<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="P86-1017">
  <Title>Encodinl~ and Acquiring Meanings for-Figurative Phrases *</Title>
  <Section position="2" start_page="0" end_page="106" type="intro">
    <SectionTitle>
1. Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> The phrasal approach to language processing \[Backer75, Pawley83, Fillmore86\] emphasizes the role of the lexicon as a knowledge source. Rather than maintaining a single generic lexical entry for each word, e.g.: take, the lexicon contains many phrases, e.g.: take over, take it or leave it, take it up with, take it for granted, etc. Although this approach proves effective in parsing and in generation \[Wilensky84\], there are three problems which require further investigation. First, phrase interaction: the lexicon provides representation for single phrases, such as take to task and make up one' s mind. Yet it is required to analyze complex clauses such as he made up his mind to take her to task. The problem lies with the way the meanings of the two phrases interact to form the compound meaning. Second, phrase ambiguity: \[Zernik86\] phrasal parsing shifts the task from single-word selection to the selection of entire lexical phrases. When a set of lexical phrases appear syntactically equivalent, i.e.: he ran into a friend, he ran into an 1986 Mercedes, he ran into the store, and he ran into trouble again, disambiguation must be performed by semantic means. The conditions which facilitate phrase discrimination reside within each lexical entry itself. Third, phrase idiosyncracy: the meaning representation of phrases such as: lay down the law VS. put one' s foot down, must distinguish the special use of each phrase. This paper is concerned in the representation of phrase meanings and the process of acquiring these meanings from examples in context.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> * This research was supported in part by a grant from the ITA Foundation. Consider the figurative phrases in the sentences below, as they are parsed by the program RINA \[Zernik85a\].</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> Sh The Democrats in the house carried the water for Reagan's tax-reform bill.** $2: The famous mobster evaded prosecution for years. Finally, they threw the book at him for tax evasion.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> Depending on the contents of the given lexicon, the program may interpret these sentences in one of two ways. On the one hand, assuming that the meaning of a phrase exists in the lexicon, the program applies that meaning in the comprehension of the sentence. In S1, the program understands that the Democratic representatives did the &amp;quot;dirty&amp;quot; work in passing the bill for Reagan. On the other hand, if the figurative phrase does not exist in the lexicon, an additional task is performed: the program must figure out the meaning of the new phrase, using existing knowledge: First, the meanings given for the single words carry and water are processed literally. Second, the context which exists prior to the application of the phrase, provides a hypothesis for the formation of the phrase meaning. A dialog with RINA proceeds as follows: RINA: They moved water? User: No. The Democrats carried the water for Reagan.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> RINA: They helped him pass the bill? Thus, RINA detects the metaphor underlying the phrase, and using the context, it learns that carry the water means helping another person do a hard job. Consider encounters with three other phrases: Jenny wanted to go punk but her father $3: laid down the law.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> $4: put his foot down.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> $5: read her the riot act.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> In all these cases, it is understood from the context that Jenny's father objected to her plan of going punk (aided by the word but which suggests that something went wrong with Jenny's goals). However, what is the meaning of each one of the phrases, and in particular do all these phrases convey identical concepts? ** This sentence was recorded off the ABe television program Nightline, December 12, 1985.</Paragraph>
    <Section position="1" start_page="106" end_page="106" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
1.2 The Issues
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> In encoding meanings of figurative phrases, we must address the following issues.</Paragraph>
    </Section>
    <Section position="2" start_page="106" end_page="106" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
Underlying Knowledge
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> What is the knowledge required in order to encode the phrase throw the book? Clearly, this knowledge includes the situation and the events that take place in court, namely the judge punishing the defendant.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="1"> The phrase carry the water, for example, requires two kinds of knowledge:  (a) Knowledge about the act of carrying water which can support the analysis of the phrase metaphor.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> (b) Knowledge about general plans and goals, and the way  one person agrees to serve as an agent in the execution of the plans of another person. This knowledge supports the analysis of the context.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="3"> While the phrases above could be denoted in terms of plans and goals, other phrases, i.e.: rub one's nose in it, climb the walls, and have a chip on one's shoulder require knowledge about emotions, such as embarrassment and frustration. Unless the program maintains knowledge about resentment, the phrase have a chip on the shoulder, for example, cannot be represented. Thus, a variety of knowledge structures take place in encoding figurative phrases. Representing Phrase Meanings and Connotations The appearance of each phrase carries certain implications. For example, John put his foot down implies that John refused a request, and on the other hand, John read the riot act implies that he reacted angrily about a certain event in the past. John gave Mary a hard time implies that he refused to cooperate, and argued with Mary since he was annoyed, while John laid down the law implies that John imposed his authority in a discussion. The representation of each phrase must account for such implications.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="4"> Three different phrases in sentences $3-$5 are applied in the same context. However, not any phrase may be applied in every context. For example, consider the context established by this paragraph: $6: Usually, Mary put up with her husband's cooking, but when he served her cold potatoes for breakfast, she put her foot down.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="5"> Could the phrase in this sentence be replaced by the other two phrases: (a) lay down the law, or (b) read the riot act? While understandable, these two phrases are not appropriate in that context. The sentence she read him the riot act does not make sense in the context of debating food taste. The sentence she laid down the law does not make as much sense since there is no argument between individuals with non-equal authority. Thus, there are conditions for the applicability of each lexical phrase in various contexts. These conditions support phrase disambiguation, and must be included as pan of a phrase meaning.</Paragraph>
    </Section>
    <Section position="3" start_page="106" end_page="106" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
Phrase Acquisition
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> Phrase meanings are learned from examples given in context. Suppose the structure and meaning of put one' s foot down is acquired through the analysis of the following sentences: null $6: Usually, Mary put up with her husband's cooking, but when he served her cold potatoes for breakfast, she put her foot down.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="1"> S7: Jenny was dating a new boyfriend and started to show up after midnight. When she came at 2am on a weekday, her father put his foot down: no more late dates.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> 58: From time to time I took money from John, and I did not always remember to give it back to him. He put his foot down yesterday when I asked him for a quarter.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="3"> Since each example contains many concepts, both appropriate and inappropriate, the appropriate concepts must be identified and selected. Furthermore, although each example provides only a specific episode, the ultimate meaning must be generalized to encompass further episodes.</Paragraph>
    </Section>
    <Section position="4" start_page="106" end_page="106" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
Literal Interpretation
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> Single-word senses (e.g.: the sense of the panicle into in run into another ear), as well as entire metaphoric actions (e.g.: carry the water in the Democratic representatives carried the water for Reagan's tax-reform bill) take pan in forming the meaning of unknown figurative phrases. Can the meaning of a phrase be acquired in spite of the fact that its original metaphor is unknown, as is the case with read the riot act (what act exactly?) or carry the water (carry what water)?</Paragraph>
    </Section>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>