Vignette d'image

Hilpert, Martin

Nom
Hilpert, Martin
Affiliation principale
Site web
Fonction
Professeur.e ordinaire
Email
martin.hilpert@unine.ch
Identifiants
https://libra.unine.ch/handle/123456789/717
_
0000-0002-6347-5076

Résultat de la recherche

Filtres

Réinitialiser les filtres

Paramètres

Voici les éléments 1 - 10 sur 14
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Measuring the semantic headedness of English blends with token-based semantic vector space modeling: a corpus-based study
    (2024-12)
    Qingnan Meng
    ;
    Hilpert, Martin 
    This article analyzes the semantic headedness of English blends with distributional semantics methods. The semantic head of a blend is the source word that transfers its semantic information to the blend as a whole. For example, a sitcom is a kind of comedy. But is FedEx a kind of express, and is wi-fi a kind of fidelity? We use corpus data and token-based semantic vector space modeling in order to address these questions. Specifically, we investigate whether Plag’s ternary division of endocentric, exocentric, and coordinative compounds based on semantic headedness can also be applied to English blends, and whether the general tendency of semantic right-headedness can be observed for all three subtypes. We analyze a dataset of fifty-five blends and their respective source words, using data from the Corpus of Contemporary American English and the English Web Corpus 2021. We measure the degree of semantic similarity between each blend and its two source words. The results show that for most endocentric blends, the hypothesis of semantic right-headedness holds true. At the same time, exocentric blends and coordinative blends are shown to behave differently. We conclude that Plag’s classification offers a useful point of departure for the semantic analysis of blends and that distributional semantics methods can provide new insights into their semantic behavior.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Corpus linguistics meets historical linguistics and construction grammar: how far have we come, and where do we go from here?
    (2024-03-23)
    Hilpert, Martin 
    This paper aims to give an overview of corpus-based research that investigates processes of language change from the theoretical perspective of Construction Grammar. Starting in the early 2000s, a dynamic community of researchers has come together in order to contribute to this effort. Among the different lines of work that have characterized this enterprise, this paper discusses the respective roles of qualitative approaches, diachronic collostructional analysis, multivariate techniques, distributional semantic models, and analyses of network structure. The paper tries to contextualize these approaches and to offer pointers for future research.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    The road ahead for Construction Grammar
    (2024)
    Hilpert, Martin 
    What does the future hold for Construction Grammar? What are the most promising future avenues for research on constructions? This paper addresses the development of Construction Grammar as a theory of language through the perspective of six recent PhD dissertations that explore constructional meaning, the architecture of the constructional network, and the role of language change in a constructional theory of language. The goal of this paper is to establish connections between these ideas, and to spell out how different questions concerning Frame Semantics, distributional semantic methods, priming, nodes and connections, individual differences, and constructional change all contribute to a picture that is bigger than the sum of its parts.
  • Publication
    Accès libre
  • Publication
    Accès libre
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Disentangling modal meanings with distributional semantics
    (2021-3-25)
    Hilpert, Martin 
    This paper investigates the collocational behavior of English modal auxiliaries such as may and might with the aim of finding corpus-based measures that distinguish between different modal expressions and that allow insights into why speakers may choose one over another in a given context. The analysis uses token-based semantic vector space modeling (Heylen et al. 2015, Hilpert and Correia Saavedra 2017) in order to determine whether different modal auxiliaries can be distinguished in terms of their collocational profiles. The analysis further examines whether different senses of the same auxiliary exhibit divergent collocational preferences. The results indicate that near-synonymous pairs of modal expressions, such as may and might or must and have to, differ in their distributional characteristics. Also different senses of the same modal expression, such as deontic and epistemic uses of may, can be distinguished on the basis of distributional information. We discuss these results against the background of previous empirical findings (Hilpert 2016, Flach in press) and theoretical issues such as degrees of grammaticalization (Correia Saavedra 2019) and the avoidance of synonymy (Bolinger 1968).
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    Disentangling modal meanings with distributional semantics
    (2020)
    Hilpert, Martin 
    ;
    Susanne Flach
    Abstract This article investigates the collocational behavior of English modal auxiliaries such as may and might with the aim of finding corpus-based measures that distinguish between different modal expressions and that allow insights into why speakers may choose one over another in a given context. The analysis uses token-based semantic vector space modeling (Heylen et al., 2015, Monitoring polysemy. Word space models as a tool for large-scale lexical semantic analysis. Lingua, 157: 153–72; Hilpert and Correia Saavedra, 2017, Using token-based semantic vector spaces for corpus-linguistic analyses: From practical applications to tests of theoretical claims. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory) in order to determine whether different modal auxiliaries can be distinguished in terms of their collocational profiles. The analysis further examines whether different senses of the same auxiliary exhibit divergent collocational preferences. The results indicate that near-synonymous pairs of modal expressions, such as may and might or must and have to, differ in their distributional characteristics. Also, different senses of the same modal expression, such as deontic and epistemic uses of may, can be distinguished on the basis of distributional information. We discuss these results against the background of previous empirical findings (Hilpert, 2016, Construction Grammar and its Application to English, 2nd edn. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, Flach, in press, Beyond modal idioms and modal harmony: a corpus-based analysis of gradient idiomaticity in modal-adverb collocations. English Language and Linguistics) and theoretical issues such as degrees of grammaticalization (Correia Saavedra, 2019, Measurements of Grammaticalization: Developing a Quantitative Index for the Study of Grammatical Change. PhD Dissertation, Université de Neuchâtel) and the avoidance of synonymy (Bolinger, 1968, Entailment and the meaning of structures. Glossa, 2(2): 119–27).
  • Publication
    Accès libre
    The unidirectionality of semantic changes in grammaticalization: an experimental approach to the asymmetric priming hypothesis
    (2018)
    Hilpert, Martin 
    ;
    Correia Saavedra, David 
    Why is semantic change in grammaticalization typically unidirectional? It is a well-established finding that in grammaticalizing constructions, more concrete meanings tend to evolve into more schematic meanings. Jäger & Rosenbach (2008) appeal to the psychological phenomenon of asymmetric priming in order to explain this tendency. This article aims to evaluate their proposal on the basis of experimental psycholinguistic evidence. Asymmetric priming is a pattern of cognitive association in which one idea strongly evokes another (i.e. paddle strongly evokes water), while that second idea does not evoke the first one with the same force (water only weakly evokes paddle). Asymmetric priming would elegantly explain why semantic change in grammaticalization tends to be unidirectional, as in the case of English be going to, which has evolved out of the lexical verb go. As yet, empirical engagement with Jäger & Rosenbach's hypothesis has been limited. We present experimental evidence from a maze task (Forster et al. 2009), in which we test whether asymmetric priming obtains between lexical forms (such as go) and their grammaticalized counterparts (be going to). On the asymmetric priming hypothesis, the former should prime the latter, but not vice versa. Contrary to the hypothesis, we observe a negative priming effect: speakers who have recently been exposed to a lexical element are significantly slower to process its grammaticalized variant. We interpret this observation as a horror aequi phenomenon (Rohdenburg & Mondorf 2003).