Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T18:47:43.877Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The FrameNet model and its applications†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2009

BIRTE LÖNNEKER-RODMAN  and
COLLIN F. BAKER
BIRTE LÖNNEKER-RODMAN
Affiliation:
International Computer Science Institute, 1947 Center Street, Suite 600, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA e-mail: loenneke@icsi.berkeley.edu, collinb@icsi.berkeley.edu
COLLIN F. BAKER
Affiliation:
International Computer Science Institute, 1947 Center Street, Suite 600, Berkeley, CA 94704, USA e-mail: loenneke@icsi.berkeley.edu, collinb@icsi.berkeley.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The FrameNet database comprises an English lexicon, organized in terms of semantic frames. Frames describe situations or entities, along with their participants and props, termed frame elements. The frames are organized in an ontology-like network. For the lexical units, corpus annotations illustrate which frame elements are typically realized, and how they behave syntactically. Texts where all content words are annotated with FrameNet information offer a detailed, structured semantic representation with a variety of uses in Natural Language Processing applications, in particular in retrieving and meaningfully organizing texts written by humans, or in making human–computer interaction more natural. Also, the FrameNet English lexicon can be replaced by lexical data from other languages, while maintaining frame information, so the model is attractive for cross-lingual resources and applications. Manual annotation produced by FrameNet and similar projects for other languages is used to train automatic frame semantic annotation systems, which add rich semantic information to any type of text, and are important components for more sophisticated semantic processing applications.

Type
Papers
Information
Natural Language Engineering , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , July 2009 , pp. 415 - 453
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Baker, Collin. 2008. FrameNet, present and future. In Proceedings of First International Conference on Global Interoperability for Language Resources (ICGL-2008), 12–17, Hong Kong, January.Google Scholar
Baker, Collin, Ellsworth, Michael and Erk, Katrin. 2007. SemEval-2007 Task 19: frame semantic structure extraction. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Semantic Evaluations (SemEval-2007), 99–104, Prague, Czech Republic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baker, Collin F., Fillmore, Charles J. and Cronin, Beau. 2003. The structure of the FrameNet database. International Journal of Lexicography 16 (3): 281–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bejan, Cosmin Adrian and Hathaway, Chris. 2007. UTD-SRL: A pipeline architecture for extracting Frame Semantic Structures. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Semantic Evaluations (SemEval-2007), 460–463, Prague, Czech Republic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bender, Emily M. and Kathol, Andreas. 2001. Constructional effects of ‘Just because . . . doesn't mean’. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, 13–25, Berkeley, CA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boas, Hans C. 2005. Semantic Frames as interlingual representations for multilingual lexical databases. International Journal of Lexicography 18 (4): 445–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burchardt, Aljoscha and Frank, Anette. 2006. Approximating textual entailment with LFG and FrameNet frames. In Proceedings of the second PASCAL Recognizing Textual Entailment Workshop, 92–97, Venice, Italy.Google Scholar
Burchardt, Aljoscha, Erk, Katrin, Frank, Anette, Kowalski, Andrea, Padó, Sebastian and Pinkal, Manfred. 2006. The SALSA corpus: a German corpus resource for lexical semantics. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-06), 969–974, Genoa, Italy.Google Scholar
Cruse, D. Alan. 1986. Lexical Semantics. Cambridge, England, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dang, Trang Hoa, Kipper, Karin, Palmer, Martha and Rosenzweig, Joseph. 1998. Investigating regular sense extensions based on intersective Levin classes. In: Proceedings of the 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 17th Conferences on Computational Linguistics (COLING-ACL 1998), 293–99, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorr, Bonnie. 1994. Machine translation divergences: a formal description and proposed solution. Computational Linguistics 20 (4): 597–633.Google Scholar
Dowty, David R. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67: 547–619.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellsworth, Michael and Janin, Adam. 2007. Mutaphrase: paraphrasing with FrameNet. In Proceedings of the ACL-PASCAL Workshop on Textual Entailment and Paraphrasing, 143–150, Prague, Czech Republic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erk, Katrin. 2005. Frame assignment as word sense disambiguation. In Proceedings of the sixth International Workshop in Computational Semantics (IWCS 6), 362–364, Tilburg, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
Erk, Katrin. 2006. Unknown word sense detection as outlier detection. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference of the North American Chapter of the ACL (HLT-NAACL 2006), 128–135, New York City, NY.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erk, Katrin and Padó, Sebastian. 2006. Shalmaneser - a toolchain for shallow semantic parsing. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-06), 527–532, Genoa, Italy.Google Scholar
Erk, Katrin and Padó, Sebastian. 2007. User's guide to the Shalmaneser system. http://www.coli.uni-saarland.de/projects/salsa/shal/.Google Scholar
Fellbaum, Christiane and Baker, Collin F. 2008. Can WordNet and FrameNet be made “interoperable”? In Proceedings of The First International Conference on Global Interoperability for Language Resources (ICGL-2008), 67–74, Hong Kong.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1968. The case for case. In: Bach, Emmon and Harms, Robert T. (eds.), Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1976. Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 280: 20–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. 1985. Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica 6 (2): 222–254.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J. and Baker, Collin F. 2001. Frame semantics for text understanding. In Proceedings of the NAACL-2001 Workshop on WordNet and Other Lexical Resources: Applications, Extensions and Customizations, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
Fillmore, Charles J., Johnson, Christopher R. and Petruck, Miriam R. L. 2003. Background to FrameNet. International Journal of Lexicography 16 (3): 235–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Francopoulo, Gil. 2005. Extended examples of lexicons using LMF (auxiliary working paper for LMF). Technical Report. INRIA-Loria.Google Scholar
Francopoulo, Gil, George, Monte, Calzolari, Nicoletta, Monachini, Monica, Bel, Nuria, Pet, Mandy and Soria, Claudia. 2006. Lexical markup framework (LMF). In Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2006), 233–236, Genoa, Italy.Google Scholar
Gildea, Daniel and Jurafsky, Daniel. 2002. Automatic labeling of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics 28 (3): 245–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graehl, Jonathan, Knight, Kevin and May, Jonathan. 2008. Training tree transducers. Computational Linguistics 34 (3): 391–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ide, Nancy and Suderman, Keith. 2007. GrAF: A graph-based format for linguistic annotations. In Proceedings of the ACL-2007 Workshop on Linguistic Annotation, 1–8, Prague, Czech Republic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ide, Nancy, Reppen, Randi and Suderman, Keith. 2002. The American National Corpus: More than the web can provide. In Proceedings of the Third Language Resources and Evaluation Conference (LREC-2002), 839–844, Las Palmas, Canary Islands, Spain.Google Scholar
Johansson, Richard and Nugues, Pierre. 2006. A FrameNet-based semantic role labeler for Swedish. In Proceedings of the COLING/ACL-06 Main Conference Poster Sessions, 436–443, Sydney, Australia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansson, Richard and Nugues, Pierre. 2007. LTH: Semantic structure extraction using nonprojective dependency trees. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Workshop on Semantic Evaluations (SemEval-2007), 227–230, Prague, Czech Republic, June.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kay, Paul and Fillmore, Charles J. 1999. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: The What's X Doing Y? construction. Language 75: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kingsbury, Paul, Palmer, Martha and Marcus, Mitch. 2002. Adding semantic annotation to the Penn TreeBank. In Proceedings of the Human Language Technology Conference (HLT-2002), San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
Kipper, Karin, Dang, Hoa Trang and Palmer, Martha. 2000. Class-based construction of a verb lexicon. In Proceedings of the Seventeenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-2000), Austin, TX.Google Scholar
Koehn, Philipp. 2005. Europarl: A parallel corpus for Statistical Machine Translation. In Machine Translation Summit X, 79–86, Phuket, Thailand.Google Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. topic, focus and the mental representations of discourse referents. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics, no. 71. Cambridge, England, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lönneker-Rodman, Birte. 2007a. Beyond syntactic valence: FrameNet markup of example sentences in a Slovenian-German online dictionary. In Levická, Jana and Garabík, Radovan (eds.), Slovko 2007. Computer Treatment of Slavic and East European Languages. Proceedings of the Fourth International Seminar, Bratislava, Slovakia., 152–164, Brno, Czech Republic, October. Tribun.Google Scholar
Lönneker-Rodman, Birte. 2007b. Multilinguality and FrameNet. Technical Report TR-07-001. International Computer Science Institute, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Màrquez, Lluís, Carreras, Xavier, Litkowski, Kenneth C. and Stevenson, Suzanne (eds). 2008. Special Issue on Semantic Role Labeling. Computational Linguistics, vol. 34. MIT Press for the Association for Computational Linguistics.Google Scholar
Meredith, Daniel N. and Pieper, Jan H. 2006. BETA: better extraction through aggregation. In: Proceedings of the SIGIR-2006 Workshop on Faceted Search, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
Meyers, Adam, Reeves, Ruth, Macleod, Catherine, Szekely, Rachel, Zielinska, Veronika, Young, Brian and Grishman, Ralph. 2004. Annotating noun argument structure for NomBank. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2004), 803–806, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Narayanan, Srini and Harabagiu, Sanda. 2004. Question Answering based on semantic structures. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 2004), 693–701, Geneva, Switzerland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohara, Kyoko Hirose. 2008. Lexicon, grammar, and multilinguality in the Japanese FrameNet. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-08), Marrakech, Morocco.Google Scholar
Ohara, Kyoko Hirose, Fujii, Seiko, Ohori, Toshio, Suzuki, Ryoko, Saito, Hiroaki and Ishizaki, Shun. 2004. The Japanese FrameNet project: An introduction. In Proceedings of the LREC-04 Workshop on Building Lexical Resources from Semantically Annotated Corpora, 9–11, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Padó, Sebastian. 2007. Translational equivalence and cross-lingual parallelism: The case of FrameNet frames. In Proceedings of the NODALIDA-07 Workshop on Building Frame Semantics Resources for Scandinavian and Baltic Languages, 39–46, Tartu, Estonia.Google Scholar
Palmer, Martha, Gildea, Dan and Kingsbury, Paul. 2005. The Proposition Bank: An annotated corpus of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics 31 (1): 71–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pradhan, Sameer, Ward, Wayne, Hacioglu, Kadri, Martin, James and Jurafsky, Daniel. 2005. Semantic role labeling using different syntactic views. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-05), 581–588, Ann Arbor, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruppenhofer, Josef, Ellsworth, Michael, Petruck, Miriam R. L., Johnson, Christopher R. and Scheffczyk, Jan. 2006. FrameNet II: Extended theory and practice. http://framenet.icsi.berkeley.edu/.Google Scholar
Sato, Hiroaki. 2008. New functions of FrameSQL for multilingual FrameNets. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC-2008), Marrakech, Morocco.Google Scholar
Scheffczyk, Jan, Pease, Adam and Ellsworth, Michael. 2006a. Linking FrameNet to the Suggested Upper Merged Ontology. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems (FOIS-2006), Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Scheffczyk, Jan, Baker, Collin F. and Narayanan, Srini. 2006b. Ontology-based reasoning about lexical resources. In Proceedings of the LREC-2006 Workshop on Interfacing Ontologies and Lexical Resources for Semantic Web Technologies (OntoLex-2006), 1–6, Genoa, Italy.Google Scholar
Shen, Dan and Lapata, Mirella. 2007. Using semantic roles to improve question answering. In Proceedings of the 2007 Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL), 12–21, Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar
Sinha, Steve and Narayanan, Srini. 2005. Model based answer selection. In Proceedings of the AAAI-2005 Workshop on Textual Inference for Question Answering, 24–31, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
Subirats, Carlos and Sato, Hiroaki. 2004. Spanish FrameNet and FrameSQL. In Proceedings of LREC-2004 Workshop on Building Lexical Resources from Semantically Annotated Corpora, 13–16, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
Subirats-Rüggeberg, Carlos and Petruck, Miriam R. L. 2003. Surprise: Spanish FrameNet! In Proceedings of the Workshop on Frame Semantics, XVII International Congress of Linguists (CIL), Prague, Czech Republic.Google Scholar
Surdeanu, Mihai, Johansson, Richard, Meyers, Adam, Màrquez, Lluís and Nivre, Joakim. 2008. The CoNLL-2008 shared task on joint parsing of syntactic and semantic dependencies. In Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL-2008), 159–177, Manchester, UK.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vossen, Piek. 1999. EuroWordNet General Document. Version 3. Technical Report. University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar