21.04.2013 Views

Eckhard Bick - VISL

Eckhard Bick - VISL

Eckhard Bick - VISL

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Semantic ambiguity<br />

analytical (structural)<br />

lexical functional<br />

(1) polysemy<br />

fato-1 ('fact')<br />

fato-2 ('suit')<br />

fato-3 ('flock')<br />

(2) polylexicals<br />

ter boas razões para..<br />

('have good reasons<br />

to ..')<br />

ter razão<br />

('to be right')<br />

The above sequence of semantic ambiguity types mirrors and supplants, in a way,<br />

what has been said about ambiguity on lower levels: Thus, the lexical level of<br />

polysemy corresponds to homonymy, and more specifically, to lexeme category<br />

ambiguity (type 1 of morphological ambiguity), while the analytical and functional<br />

types mirror the corresponding syntactic ambiguity classes of syntactic form and<br />

syntactic function. Of course, lower level distinctions can imply higher level ones<br />

(this upward implication is one important aspect of progressive level parsing,<br />

downward application of lexical categories being another one), as shown for the<br />

intermediate level syntactic word classes. Thus, treating the semantic ambiguity<br />

types 2-4 as syntactically inspired, one might call thematic roles semantic arguments,<br />

polylexical meaning could be regarded as a side effect of a very closely knitted<br />

syntactic relation, and scope could be described as the semantic result of operator<br />

attachment. Conversely, the cohesion section of syntactic ambiguity (anaphora and<br />

co-ordination) might be seen as a syntactic description of semantic structure.<br />

In the three diagrams above, the difference between the semantic ambiguity<br />

level and the two lower levels is that, for polysemy, polylexical meaning, scope and<br />

thematic roles, none of the existing morphological or syntactic tags can capture the<br />

ambiguity in a principled way on the word itself, since both (semantic) readings will<br />

receive the same lower level analysis:<br />

(10)<br />

type 1: fato N M S<br />

type 2: ter razão @ voltava três vezes/rubins<br />

- 106 -<br />

(3) scope<br />

Não compre três<br />

garrafas de vinho,<br />

compre quatro/cerveja!<br />

('Don't buy [three]<br />

bottles of wine, buy<br />

four !' - 'Don't buy<br />

[three bottles of wine],<br />

(4) thematic roles<br />

O sacrifício da moça<br />

('The sacrificing of the<br />

girl')<br />

o duende voltava três<br />

vezes/rubins.<br />

('The dwarf returned<br />

three times/rubies.')

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!