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p depends on t h e source of the place object being predicated. Consider f i r s t predication of place o b j e c t s which d i r e c t l y show the l o c a t i o n 9 . 1 I n h i s new shoes, John walked through t h e barnyard.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF43": {
"text": "thia class with the eemantic structure showing concept I m relating a part of the going to the location of the car. Here the position of the a i q l e object must again be compared at each instant of the place object t o the location of the place object at that instant. Rowever, only at the last instant wt the relation be ehown as holding.* Repositions predicating place objecte produced by the SEGMENT function are a r e c a p l e x : 9.2 A n ant is crawling up your arm.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF45": {
"text": "4a The definition of ACROSS: higheat level. The conceptual level definition of the prepositional cmaept ACROSS is sketched in Figures 9 . 4 a , b, and c. Here again, it should be remembered that we are not trying t~ show the entire meaning of the prepositional form, only its relation to the place object. Accordingly, a number of unanalyzed forme will be used. Perhaps the most curious one of the forms will be one labelled acroes , this can be seen as the physical part of the concept ACROSS. It would have to be the next form developed if we are analyzing the meaning of the preposition. The definition of ACROSS begins in Figure 9 . 4 a with an indication of the F and G nodes. The structural condition again shows the required connection between these two elements. It has three a1 ternative opportunities for e a t i sfaction, one for direct predication, one for UNIT functions, and one for SEGMENT funf tions. The three choices are reflected by the three arcs projecting from the OR node. Which case applies should be shown by one of the two arcs projecting from the corresponding AND node. The test for direct predication is identified by the object in the F role being pointed to by an Event/Statc.* This is shown by *It could just a8 well be pointed to by a WAY node. Thicl could be t e e t c dfor with the addition of a disjunct.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF46": {
"text": "4b The d e f i n i t i o n of ACROSS: d i r e c t predication. The d e f i n i t i o n of ACROSS: SEGMENT predication. a t e s t labelled w i t h these names. The condition that muat hold i f we do have d i r e c t predication i s shorn i n Figure 9 . 4 b . I t s t a t e s that for every p l a c e l e t the p h y s i c a l across must hold between the space o f the p l a c e l e t and the space of the p l a c e object of a BEING-AT which locates the object i d e n t i f i e d by the object i n the r o l e a t the ti* shown i n the placelet. The superscripts on nodes i n the figure e s t a b l i s h co-reference between the different parts of Figure 9 . 4 . The structure for the UNIT case i s f a i r l y similar and not shown. For the SEGMENT case, the condition i s based on one space being p h y~i c a l across from another. This i s shown i nFigure 9.4~. Both spices are shown being produced by a s~e c i a l",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF47": {
"text": "The bridge goes from New York to New Jersey. Any direct representation of these phenomena using the definitions from the lasf section is unlikely since a non-instantaneous time interval must be present, while these sentences are basically instantaneous. My best suggestion is to represent these using the motional structures but to indicate by a function or operation applied to every appropriate f o a that the actual sense is metaphorical. Unfortunately, this leads to odious complexity. It is probably better to say our claims stop at this point. ball completely under the car. Some seem to predicate place objects directly: 10.4 I walked two miles.",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF48": {
"text": "c o n s i d e r e d . Two problems remain completely unsolved. The f i r s t i n v o l v e s r e l a t i v e motion.10.6 The a n t walked o v e r t h e r i s i n g p i l e of dough.Now, i t i s a c t u a l l y p o s s i b l e t h a t -1 0 . 6 can be t r u e b u t t h a t t h e dough changed d u r i n g t h e walking. S i n c e t h e r e i s no one s t a t i c p i l e of dough, t h i s would make which p r o b l e m a t i c t h e u s e of t h e dough as t h e o b j e c t into,,the motion of t h e a n t i s p r o j e c t e d . Secondly, i t a p p e a r s t h a t i n f e r e n c e s v a r y i n h a b i t u a l s e n t e n c e s : 10.7 He bought a p r e s e n t f o r h e r i n New York. 10.8 He always buys a p r e s e n t f o r h e r i n New York. The l a s t examples d i f f e r because t h e former s a y s an e v e n t o c c u r r e d i n New York",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"FIGREF49": {
"text": "Switching from d i f f i c u l t t o promising a r e a s , one s t r o n g possibility exists f o r expanding the a n a l y e i s and c o r r o b o r a t i n g i t . As the a n a l y s i s was d e v e l o p i n g , t i m e c o u l d be s e e n t-9 become more c l o s e l y a s s o c i a t e d with p l a c e . I n t h e end, t i m e was claimed t o f i t i t e v e r y p l a c e o b j e c t . Perhaps w i t h our p l a c e o b j e c t , no s e p a r a t e t i m e a t t r i b u t e needs t o be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h e v e n t s o r s t a t e s of a f f a i r s . W e may be a b l e t o c l a i m t h a t , t o q u o t e E. J . L e m o n (19671, we can a s s o c i a t e I I",
"num": null,
"type_str": "figure",
"uris": null
},
"TABREF0": {
"content": "",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"type_str": "table",
"text": ". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Previous Efforts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analyses Using Physical Objects . . . . . . . . . Analyses Usifig Events and States of Affairs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nonuniform Analyses IV . The Syntactic Structure of Spatial References and the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Locative Prepositions . . . . . . Other Spatial References as Locative Prepositions . . . . . . . . . Semantic Structure of Prepositional Phrases . . . . . . . . ."
},
"TABREF1": {
"content": "",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"type_str": "table",
"text": "Reference Applying to Motional Events VIII . Extending the Motional Analysis to Other Spatial References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Interpreting the Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O b j e c t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The SEGMENT and UNIT Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Prepositions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Limitations. Summary. and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . ."
},
"TABREF3": {
"content": "",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"type_str": "table",
"text": ""
},
"TABREF4": {
"content": "",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"type_str": "table",
"text": ""
},
"TABREF5": {
"content": "",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"type_str": "table",
"text": ""
},
"TABREF6": {
"content": "",
"num": null,
"html": null,
"type_str": "table",
"text": ""
}
}
}
}