1887
Volume 17, Issue 3
  • ISSN 1871-1340
  • E-ISSN: 1871-1375

Abstract

Abstract

This study investigates the phenomenon of defectiveness in Russian case and number noun paradigms from the perspective of distributional semantics. We made use of word embeddings, high-dimensional vectors trained from large text corpora, and compared the observed paradigms of nouns that are defective in the genitive plural, as suggested by Zaliznjak (1977), with the observed paradigms for non-defective nouns. When the embeddings of about 20,000 inflected forms were projected onto a two-dimensional space, clusters of case and number within case were found, suggesting global semantic similarity for words with the same inflectional features. Moreover, defective lexemes were characterized by lower semantic transparency, in that inflected forms of the same lexeme are semantically less similar to each other, and their meanings are also more idiosyncratic. Furthermore, compared to non-defective lexemes, inflected forms from defective lexemes are further away from the idealized average case-number meanings, obtained by averaging over the vectors of all inflected forms of the same case-number combination. As a consequence, the semantics of defective forms are predicted less precisely by a simple model of conceptualization that assumes that the meaning of a given Russian inflected form is approximated well by the sum of pertinent embeddings of the lexeme, case, and number within case. We conclude that the relationship between defectiveness and semantics, at least the kind captured by word embeddings, is stronger than has been anticipated previously.

Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ml.22013.chu
2023-05-30
2024-05-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ml.22013.chu.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/ml.22013.chu&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Baayen, R. H., Chuang, Y.-Y., Shafaei-Bajestan, E., and Blevins, J.
    (2019) The discriminative lexicon: A unified computational model for the lexicon and lexical processing in comprehension and production grounded not in (de)composition but in linear discriminative learning. Complexity. 10.1155/2019/4895891
    https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4895891 [Google Scholar]
  2. Baerman, M.
    (2008) Historical observations on defectiveness: the first singular non-past. Russian Linguistics, 32(1):81–97. 10.1007/s11185‑007‑9017‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11185-007-9017-9 [Google Scholar]
  3. (2011) Defectiveness and homophony avoidance. Journal of Linguistics, 47(1):1–29. 10.1017/S0022226710000022
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226710000022 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baerman, M., Brown, D., and Corbett, G. G.
    (2005) The Syntax-Morphology Interface: A Study of Syncretism. Cambridge Studies in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486234
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486234 [Google Scholar]
  5. Baerman, M. and Corbett, G. G.
    (2010) Introduction: Defectiveness: Typology and diachrony. InBaerman, M., Corbett, G. G., and Brown, D., editors, Defective Paradigms: Missing forms and what they tell us, pages1–18. Cambridge University Press. 10.5871/bacad/9780197264607.003.0001
    https://doi.org/10.5871/bacad/9780197264607.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
  6. Becker, M. and Gouskova, M.
    (2016) Source-Oriented Generalizations as Grammar Inference in Russian Vowel Deletion. Linguistic Inquiry, 47(3):391–425. 10.1162/LING_a_00217
    https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00217 [Google Scholar]
  7. Benko, V.
    (2014) Compatible sketch grammars for comparable corpora. InAbel, A., Vettori, C., and Ralli, N., editors, Proceedings of the 16th EURALEX International Congress, pages417–430, Bolzano, Italy. EURAC research.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bojanowski, P., Grave, E., Joulin, A., and Mikolov, T.
    (2017) Enriching word vectors with subword information. Transactions of the Association for Computational Linguistics, 51:135–146. 10.1162/tacl_a_00051
    https://doi.org/10.1162/tacl_a_00051 [Google Scholar]
  9. Boleda, G.
    (2020) Distributional semantics and linguistic theory. Annu. Rev. Linguist., 61:1–22. 10.1146/annurev‑linguistics‑011619‑030303
    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011619-030303 [Google Scholar]
  10. Brown, D. and Arkadiev, P.
    (2018) Syncretism (second edition). Oxford University Press. Oxford Bibliographies in Linguistics. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Brown, D., Corbett, G. G., Fraser, N. M., Hippisley, A., and Timberlake, A.
    (1996) Russian noun stress and network morphology. Linguistics, 341:53–107. 10.1515/ling.1996.34.1.53
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1996.34.1.53 [Google Scholar]
  12. Corbett, G.
    (2012) Features. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139206983
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139206983 [Google Scholar]
  13. Daland, R., Sims, A. D., and Pierrehumbert, J.
    (2007) Much ado about nothing: A social network model of Russian paradigmatic gaps. InProceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, pages936–943, Prague, Czech Republic. Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. del Prado Martin, F. M., Kostić, A., and Baayen, R. H.
    (2004) Putting the bits together: An information theoretical perspective on morphological processing. Cognition, 94(1):1–18. 10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.015
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2003.10.015 [Google Scholar]
  15. Firth, J. R.
    (1968) Selected papers of J. R. Firth, 1952–59. Indiana University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Gorman, K. and Yang, C.
    (2019) When nobody wins. InRainer, F., Gardani, F., Dressler, W. U., and Luschutzky, H. C., editors, Competition in Inflection and Word-Formation, pages169–193. Springer International Publishing, Cham. 10.1007/978‑3‑030‑02550‑2_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02550-2_7 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gouskova, M. and Becker, M.
    (2013) Nonce words show that Russian yer alternations are governed by the grammar. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 31(3):735–765. 10.1007/s11049‑013‑9197‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-013-9197-5 [Google Scholar]
  18. Grave, E., Bojanowski, P., Gupta, P., Joulin, A., and Mikolov, T.
    (2018) Learning word vectors for 157 languages. InProceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2018).
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Ilola, E. and Mustajoki, A.
    (1989) Report on Russian Morphology as it appears in Zaliznyak’s Grammatical Dictionary. Helsinki University Press, Helsinki. Type: Book.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Janda, A. L. and Tyers, M. F.
    (2021) Less is more: why all paradigms are defective, and why that is a good thing. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 17(1):109–141. 10.1515/cllt‑2018‑0031
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2018-0031 [Google Scholar]
  21. Landauer, T. and Dumais, S.
    (1997) A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2):211–240. 10.1037/0033‑295X.104.2.211
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.211 [Google Scholar]
  22. Lõo, K., Järvikivi, J., and Baayen, R. H.
    (2018a) Whole-word frequency and inflectional paradigm size facilitate estonian case-inflected noun processing. Cognition, 1751:20–25. 10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  23. Lõo, K., Järvikivi, J., Tomaschek, F., Tucker, B. V., and Baayen, R. H.
    (2018b) Production of estonian case-inflected nouns shows whole-word frequency and paradigmatic effects. Morphology, 28(1):71–97. 10.1007/s11525‑017‑9318‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11525-017-9318-7 [Google Scholar]
  24. Marelli, M. and Baroni, M.
    (2015) Affixation in semantic space: Modeling morpheme meanings with compositional distributional semantics. Psychological Review, 122(3):485. 10.1037/a0039267
    https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039267 [Google Scholar]
  25. Matthews, P. H.
    (1997) The concise Oxford dictionary of linguistics. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Meyer, P.
    (1994) Grammatical categories and the methodology of linguistics: Review article on van helden, w. andries: 1993, ‘concept formation between morphology and syntax’. Russian Linguistics, 181:341–377. 10.1007/BF01650152
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01650152 [Google Scholar]
  27. Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G. S., and Dean, J.
    (2013) Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. InAdvances in neural information processing systems, pages3111–3119.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Nikolaev, A. and Bermel, N.
    (2022) Explaining uncertainty and defectivity of inflectional paradigms. Cognitive Linguistics. in press. 10.1515/cog‑2021‑0041
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2021-0041 [Google Scholar]
  29. Sims, A. D.
    (2015) Inflectional Defectiveness. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781107053854
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107053854 [Google Scholar]
  30. Thornton, A. M.
    (2019) Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics, chapter Overabundance in morphology. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Van der Maaten, L. and Hinton, G.
    (2008) Visualizing data using t-SNE. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 9(11).
    [Google Scholar]
  32. van Helden, W. A.
    (1993) Case and gender: Concept formation between morphology and syntax, volume II volumes ofStudies in Slavic and general linguistics. Rodopi, 20 edition.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Wood, S.
    (2017) Generalized Additive Models: An Introduction with R. Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2 edition. 10.1201/9781315370279
    https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315370279 [Google Scholar]
  34. Yamada, I., Asai, A., Sakuma, J., Shindo, H., Takeda, H., Takefuji, Y., and Matsumoto, Y.
    (2020) Wikipedia2Vec: An efficient toolkit for learning and visualizing the embeddings of words and entities from Wikipedia. InProceedings of the 2020 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing: System Demonstrations, pages23–30. Association for Computational Linguistics. 10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp‑demos.4
    https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2020.emnlp-demos.4 [Google Scholar]
  35. Yang, C.
    (2016) The Price of Linguistic Productivity: How Children Learn to Break the Rules of Language. The MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/9780262035323.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262035323.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  36. Zaliznjak, A. A.
    (1977) Grammatičeskij slovar’ russkogo jazyka. Russkij jazyk, Moscow.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Švedova, N. J.
    editor (1984) Slovar’ russkogo jazyka (S. I. Ožegov). Russkij jazyk, Moscow, 16th edition.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ml.22013.chu
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ml.22013.chu
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): case; defectiveness; distributional semantics; number; Russian noun paradigm
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error