Search

To understand natural language, automatic systems must have the ability and possibility to know what is inferred, and if so, how it is inferred, and from what in a text. The linguistically determined implications imposed by a predicate on its propositional arguments, appearing in a text as textual inferences, are, with other elements, such as knowledge of the world, speakers' assumptions about language usage, situational stereotypes, implicatures, etc., one of the necessary elements for a system to be considered as understanding natural language. In this paper, Wiesław Banyś focuses on an important part of textual inferences, one which has been given hardly any scholarly attention so far, namely the relations between a particular category of textual inferences constituted by phrasal implicatives in the sense of Karttunen (2012) and a particular category of multi-word expressions constituted by support verbs. Banyś first gives a brief introduction to the current state of the art of the description of the two general categories: inferences, including a particular type of inferences: paraphrases (sec. 1), and multiword expressions with a particular type of these constructions: support verbs (sec. 2), which allows us to present the relations between support verbs and paraphrases (sec. 3). He then moves on to a discussion of implicatives, including phrasal implicatives (sec. 4), and presents a sketch of the description of some types of support verb constructions from the point of view of their implicative power (sec. 5). The analyses of the type presented are to be continued and need to be extended to all constructions of the type analysed and are at the same time part of a much more general project. They constitute the beginning of a systematic implementation to be done on French and Polish material, in correlation with the English, of the combinatorics of truth values, "implicative signatures", of predicates, whether verbal, adjectival or nominal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revue de Synthèse is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revue de Synthèse is the property of Brill Academic Publishers and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of INFOR is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Mathématiques & Sciences Humaines is the property of Editions du CNRS and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Mathématiques & Sciences Humaines is the property of Editions du CNRS and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Mathématiques & Sciences Humaines is the property of Editions du CNRS and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The question of the syntagmatic combinatorics of words belonging to the classes commonly addressed by grammatical tradition (such as nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs) has been a subject of sustained reflection for several decades. The situation is different for discourse markers (DMs), which have gained substantial interest only recently (toward the end of the 1990s). This article takes as its starting point the idea that DMs are subject to the same types of syntagmatic associations as words belonging to the "ordinary" classes. By analogy with these classes, three types of syntagmatic associations are distinguished in the domain of DMs: the free discursive co-occurrence, the fixed expression (or discursive locution), and the semi-fixed expression (or discursive collocation). Of these types of word associations, the semi-fixed expression proves the most original and the most delicate to examine. It is therefore specifically analyzed in this text, namely through a study of one marker in particular: don ([dↄ]). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]