Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||To ascertain that a formalization of the intuitive notion of a ‘concept’ is linguistically interesting, one has to check whether it allows to get a grip on distinctions and notions from lexical semantics. Prime candidates are notions like ‘prototype’, ‘stereotypical attribute’, ‘essential attribute versus accidental attribute’, ‘intension versus extension’. We will argue that although the current paradigm of formal concept analysis as an application of lattice theory is not rich enough for an analysis of these notions, a lattice theoretical approach to concepts is a suitable starting point for formalizing them.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Only published papers are available at libraries|
Similar books and articles
Godehard Link (1983). The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice-Theoretic Approach. In P. Portner & B. H. Partee (eds.), Formal Semantics - the Essential Readings. Blackwell.
J. Pustejovsky & Bran Boguraev (eds.) (1997). Lexical Semantics: The Problem of Polysemy. Oxford University Press.
D. A. Cruse (1986). Lexical Semantics. Cambridge University Press.
Christian Bassac, Bruno Mery & Christian Retoré (2010). Towards a Type-Theoretical Account of Lexical Semantics. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 19 (2):229-245.
József Andor (2003). On the Role of Frame-Based Knowledge in Lexical Representation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (6):667-668.
Shalom Lappin (ed.) (1996). The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Blackwell Reference.
Kent Johnson (2007). An Overview of Lexical Semantics. Philosophy Compass 3 (1):119-134.
Yael Ravin (1990). Lexical Semantics Without Thematic Roles. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads41 ( #32,764 of 738,694 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 738,694 )
How can I increase my downloads?