TY - GEN
T1 - Relating frames and constructions in Japanese FrameNet
AU - Ohara, Kyoko Hirose
N1 - Copyright:
Copyright 2017 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2014
Y1 - 2014
N2 - Relations between frames and constructions must be made explicit in FrameNet-style linguistic resources such as Berkeley FrameNet (Fillmore & Baker, 2010, Fillmore, Lee-Goldman & Rhomieux, 2012), Japanese FrameNet (Ohara, 2013), and Swedish Constructicon (Lyngfelt et al., 2013). On the basis of analyses of Japanese constructions for the purpose of building a constructicon in the Japanese FrameNet project, this paper argues that constructions can be classified based on whether they evoke frames or not. By recognizing such a distinction among constructions, it becomes possible for FrameNet-style linguistic resources to have a proper division of labor between frame annotations and construction annotations. In addition to the three kinds of "meaningless" constructions which have been proposed already, this paper suggests there may be yet another subtype of constructions without meanings. Furthermore, the present paper adds support to the claim that there may be constructions without meanings (Fillmore, Lee-Goldman & Rhomieux, 2012) in a current debate concerning whether all constructions should be seen as meaning-bearing (Goldberg, 2006: 166-182).
AB - Relations between frames and constructions must be made explicit in FrameNet-style linguistic resources such as Berkeley FrameNet (Fillmore & Baker, 2010, Fillmore, Lee-Goldman & Rhomieux, 2012), Japanese FrameNet (Ohara, 2013), and Swedish Constructicon (Lyngfelt et al., 2013). On the basis of analyses of Japanese constructions for the purpose of building a constructicon in the Japanese FrameNet project, this paper argues that constructions can be classified based on whether they evoke frames or not. By recognizing such a distinction among constructions, it becomes possible for FrameNet-style linguistic resources to have a proper division of labor between frame annotations and construction annotations. In addition to the three kinds of "meaningless" constructions which have been proposed already, this paper suggests there may be yet another subtype of constructions without meanings. Furthermore, the present paper adds support to the claim that there may be constructions without meanings (Fillmore, Lee-Goldman & Rhomieux, 2012) in a current debate concerning whether all constructions should be seen as meaning-bearing (Goldberg, 2006: 166-182).
KW - Constructicon
KW - Frame semantics
KW - Japanese FrameNet
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85028732039&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85028732039&partnerID=8YFLogxK
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85028732039
T3 - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2014
SP - 2474
EP - 2477
BT - Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2014
A2 - Calzolari, Nicoletta
A2 - Choukri, Khalid
A2 - Goggi, Sara
A2 - Declerck, Thierry
A2 - Mariani, Joseph
A2 - Maegaard, Bente
A2 - Moreno, Asuncion
A2 - Odijk, Jan
A2 - Mazo, Helene
A2 - Piperidis, Stelios
A2 - Loftsson, Hrafn
PB - European Language Resources Association (ELRA)
T2 - 9th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2014
Y2 - 26 May 2014 through 31 May 2014
ER -