Grammatical blending Creative and schematic ects in sentence processing and translation.pdf

《Grammatical blending Creative and schematic ects in sentence processing and translation.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《Grammatical blending Creative and schematic ects in sentence processing and translation.pdf（15页珍藏版）》请在得力文库 - 分享文档赚钱的网站上搜索。

1、Grammatical Blending:Creative and Schematic Aspectsin Sentence Processing and TranslationA dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of therequirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophyin Cognitive SciencebyNili MandelblitUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA,SAN DIEGOCommittee in charge:Professor Gilles

2、Fauconnier,ChairProfessor Farrell AckermanProfessor John BataliProfessor Adele GoldbergProfessor Jean Mandler1997CopyrightNili Mandelblit,1997All rights reservedThe dissertation of Nili Mandelbli is approved,and it isacceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm:ChairUniversity of Cali

3、fornia,San Diego1997TABLE OF CONTENTSSignature Page.iiiTable of Contents.ivList of Figures and Tables.viiNotes on Hebrew Transcription.ixAcknowledgments.xVita,Publications,and Fields of Study.xiAbstract.xiiiiPART ONE:GRAMMATICAL BLENDING-BASIC CONCEPTS.11.Preliminaries.21.0 Introduction and outline.

4、21.1 The data.81.2 Theoretical background.92.The descriptive framework.232.0 Introduction.232.1 The processing of syntactic constructions.232.2 Blending operations in the generation of simple transitive sentences.262.3 Blending operations in the generation of English Caused-Motion sentences.312.4 De

5、-integration operations in language interpretation.40PART TWO:A GRAMMATICAL BLENDING ACCOUNT OF HEBREW BINYANIM.443.The Hebrew binyanim system.453.0 Introduction:From English Constructions to Hebrew Morphology.453.1 The Hebrew System of Verbal-Patterns:Some Basic Notions.473.2 Literature Review:prin

6、cipal accounts of the binyanim system.513.4 Literature review:grammatical voice and related categories.543.5 Summary.624.Blending analysis of the Hebrew causative stem hifil.634.0 Introduction.634.1 The interaction of hifil morphology and causative syntactic constructions.664.1.1 Hifil morphology an

7、d the Basic Transitive construction.684.1.2 Hifil morphology and the Transfer construction.744.1.3 Hifil morphology and the Bitransitive construction.794.2 Advantages of the blending analysis of hifil.844.2.1 Coles clause-union account of hifil.854.2.2 The solutions provided by the blending analysis

8、.874.3 Innovative hifil verbs in(non-standard)Hebrew.944.4 Conclusions.995.Blending analysis of the Hebrew transitive binyanim.1025.0 Introduction.1025.1 Blending characterization of the piel stem.1045.1.1 Piel vs.hifil morphology and the Transitive Construction.1075.1.2 Piel vs.hifil morphology and

9、 the Transfer Construction.1115.1.3 Piel vs.hifil morphology and the Bitransitive Construction.1145.1.4 Summary-the blending schema of piel.1165.2 Blending characterization of the paal stem.1185.3 Conclusions-The transitive binyanim in Hebrew.1246.Blending analysis of the Hebrew intransitive binyani

10、m.1266.0 Introduction.1266.1 The intransitive-only binyanim.1286.2 Blending analysis of hufal and pual.1326.3 Blending analysis of nifal.1396.4 Blending analysis of hitpael.1487.Summary of results-a blending account of the binyanim system.163PART THREE:GRAMMATICAL BLENDING IN WIDER CONTEXT.1758.Blen

11、ding and translation.1768.0 Introduction.1768.1 Issues in translation theory.1788.2 The translation process from the grammatical blending point of view.1888.3 Analyzing translation of Caused-Motion sentences into Hebrew.1958.3.1 Mismatches in the translation of Caused-Motion sentences.1958.3.2 Commu

12、nicating Caused-Motion events in English.1978.3.3 Communicating Caused-Motion events in Hebrew.1998.4 The core analysis.2028.5 Conclusions.2309.Blending and NLP.2329.0 Introduction.2329.1 The field of Machine Translation(MT)-background.2389.2 Implications of grammatical blending for semantic analysi

13、s in MT.2549.3 Conclusions.27610.Concluding Remarks.28110.1 Overview-grammatical blending in sentence processing.28110.2 Suggestions for Future Research.28710.2.1 Theoretical Linguistics.28710.2.2 Psycholinguistics.28710.2.3 Language Acquisition.28910.2.4 Extending the mechanism of grammatical blend

14、ing.29110.2.5 Linguistic blending operations and general cognition.293Appendices.295References.298LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLESFIGURESFigure 1-1:Conceptual Blending(Fauconnier&Turner,1994)16Figure 2-1:Blending operation in generating Seana kissed Danny27Figure 2-2:Blending operation in generating Rache

15、l sneezed the napkin off.33Figure 2-3:Blending operation in generating She trotted the horse into.36Figure 2-4:Blending operation in generating The commander let the tank into.37Figure 2-5:Blending operation in generating Jack threw the ball into the basket39Figure 2-6:The de-integration operation i

16、n interpreting Rachel sneezed.41Figure 4-1:The mapping schema of predicates in hifil sentences65Figure 4-2:Blending operation in generating a Basic Transitive hifil sentence70Figure 4-3:Blending operation in generating a Transfer hifil sentence77Figure 4-4:Blending operation in generating a Bitransi

17、tive hifil sentences83Figure 5-1:Mapping schemas of predicates in hifil,piel,and paal104Figure 5-2:Contrasting the mapping schemas of predicates in piel and hifil106Figure 5-3:Blending operations in generating hifil andpiel Transitive sentences109Figure 5-4:Blending operations in generating hifil an

18、dpiel Transfer sentences113Figure 5-5:Blending operation in generating a Bitransitive piel sentence115Figure 5-6:Integration of predicates in paal verbs119Figure 5-7:Two possible blending characterizations of paal sentences120Figure 6-1:Comparing the blending schemas of transitive and intransitive s

19、tems 132Figure 6-2:The blending schemas of piel,pual,hifil,and hufal 133Figure 6-3:Comparing blending operations in generating hifil and hufal sentences 136Figure 6-4:Comparing blending operations in generating piel and pual sentences138Figure 6-5:Two alternative blending characterizations for paal

20、and nifal.140Figure 6-6:Comparing blending operations in generating paal and nifal sentences142Figure 6-7:The blending schema of hitpael149Figure 6-8:Comparing blending operations in generating piel and hitpael sentences152Figure 6-9:Comparing the blending schemas of paal and hitpael 153Figure 6-10:

21、Two possible blending schemas for the stem hitpael 161Figure 7-1:Summary-a blending analysis of the binyanim system164Figure 7-2:Summary-three mapping schemas of predicates in the binyanim system166Figure 7-3:Summary-three mapping schemas of participants in the binyanim system166Figure 8-1:Blending

22、operation in generating The wind blew the ship off course189Figure 8-2:Translation is the outcome of two independent blending operations192Figure 8-3-A:Blending operation in generating The audience laughed.205Figure 8-3-B:Blending operations in the translation of The audience laughed.210Figure 8-4-A

23、:Blending operation in generating She trotted the horse into.211Figure 8-4-B:Blending operations in the translation of She trotted the horse into.214Figure 8-5:Blending operations in the translation of She threw the ball into.216Figure 8-6-A:Blending operation in generating an Hebrew analytic causat

24、ive sentence 219Figure 8-6-B:Blending operations in the translation of Rachel helped Sam into.222Figure 8-7:Blending operations in the translation of David hammered the nail into.224Figure 8-8:Blending operations in the translation of We laughed our conversation.230Figure 9-1:A frame-type representa

25、tion of the predicate LAUGH-CM263Figure 9-2:A frame-type representation of CAUSED-MOTION events264Figure 9-3:A frame-type representation of Frank sneezed the napkin off.266Figure 9-4:A frame-type representation of INSULT-THAT-CAUSES-MOTION events269Figure 10-1:The pual and hitpael blending schemas29

26、1TABLESTable 3-1:The grammatical functions of the main binyanim(Berman,1975)53Table 7-1:Summary-defining each binyan as a function of two parameters 167Table 7-2.Waltke&OConnors(1990)analysis of the binyanim system169 NOTES ON HEBREW TRANSCRIPTIONThe transcription defined below is used for all Hebre

27、w forms cited in the manuscript.Thetranscription reflects general casual Israeli Hebrew,and is a compromise(for conveniencepurposes)between phonemic and phonetic transcription.It combines transcriptionconventions from several English manuscripts on Modern Hebrew grammar(e.g.,Berman,1978;Glinert,1989

28、).Consonants VowelsLetter Name Transcription Name Transcription alef?kamac/pataxabet/vetb/vsegol/cereegimelg xirik(yod)i,edaleddxolam(vav)ohehshuruk/kubbutzuvavvzayinzxetxtettyodykaf/xafk/xlamedlmemmnunnsamexsayinpe/fep/fcadeckofkreshrshin/sinsh/stavtNote on transcript ion of consonants :alef and ay

29、in in initial and final positions of a word,and he in final position,are not indicated in the Hebrew transcription in this manuscript.NOTATIONS*before a linguistic example indicates unacceptable?before a linguistic example indicates questionableOther symbols are explained as theyoccur in the text.AC

30、KNOWLEDGMENTSI would like to offer my gratitude to all those who helped me complete this dissertation.I have been most fortunate to have Gilles Fauconnier as my advisor:his brilliant ideas andenthusiasm have made my years in graduate school an intriguing and enjoyable experience.I am deeply indebted

31、 to him for his time,guidance,encouragement,kindness,andunflagging support.His influence on my thinking about the nature of human language andcognition is clear throughout these pages.I was also fortunate to have the opportunity to work with the other members of mycommittee.I want to thank Farrell A

32、ckerman for keeping me thinking about differenttheoretical perspectives in linguistics and encouraging me towards further precision in myanalysis.John Batali was very helpful in my first years in graduate school in providingacademic and financial support as well as feedback on my early work,and in e

33、ncouragingme to follow my interests.I am grateful to Adele Goldberg for continuous discussion andmany helpful comments.Her own dissertation set an example to strive for,and hadcountless influence on my work.And to Jean Mandler,I thank for always asking difficultquestions and for leading me to think

34、about the cognitive developmental plausibility of myanalysis.A number of people at the Cognitive Science community at UCSD have helped me inone way or another by providing valuable feedback on earlier drafts,and by sharing theirideas and insights.These include,but are not limited to,Raul Aranovich,S

35、eana Coulson,Nick Flor,Deborah Forster,Rick Grush,Martha Kutas,Ron Langacker,Toni Maschler,and Adrian Robert.I would like to thank these people and others at the Cognitive Scienceprogram at UCSD for providing the intellectual environment for conducting trulyinterdisciplinary research.Outside of UCSD

36、,I have greatly benefited from conversationswith John Barnden,Douglas Hofstadter,George Lakoff,Adee Matan,Sergei Nirenburg,Tim Rohrer,Eve Sweetser and Mark Turner.A special thanks is due to my family:Hemda,Nathan,Orna and Tsahi Mandelblit,whofrom far away offered love and support without which I cou

37、ld have never finished thedissertation.And last,but certainly not least,my debt and gratitude are to Oron.He offeredfriendship,love,and brilliant insights.I thank him for standing behind me,and for alwaysencouraging and supporting my work.I cannot imagine what my years of graduate schoolwould have b

38、een like without him.I am glad we got to share the joy of finishing ourdissertations together.VITAAugust 01,1965Born,Haifa,Israel1983-1985Israeli Defense Force(sergeant)1987-1991Researcher,Tovna Machine Translation Systems Ltd.,Jerusalem1988B.Sc.,Computer Science,Hebrew University of Jerusalem1991-1

39、997Teaching Assistant,Department of Cognitive Science and Programof Judaic Studies,University of California,San Diego1994M.Sc.,Cognitive Science,University of California,San DiegoWinter 1996Instructor,Department of Cognitive Science,University ofCalifornia,San Diego1997Ph.D.,Cognitive Science,Univer

40、sity of California,San DiegoPUBLICATIONSMandelblit,N.,&Zachar,O.(in press).The Notion of Dynamic Unit:ConceptualDevelopments in Cognitive Science.Cognitive Science.Grush,R.,&Mandelblit,N.(in press).Blending in Language,Conceptual Structure,andthe Cerebral Cortex.In P.A.Brandt,F.Gregersen,F.Stjernfel

41、t,&M.Skov(Eds.).TheRoman Jakobson Centennial(Acta Linguistica,v.31),Copenhagen:Hans Reitzel Forlag.Mandelblit,N.(1995a).Beyond Lexical Semantics:Mapping and Blending of Conceptualand Linguistic Structures in Machine Translation.In Proceedings of the 4th Int.Conf.onthe Cognitive Science of Natural La

42、nguage Processing.Dublin,Ireland,June 1995.Mandelblit,N.(1995b).The Cognitive View of Metaphor and its Implication forTranslation Theory.In M.Thelen(Ed.),Translation and Meaning,vol.3,pp.483-495.Hogeschool Maastricht,The Netherlands.Mandelblit,N.(1993).Machine Translation:a Cognitive Linguistics App

43、roach.InProceedings of the 5th Int.Conf.on Theoretical and Methodological Issues in MachineTranslation,(pp.117-130).Kyoto,Japan,July 1993.FIELDS OF STUDYMajor Field:Cognitive ScienceStudies in Aphasia.Professor Elizabeth BatesStudies in Artificial Intelligence.Professor David KirshStudies in Cogniti

44、ve Development.Professor Jean MandlerStudies in Cognitive Psychology.Professor Donald Norman and Aaron CicourelStudies in Neural Networks.Professor Jeffrey ElmanStudies in Neuroanatomy and Neurophysiology.Professor Martin SerenoStudies in Semantics and Pragmatics,Professor Adele Goldberg,Gilles Fauc

45、onnier,and Ronald LangackerStudies in Statistics.Professor Norman AndersonStudies in Syntax.Professor Farrell Ackerman and Adele GoldbergStudies in Visual Modeling.Professor Martin SerenoABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATIONGrammatical Blending:Creative and Schematic Aspects inSentence Processing and Transla

46、tionbyNili MandelblitDoctor of Philosophy in Cognitive ScienceUniversity of California,San Diego,1997Professor Gilles Fauconnier,ChairThis dissertation studies the intricate connection between conceptual structure,meaning,and grammar,through an analysis of a general cognitive operation(conceptualble

47、nding).I develop an analysis of sentence processing as a case of conceptual andlinguistic blending:sentence generation involves the blending of a conceived event with asyntactic construction;sentence interpretation starts with a reconstruction of the blendingconfiguration.An important function of gr

48、ammar is to formally mark various blendingconfigurations,providing cues to the hearer in reconstructing(interpreting)linguisticblends.The study analyzes sentences from English and Hebrew showing that similar blendingconfigurations underlie these two superficially different grammatical systems.I sugg

49、est thatthe two systems differ only in the formal tools that mark blending configurations.Theanalysis also suggests that the same blending operations give rise to both the highlystructured aspects of language and to its creative aspects(as reflected in non-conventional,productive use of the language

50、).These two forms of language lie on a continuum fromentrenched to novel blends.Grammaticality represents the most entrenched blendingconfigurations.A major part of the dissertation analyzes a single grammatical system:the Hebrewverbal morphological binyanim system.I argue that different binyanim sy