Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T15:17:15.778Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Computational Implementation and Applications of Role and Reference Grammar

from Part Four - Applications of RRG

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 June 2023

By
Brian Nolan
Edited by
Delia Bentley ,
Ricardo Mairal Usón ,
Wataru Nakamura  and
Robert D. Van Valin, Jr
Delia Bentley
Affiliation:
University of Manchester
Ricardo Mairal Usón
Affiliation:
Universidad National de Educación a Distancia, Madrid
Wataru Nakamura
Affiliation:
Tohoku University, Japan
Robert D. Van Valin, Jr
Affiliation:
Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf
Get access

Summary

This chapter explores the computational implementation and applications of Role and Reference Grammar (RRG). We discuss computational work which provides evidence that the RRG approach to grammar has a beneficial role to play in natural language processing (NLP) and delivers a credible and realistic linguistic model to underpin NLP applications. The computability of the model has been tested in diverse software applications. We characterize these and explain how RRG is used to underpin the linguistic component in the architecture of a number of software systems and applications. We conclude with a discussion of the contribution that RRG can provide to NLP. We discuss how the RRG model is translated into software, and some of the challenges involved. The chapter is a testimonial to how the RRG model of language can be successfully implemented in software.

Keywords

natural language processingimplementation of linguistic frameworks in softwarecomputational adequacy
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Role and Reference Grammar , pp. 785 - 820
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Butler, C. S. 2009. Criteria of adequacy in functional linguistics. Folia Linguistica: Acta Societas Linguistica Europaea 42(1): 1–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, C. S. and Gonzálvez-García, F., , F. 2014. Exploring Functional-Cognitive Space (Studies in Language Companion Series 157). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, C. S. and Martín Arista, J. (eds.). 2009. Deconstructing Constructions. (Studies in Language Companion Series 107). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Copestake, A. 2002. Implementing Typed Feature Structure Grammars (Center for the Study of Language and Information Publication Lecture Notes). Stanford, CA: CSLI publications.Google Scholar
Cortés-Rodríguez, F. 2016a. Parsing simple clauses within ARTEMIS: The computational treatment of the layered structure of the clause in Role and Reference Grammar. In Proceedings of the 34th International Conference of AESLA, Alicante, 14–16.Google Scholar
Cortés-Rodríguez, F. 2016b. Towards the computational implementation of Role and Reference Grammar: Rules for the syntactic parsing of RRG phrasal constituents. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación (CLAC). 65: 75–108.Google Scholar
Cortés-Rodríguez, F. and Mairal Usón, R.. 2016. Building an RRG computational grammar. Onomazein 34: 86–117.Google Scholar
Díaz Galán, A. and Fumero Pérez, M.. 2016. Developing parsing rules within ARTEMIS: The case of Do auxiliary insertion. In Periñán-Pascual, C. and Mestre-Mestre, E. (eds.), Understanding Meaning and Knowledge Representation: From Theoretical and Cognitive Linguistics to Natural Language Processing, 283–302. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Díaz Galán, A. and Fumero Pérez, M. 2017. ARTEMIS: state of the art and future horizons. Revista de Lenguas para Fines Específicos 23( 2): 16–40. https://ojsspdc.ulpgc.es/ojs/index.php/LFE/article/view/917.Google Scholar
Diedrichsen, E. 2008. Where is the PreCore slot? Mapping the layered structure of the clause and German sentence topology. In Van Valin, (ed.), 203–224.Google Scholar
Diedrichsen, E. 2011. The theoretical importance of constructional schemas in RRG. In Nakamura, W. (ed.), New Perspectives in Role and Reference Grammar, 168–199. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Diedrichsen, E. 2014. A Role and Reference Grammar parser for German. In Nolan, and Periñán, (eds.), 105–142.Google Scholar
Dorr, B. J. 1992. Machine translation divergences: A lexical semantic perspective. Proceedings of the Second Seminar on Computational Lexical Semantics, 169–183. Toulouse, France.Google Scholar
Dorr, B. J., Hovy, E. H. and Levin., L. S. 2006. Machine translation: Interlingual methods. In Natural Language Processing and Machine Translation Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.58.532.Google Scholar
Felices-Lago, A. and Ureña Gómez-Moreno, P.. 2014. FunGramKB term extractor: A tool for building terminological ontologies from specialised corpora. In Nolan, and Periñán-Pascual, (eds.), 251–270.Google Scholar
Fumero Pérez, M. and Díaz Galán, A.. 2017. The interaction of parsing rules and argument-predicate constructions: Implications for the structure of the Grammaticon in FunGramKB. Revista de Lingüística y Lenguas Aplicadas 12: 33–44.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, J. 2012. The persuasive tutor: A BDI teaching agent with Role and Reference Grammar language interface – Sustainable design of a conversational agent for language learning. ITB Journal 13(2): 31–50. https://arrow.tudublin.ie/itbj/vol13/iss2/3.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, J. 2014. Three-place predicates in RRG: A computational approach. In Nolan, and Periñán-Pascual, (eds.), 79–104.Google Scholar
Gottschalk, J. 2019. On the application of conceptual graphs in RRG: First steps towards a functional computational processing model. In Kailuweit, R., Künkel, L. and Staudinger, E. (eds.), Applying and Expanding Role and Reference Grammar, 325–354. Freiburg: NIHIN Studies. https://freidok.uni-freiburg.de/data/16830.Google Scholar
Guerra García, F. and Sacramento Lechado, E.. 2014. Exploring the thematic-frame mapping in FunGramKB. In Nolan, and Periñán-Pascual, (eds.), 233–250.Google Scholar
Guest, E. 2008. Parsing for Role and Reference Grammar. In Van Valin, (ed.), 435–453.Google Scholar
Jackendoff, R. S. 1990. Semantic Structures. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kailuweit, R, Künkel, L. and Staudinger, E. (eds.). 2019. Applying and Expanding Role and Reference Grammar. Freiburg: NIHIN Studies. https://freidok.uni-freiburg.de/data/16830.Google Scholar
Kallmeyer, L., Osswald, R. and Van Valin, R. D. Jr. 2013. Tree wrapping for Role and Reference Grammar. In Morrill, G. and Nederhof, M.-J. (eds.), Proceedings of the Formal Grammar 17th and 18th International Conferences, 175–190. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kecskes, I. and Zhang., F. 2009. Activating, seeking, and creating common ground: A socio-cognitive approach. Pragmatics & Cognition 17:(2): 331–355.Google Scholar
Leeson, L. and Nolan, B.. 2008. Digital deployment of the Signs of Ireland Corpus in Elearning. In Language Resources and Evaluation LREC2008 – 3rd Workshop on the Representation and Processing of Sign Languages: Construction and Exploitation of Sign Language Corpora, Marrakech, Morocco.Google Scholar
Mairal Usón, R. and Cortés-Rodríguez, F.. 2017. Automatically representing text meaning via an interlingua-based system (ARTEMIS): A further step towards the computational representation of RRG. Journal of Computer-Assisted Linguistic Research 1: 61–87.Google Scholar
Mairal Usón, R. and Ruiz de Mendoza, F.. 2009. Levels of description and explanation in meaning construction. In Butler, C. S. and Martín Arista, J. (eds.), Deconstructing Constructions (Studies in Language Companion Series 107), 153–198. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Montiel-Ponsoda, E. and Aguado-de-Cea, G.. 2014. Applying the lexical constructional model to ontology building. In Nolan, and Periñán-Pascual, (eds.), 313–338.Google Scholar
Murtagh, I. 2019a. Motivating the computational phonological parameters of an Irish Sign Language avatar. In Nolan, and Diedrichsen, (eds.), 323–339.Google Scholar
Murtagh, I. 2019b. A Linguistically Motivated Computational Framework for Irish Sign Language. PhD thesis, Trinity College Dublin School of Linguistic Speech & Communication Science. www.tara.tcd.ie/handle/2262/89131.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. 2004. First steps towards a computational Role and Reference Grammar. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Role and Reference Grammar, Dublin, July 2004, 196–223. https://rrg.caset.buffalo.edu/rrg/RRG2004%20Book%20of%20Proceedings.pdf.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. 2011. Meaning construction and grammatical inflection in the layered structure of the Irish word: An RRG account of morphological constructions. In Nakamura, W. (ed.), New Perspectives in Role and Reference Grammar, 64–103. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. 2012. The Syntax of Modern Irish: A Functional Account. Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. 2013. Constructions as grammatical objects: A case study of the prepositional ditransitive construction in Modern Irish. In Nolan, B. and Diedrichsen, E. (eds.), Linking Constructions into Functional Linguistics, (Studies in Language Companion Series 145), 143–178. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. 2014. Extending a lexicalist functional grammar through speech acts, constructions and conversational software agents. In Nolan, and Periñán, (eds.), 143–164.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. 2016. What can theoretical linguistics do for natural language processing research? In Periñán-Pascual, C. and Mestre Mestre, E. (eds.). Meaning and Knowledge Representation, 235–248. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. and Diedrichsen, E. (eds.). 2013. Linking Constructions into Functional Linguistics: The Role of Constructions in Grammar (Studies in Language Companion Series 145). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. and Diedrichsen, E. (eds.). 2019. Linguistic Perspectives on the Construction of Meaning and Knowledge: The Linguistic, Pragmatic, Ontological and Computational Dimensions. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. and Periñán-Pascual, C. (eds.). 2014. Language Processing and Grammars: The Role of Functionally Oriented Computational Models (Studies in Language Companion Series 150). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. and Salem, Y.. 2010. UniArab: An RRG Arabic-to-English Machine Translation Software. In W. Nakamura (ed.), Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Role and Reference Grammar (RRG 2009), 243–270. linguistics.buffalo.edu/people/faculty/vanvalin/rrg/ProceedingsofRRG2009_02.pdf.Google Scholar
Nolan, B. and Salem, Y.. 2011. UniArab: RRG Arabic-to-English Machine Translation. In Nakamura, W. (ed.), New Perspectives in Role and Reference Grammar, 312–346. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Panesar, K. 2017. A Linguistically Centred Text-Based Conversational Software Agent. Unpublished PhD thesis, Leeds Beckett University. www.researchgate.net/publication/319376849_PhD_Thesis_%27A_linguistically_centred_text-based_conversational_software_agent%27.Google Scholar
Panesar, K. 2019. Functional linguistic based motivations for a conversational software agent. In Nolan, and Diedrichsen, (eds.), 340–371.Google Scholar
Panesar, K. 2020. Conversational artificial intelligence: Demystifying statistical vs. linguistic NLP solutions. Journal of Computer-Assisted Linguistic Research 4: 47–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. 2013. Towards a model of constructional meaning for natural language understanding. In Nolan, and Diedrichsen, (eds.), 205–230.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Arcas-Túnez, F.. 2004. Meaning postulates in a lexico-conceptual knowledge base. In Proceedings of the 15th International Workshop on Databases and Expert Systems Applications, 8–42. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Arcas-Túnez, F.. 2005. Microconceptual-knowledge spreading in FunGramKB. In Proceedings of the 9th IASTED International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Soft Computing, 239–244. Anaheim: ACTA Press.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Arcas-Túnez, F.. 2007. Deep semantics in an NLP knowledge base. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference of the Spanish Association for Artificial Intelligence, Universidad de Salamanca, 279–288.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Arcas-Túnez, F.. 2008. A cognitive approach to qualities for NLP. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 41: 137–144.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Arcas-Túnez, F.. 2010. The architecture of FunGramKB. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2010, Malta, 2667–2674. www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2010/summaries/284.html.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Arcas-Túnez., F 2014. The implementation of the FunGramKB CLS Constructor in ARTEMIS. In Nolan, and Periñán-Pascual, (eds.), 165–196.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Mairal Usón, R.. 2009. Bringing Role and Reference Grammar to natural language understanding. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 43: 265–273.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Mairal Usón, R.. 2010. Enhancing UniArab with FunGramKB. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 44: 19–26.Google Scholar
Periñán-Pascual, C. and Mairal Usón, R.. 2011. The COHERENT methodology in FunGramKB. Onomázein 24: 13–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pokahr, A., Braubach, L., Haubeck, C. and Ladiges, J.. 2014. Programming BDI agents with pure Java. In German Conference on Multiagent System Technologies, MATES2014, 216–233. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, J. 1991. The generative lexicon. Computational Linguistics 17(4): 409–441.Google Scholar
Pustejovsky, J. 1995. The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Rao, A. S. and Georgeff, M. P.. 1995. BDI agents: From theory to practice. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems ICMAS-95, 312–319.Google Scholar
Ruiz de Mendoza, F. and Mairal Usón, R.. 2008. Levels of description and constraining factors in meaning construction: an introduction to the Lexical Constructional Model. Folia Linguistica 42(2): 355–400.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Cárdenas, B. and Faber, P.. 2014. A functional and constructional approach for specialized knowledge resources. In Nolan, and Periñán-Pascual, (eds.), 297–312.Google Scholar
Searle, J. 1969. Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Valin, R. D. Jr. 2005. Exploring the Syntax–Semantics Interface. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Van Valin, R. D. Jr. (ed.). 2008. Investigations of the Syntax–Semantics–Pragmatics Interface. (Studies in Language Companion Series 105). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Valin, R. D. Jr. and Diedrichsen, E.. 2006. A Bonsai Grammar for German. www.academia.edu/26126987/A_Bonsai_Grammar_for_German.Google Scholar
Vauquois, B. 1968. A survey of formal grammars and algorithms for recognition and transformation in machine translation. Proceedings of the IFIP Congress-6, 254–260.Google Scholar
Winther-Nielsen, N. 2008. A Role-Lexical Module (RLM) for Biblical Hebrew: A mapping tool for RRG and WordNet. In Van Valin, (ed.), 455–478.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×