<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C82-1061">
  <Title>QUANTIFICATION OF MEANING AND THE COMPUTER</Title>
  <Section position="2" start_page="377" end_page="377" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
378 M. Tt/~;ITELOV.~
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> phenomena. In this stage of analysis the computer is an indispensable instrument of research.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> Let us remember in this place the thirties and fifties of this century when the first semantic frequency dictionaries of English were - manually - compiled \[I\], \[2\]. They were isolated achievements combining quantitative and qualitative approaches to obtain the frequency of individual lexical meanings.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> In the Dept. of Mathematical Linguistics and Phonetics, we dispose with a statistical corpus of texts processed by computer the units of which /words/ havebeen encoded in context with regard to syntax, morphology and lexicon; the corpus provides an adequate basis for the quantification of the so-called context meaning, i.e.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> meaning in a certain context \[3~.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> As it is known, a discourse is determined by external and internal linguistic conditions, in other words, it is a function of linguistic and extralinguistic variables. The complex relations between objects and other events of reality are reflected in language by syntagmatic and paradigmatic relations; to disclose their mutual conditioning is one of the major aims of the semantic analysis.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> The lexicon introducing the sememes within their proper systems is not capable to cope with their complex relations in the communication, and, thus, it is necessary to examine the linking of sememes in the frame of syntactic structure. This is a task which cannot be done without an assistance ~f computer, especially when the relations are to be quantified. And, at the same time, this is a task which ought to be performed by the quantitative linguistics as a first step to the quantification of meaning which is today at the centre of interest in linguistics, logic and other sciences.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> A prerequisite for obtaining good results in the semantic research is a computationally processed corpus of linguistic units /sentence tokens/ in which we may quantify: /1./ semantics of syntactic functions, /2./ lexical meanings by means of which the semantics of sentence elements are expressed, /3./ meanings of morphological categories, especially those of parts of speech, when they prove to be of importance for semantics in points /1./ and /2./.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> On this subject we add a few remarks. To point /1./: It is well</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="3" start_page="377" end_page="377" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
QUANTIFICATION OF MEANING AND THE COMPUTER 379
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> known that in spite of a considerable progress in sentence semantics in these last years ~4\], \[5\], there is a number of questions remaining unsolved or open. Nevertheless, we are able to quantify semantics on the sentence level applying the principles of L. Tesnitre \[6\]. The approach consists in searching for semantic components corresponding to sentence members in different syntactic functions. This is certainly no easy task, but is possible under the condition that we dispose with a perfectly performed syntactic analysis of whole sentences /simple, compound, and complex/ and larger samples of running texts, as is the sampling used inthe Depto of Mathematical Linguistics for the mentioned corpus of texts.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> This sort of underlying language material allows us to study the semantics of language units even larger than a sentence - this, however, being a prospect for a future work.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> Remarks to point /2./: The study of lexical meanings fixed ~n explanatory dictionaries shows some interesting aspects, too. The analysis based on their distribution in text and in relation to the respective semantics of syntactic functions gives a new picture of the frequency distribution of different context meanings associated with a word, and, in some cases, even corrects their position with regard to morphological categories.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> Remarks to point /3./: Each part of speech, of course, &amp;quot;behaves&amp;quot; in a different way as far as the semantics of syntactic functions and the lexical meanings are concerned; sometimes, the meaning can be significantly influenced also by morphological categories.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> E.g. the animate and inanimate genders of masculines in Czech concern not only the semantics of the analyzed word, but also its &amp;quot;environment&amp;quot;. So for example, the animateness of subject /e.g. agent/, or object /e.g. afficient/, is reflected in the verb /predicate/ and also is connected with certain lexical meanings; similarly, the verb categories /e.g. mood and tense/ often influence the use of lexical meanings as well as the constitution of new meanings. null These assertions will be now exemplified on two fundamental parts of speech, the verb and the noun, which in the quantitative semantic analysis manifest some specific features referring to their part-of-speech properties and syntactic functions.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> 380 M. TF.SITELOV./~ E.g. the Czech verb in the predicative position represents toge ther with its actants the semantic nucleus of sentence. The actants are formally expressed by the subject, object and/or adverbials as free complements. After the determination of meanings corresponding to the syntactic functions of verb as a further step we ascertain which of the lexical meanings functions most frequently as predicate. The semantics of predicate may be also ingluenced by the part-of-speech appurtenance of actantsassigned tosyntacticfunctions.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> assigned. It certainly makes a difference when a subject is expressed by a noun or a pronoun, or when it is not expressed at all.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> There are other important aspects, too, e.g. whether the function of subject /e.g. agent/ is expressed by an animate or an inanimate noun, whether it is a human being, animal or thing, whether the word stands in the singular or the plurals whether it is plurale tantum etc. In the relation of object to predicate we must take into account the lexical meaning of object and its morphological categories, especially case.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="8"> Between the verb, subject and object there exists a relation of semantic congruence, i.e. a classificatory agreement of noun and verb /i.e. of the predicate and its actants/. E.g. water, wine flows..._._.,___~_~_# not so the table, the earth~ we chase the d~ not ~.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="9"> This principle is rather close to the intention of verb in the sense of E. Pauliny \[7\].</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="10"> With the noun in Czech we quantify the semantics corresponding especially to subject, object, attribute and adverbial. Compared to the previous remarks on the semantic quantification of verb we have to do for the most part with an inverse relation; as a point of departure we take now the noun in one of its syntactic functions /with different meanings/ and procede to the verb syntactically functioning as a predicate. Further steps of analysis are practically the same as with the verb, i.e. the determination of a corresponding lexical meaning of the given noun, of its morphological categories and/or syntactic functions of its ='environment.&amp;quot; With the, adverbial the attention is paid especially to whether it is obligatory or optional .\[5\].</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="11"> The semantic analysis of the remaining parts of speech in sentence, e.g. formal words /grammar words/, such as prepositions and conjunctionss have some aspects common with verbs or nouns and, in addition,</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="4" start_page="377" end_page="377" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
QUANTIFICATION OF MEANING AND THE COMPUTER 381
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> some special features connected with their status. In any case, the quantification of their semantics in the manner explained shows the functioning of wobds in text in a new light.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The quantitative Linguistics can fulfill the task presented with the aid of computer which creates optimum conditions for the application of quantitative methods in semantics. Within the quantitative microanalysis Qf individual words in text /in context/ aimed at an identification of context meaning it is possible to obtain new facts concerning the theory of semantics in general and the quantitative semantics in special~ the application of results may lead to a new type of semantic frequency dictionary. And this is at present, under my leadership, the principal task of the Dept.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> of Mathematical Linguistics and Phonetics, in the Czech Language Institute.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>