Two linguistic levels of lexical ambiguity and a unified categorical representation

Lexical disambiguation is one of the oldest problems in natural language processing. There are three main types of lexical ambiguity: part-of-speech ambiguity, homonymy, and polysemy, typically divided into two tasks in practice. While this division suffices for engineering purposes, it does not align well with human intuition. In this article, I use lexical ambiguity as a representative case to demonstrate how insights from theoretical linguistics can be helpful for developing more human-like meaning and knowledge representations in natural language understanding. I revisit the three types of lexical ambiguity and propose a structured reclassification of them into two levels using the theoretical linguistic tool of root syntax. Recognizing the uneven expressive power of root syntax across these levels, I further translate the theoretical linguistic insights into the language of category theory, mainly using the tool of topos. The resulting unified categorical representation of lexical ambiguity preserves rootsyntactic insights, has strong expressive power at both linguistic levels, and can potentially serve as a bridge between theoretical linguistics and natural language understanding.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Computer-Assisted Linguistic Research
Published
2024-11-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.4995/jclr.2024.22348
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Natural Language Processing Techniques
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.35
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Two linguistic levels of lexical ambiguity and a unified categorical representation

Chenchen Song
1 citations
Journal of Computer-Assisted Linguistic Research
Natural Language Processing Techniques
0.35
article

Two linguistic levels of lexical ambiguity and a unified categorical representation

Chenchen Song
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Lexical disambiguation is one of the oldest problems in natural language processing. There are three main types of lexical ambiguity: part-of-speech ambiguity, homonymy, and polysemy, typically divided into two tasks in practice. While this division suffices for engineering purposes, it does not align well with human intuition. In this article, I use lexical ambiguity as a representative case to demonstrate how insights from theoretical linguistics can be helpful for developing more human-like meaning and knowledge representations in natural language understanding. I revisit the three types of lexical ambiguity and propose a structured reclassification of them into two levels using the theoretical linguistic tool of root syntax. Recognizing the uneven expressive power of root syntax across these levels, I further translate the theoretical linguistic insights into the language of category theory, mainly using the tool of topos. The resulting unified categorical representation of lexical ambiguity preserves rootsyntactic insights, has strong expressive power at both linguistic levels, and can potentially serve as a bridge between theoretical linguistics and natural language understanding.

Journal of Computer-Assisted Linguistic ResearchVol. 8
Zhejiang University (CN)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 32%
Natural Language Processing Techniques
0.35
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Two linguistic levels of lexical ambiguity and a unified categorical representation — Chenchen Song · Journal of Computer-Assisted Linguistic Research (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS