A Compositional Constructional Analysis of Hitting Verb Argument

A Compositional Constructional Analysis of ‘Hitting’ Verb Argument Realization Patterns and Their Meanings Ellen K. Dodge International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley June 27, 2013

‘Hitting’ verbs • ‘Hitting’ verbs: • E. g. : hit, slap, kick, punch, pat, tap, whack, etc. • semantically similar • exhibit a wide range of similar argument realization patterns • different patterns describe different situations

Argument Realization Patterns 1. She slapped/kicked/punched the box off the table – actor causes motion of another entity 2. She slapped her hand on / kicked her foot against the table – actor moves body part, contacts another entity 3. She slapped him on the back / across the face. – actor affects person via contact at specific body location

Road Map • Argument Structure Constructions (Goldberg 1995, 2010) • Embodied Construction Grammar (ECG) (Feldman, Dodge, and Bryant, 2010) • Analysis : – Meaning – Verb and A-S Constructions – Sentence examples

Argument Structure Constructions She slapped the block into the box Verb: Slap <slapper> <slapped thing> A-S: Cause Motion meaning: <causer> <patient/theme> <landmark> syntax: Subj Dir. Obj Prep. Obj

Argument Structure Constructions She slapped her hand on the block Verb: Slap <slapper> <hand> <slapped thing> A-S: Move. Body. Part meaning: <actor> <theme/instrument> <landmark> syntax: Subj Dir. Obj Prep. Obj

Argument Structure Constructions She slapped him on the arm Verb: Slap <slapper> <slapped thing> A-S: Part. Possessor meaning: <causer> <affected. Person> <body. Part> syntax: Subj Dir. Obj Prep. Obj

Argument Structure Constructions Need to identify and represent: – Semantic commonalities that motivate different patterns of integration of verb, A-S construction, and nominal meanings – Complex meanings that arise from this integration – Relevant constraints that enable us to distinguish between different patterns

Embodied Construction Grammar Construction grammar in which embodied semantics are central Simulation semantics -- understanding a description of an event involves activation of the same/similar neural structure as is active for other experiences of that event

Language Understanding Model • Analysis: – Determination of which constructions in a grammar “best-fit” a given utterance – Unification of instantiated constructions produces semantic specification (Semspec) • Simulation: – Enactment of the situation specified in the Semspec. – May allow understander to draw further inferences.

Embodied Construction Grammar • ECG formalism enables precise, consistent representations of constructions and meanings • Supports computational implementations: – ECG Workbench -- view, write and test grammars – Constructional Analyzer (Bryant 2008) – analyzes sentence examples, produces semantic specifications

Meaning • Represented using schemas • Consistent with simulation semantics • Meanings of verb and A-S constructions are represented using some of the same or schemas

Motor Control Schema schema Process roles protatgonist x-net schema Motor. Control subcase of Process roles actor: @animate. Entity effector effort routine constraints actor ↔ protagonist routine ↔ x-net

Force Application schema Motor. Control subcase of Process roles actor: animate. Entity effector effort routine constraints actor ↔ protagonist routine ↔ x-net schema Force. Application subcase of Motor. Control evokes Force. Transfer as ft roles actor acted Upon effector constraints actor ↔ ft. supplier acted Upon↔ ft. recipient effort ↔ ft. force. Amount schema Force. Transfer evokes Contact as c roles supplier recipient force. Amount constraints supplier ↔ c. entity 1 recipient ↔ c. entity 2 e. g. squeeze, press

Forceful. Motion. Action schema Force. Application schema Forceful. Motion. Action subcase of Force. Application evokes Source. Path. Goal as spg roles actor acted Upon effector constraints acted Upon↔ spg. landmark effector ↔ spg. trajector schema Source. Path. Goal subcase of Trajector. Landmark roles landmark trajector source path goal e. g. slap, kick, punch, etc.

Cause. Effect. Action schema Cause. Effect. Action subcase of Complex. Process roles causal. Process: Force. Application effect. Process: Process causer affected x-net: @cause. Effect constraints process 1. acted. Upon ↔ affected Many transitive A-cxns schema Force. Application subcase of Motor. Control evokes Force. Transfer as ft roles actor acted Upon constraints actor ↔ ft. supplier acted Upon↔ ft. recipient effort ↔ ft. force. Amount schema Process roles protatgonist x-net

Cause Motion schema Cause. Motion subcase of Complex. Process roles causal. Process: Force. Application effect. Process: Motion. Along. APath causer affected x-net: @cause. Motion e. g. throwing, dragging Cause. Motion A-S cxn schema Force. Application subcase of Motor. Control evokes Force. Transfer as ft roles actor acted Upon constraints actor ↔ ft. supplier acted Upon↔ ft. recipient effort ↔ ft. force. Amount schema Motion. Along. APath subcase of Motion evokes SPG as spg roles x-net: @translationalmotion constraints mover ↔ spg. trajector

Process schema lattice Process Contact Motor. Control Force. Transfer Complex. Process Effector Motion Force. Application Cause. Effect Motion. Along. APath Forceful. Motion. Action Effector Motion. Path SPG

Constructions A given sentence instantiates many constructions For She slapped the block into the box: · Lexical constructions: She, slapped, the, block, into, box · Past. Tense cxn · Phrasal cxns: the block, into the box · Argument Structure Cxn: Cause. Effect · Clause cxn: Declarative

Verb Constructions construction Slap. Past subcase of Slap, Past. Tense form: Word. Form constraints self. f. orth “slapped” meaning: Forceful. Motion. Action constraints effector @handt self. m. x-net @slap Other similar verbs: kick effector = foot punch: effector = fist tap: force amount = low whack: force amount = high schema Forceful. Motion. Action subcase of Force. Application roles actor: @animate acted. Upon effector x-net: @forceful. Motion. Action

Ontology animate sub of entity animal sub of animate person sub of animate body. Part sub of entity foot sub of body. Part arm sub of body. Part leg sub of body. Part

Cause. Motion A-S cxn construction Active. Trans. Cause. Motion 2 subcase of Argument. Structure constructional constituents v : Verb // inherited np: NP pp: Path-PP form constraints v. f before np. f before pp. f meaning: Cause. Motion evokes Event. Descriptor as ed evokes Forceful. Motion. Action as fma constraints v. m <--> self. m. causal. Process self. m. affected <--> np. m self. m. causer <--> ed. profiled. Participant self. m. effect. Process. spg <--> pp. m schema Cause. Motion subcase of Complex. Process roles causal. Process: Force. Application effect. Process: Motion. Along. APath causer affected x-net: @cause. Motion

Cause Motion A-S construction e. g. She slapped the block into the box CAUSE MOTION 2 Constituents: Verb, NP, PP Form: Verb > NP > PP A-S cxn meaning: Cause. Motion Verb meaning: Forceful. Motion. Action Meaning constraints: verb meaning = Cause. Motion. cause prof. Participant = causer <–> actor NP = affected <–> acted. Upon <–> mover <–> trajector PP. np = landmark

She slapped the block into the box Cause. Motion. Action cause: Force. Application effect: Motion. Path causer affected landmark She Ref. Descriptor ont-category: person gender: female Forceful. Motion. Action actor acted. Upon effector: hand routine: slap slapped the block into the box Ref. Descriptor ont-category: block ont-cat: box Motion. Path mover SPG trajector landmark

She slapped her hand on the block EFFECTOR MOTION Constituents: Verb, NP, PP Form: Verb > NP > PP A-S cxn meaning: Forceful. Motion. Action Verb meaning: Forceful. Motion. Action Meaning Constraints: prof. Participant = actor NP = effector <–> trajector PP. np = acted. Upon <–> landmark

She slapped her hand on the block Forceful. Motion. Action actor acted. Upon effector: hand routine: slap She Ref. Descriptor ont-category: person gender: female slapped her hand Ref. Descriptor ont-cat: hand SPG trajector landmark the block Ref. Descriptor ont-cat: block

She slapped him on the hand PART POSSESSOR Constituents: Verb, NP, PP: Body. Part. PP (the+Body. Part) Form: Verb > NP > PP A-S cxn meaning: Cause. Effect evokes: Possession Verb meaning: Forceful. Motion. Action Meaning Constraints: verb meaning = Cause. Effect. cause prof. Participant = causer <–> actor NP = affected <–> acted. Upon <–> p. posssessor (@person) PP. np = <–> p. possessed (@body. Part)

She slapped him on the hand Cause. Effect cause: Forceful. Motion. Action effect: causer affected She Ref. Descriptor ont-category: person gender: female Forceful. Motion. Action actor acted. Upon effector: hand routine: slap slapped him the hand Ref. Descriptor ont-cat: person ont-cat: hand Possession Possessor: person Possessed: body. Part

A-S Cxn Subject Direct Object PP-Object Cause. Motion Causer Actor Affected Acted. Upon Mover Trajector Landmark Effector. Motion Actor Effector Trajector Acted. Upon Landmark Part. Possessor Causer Actor Affected Acted. Upon Possessor (person) Possession (body part)

Concluding Remarks • Important to recognize and represent: – Inherent complexity of conceptual structure (and participant roles) utilized by linguistic constructions – Importance of inter-related schematic structures for compositional analysis – Use of constraints to support best-fit analysis process • ECG formalism facilitates analysis

References Feldman, Jerome, Ellen Dodge, and John Bryant. 2010. Embodied Construction Grammar. In The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis, edited by B. Heine and N. Heiko. New York: Oxford University Press. Filllmore, Charles. 1970. The grammar of hitting and breaking. In Readings in English Transformational Grammar, edited by R. Jacobs and P. Rosenbaum. Waltham, MA: Ginn and Company. Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: a construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ———. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Sem. Spec generated by ECG workbench for analysis of He cut the bread

Cause. Motion A-S cxn e. g. She threw the block into the box construction Active. Transitive. Cause. Motion 2 subcase of Argument. Structure constructional constituents v : Verb // inherited np: NP pp: Path-PP form constraints v. f before np. f before pp. f meaning: Cause. Motion evokes Event. Descriptor as ed evokes Forceful. Motion. Action as fma constraints v. m <--> self. m. causal. Process self. m. affected <--> np. m self. m. causer <--> ed. profiled. Participant self. m. effect. Process. spg <--> pp. m CAUSE MOTION 1 Constituents: Verb, NP, PP Form: Verb > NP > PP A-S cxn meaning: Cause. Motion Verb meaning: Cause. Motion Meaning constraints: affected = np causer = profiled. Participant (subject NP) spg = pp (landmark = pp. np)

Key parts of analysis • Argument Structure constructions (A-S cxns) are used to capture different ‘scene’ descriptions associated with different argument realization patterns • Meaning of the verb and A-S cxns captures semantic elements that are relevant to these different argument realization patterns • Formalization supports a detailed, consistent, [scalable? ? ] computationally implemented analysis

Argument Realization Patterns • She slapped/kicked/punched the box – action potentially affects some other entity • She slapped him silly / punched him senseless – action results in some specific effect • She slapped at his hand / tapped on the table – action is directed at a spatial target