Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Paper
Class A
2015
PARTICIPANT ROLE
A. INTRODUCTION
An important aspect of lexical meaning is the semantics of events. An event is
represented by predicate or possibly other predicators. Each event composed of
participants that are formed from referring expressions. Such participants are often
characterized as filling distinct roles such as agent, patient and location. Those
participants are called as participant or semantic (Hurford et al., 2007) or thematic roles.
(Gruber, 1965)
This paper answers the following questions. To what extent the representation of
event can mark as certain participant roles? Is there any relation between participant role
and sense relation? What are the possible problems in assigning semantic roles? Hence,
this paper focuses on describing the extent of representation of participant roles; the
relation between participant role and sense relation and the possible problems in assigning
semantic roles.
B. PARTICIPANT ROLE
1. Definition of Participant Role
Hurford et al. (2007) asserts participant roles as a relationships between a verb
(and possibly other predicators) and the referring expressions in a sentence.
Meanwhile, Jackendoff (1972) states it is the semantic relation between the
arguments of the verb and the situation described by the verb. He argues that
thematic roles are fundamentally semantic in nature. (1972)
1.1. Referring Expression
Meanwhile, he states that referring expression is any expression used in an
utterance to refer to something or someone, namely used with particular referent
in the mind of the speaker. (2007:37)
1.2. Predicate
It is any word (or sequence of words) which (in a given single sense) can
function as the predicator of a sentence. (2007:48) Not only verbs, but also
nouns, adjectives and prepositions are all semantically predicate.
1.3. Predicator
Hurford et al. (2007:47) argued that it is the word (sometimes a group of
words) which does not belong to any of the referring expressions
1.4. Argument
Argument is role played by the referring expressions. (2007:48)
2. Types of Participant Role
a) Agent
The Agent of a sentence is the person deliberately carrying out the action
described. (Hurford et al., 2007:245). It is the volitional causer of an event.
(Jurafsky and Martin, 2009). For example:
A burglar ransacked my house
When the Agent role is expressed in the Complement of a sentence (as in
passive sentences) the preposition expresses this role is by. (Hurford et al., 2007)
For example:
My house is ransacked by a burglar
Jackendoff (1972) breaks down the Agent category into three subtypes: Actor,
volitional Actor, and extrinsic Instigator of Event. While Dowty (1991) states that
there is no known language in which the agent of such verbs does not appear in
subject position
b) Affected or Patient
The Affected participant is the thing (not usually a person, although it may be)
upon which the action is carried out (2007:245-246). It is the participant most
directly affected by an event. (Jackendoff, 1972). For examples:
Muriel dealt the cards carefully
(Dowty, 1991) proposes that Agent and Patient are prototypes, each encoding
a cluster of participant properties.
c) Instrument
The Instrument is the thing (hardly ever a person) by means of which the
action is carried out. (Hurford et al., 2007:246). It is an instrument used in an
event. (Jurafsky and Martin, 2009). It is also causal intermediary in an event
(Koenig et al., 2008)
For examples:
Seymour sliced the salami with a knife
Koenig et al. (2008:180) argue that in instrumental role the object of with and
the direct object of use target very similar, if not identical, L-thematic roles. Valin
and Wilkins (1996) argue that agent, force and instrument are subtypes of the
larger role Effector
d) Location
The role of Location is played by any expression referring to the place where
the action described by a sentence takes place. (2007:249)
Im meeting Dick at Waverley Station
Prepositions which are typically used in connection with the expression of
Location role are: in, at, on, under, nearby, above. (2007:250)
When the Instrument role is expressed in the Complement of a sentence, the
preposition that is typically used to express it is with (and sometimes by) (Hurford
et al., 2007)
e) Beneficiary
The Beneficiary is the person for whose benefit or to whose detriment the
action described by the sentence is carried out (2007:249). It is the beneficiary of
an event. (Jurafsky and Martin, 2009)
Alan was sent a special offer from the Readers Digest
Prepositions which are typically used to express the Beneficiary role, with or
without paraphrasing, are: for, to (2007:250) for example:
Readers Digest sent a special offer for Alan
f) Experiencer
The Experiencer is typically a person who is mentally aware of, perceives, or
experiences the action or state described by the sentence, but who is not in control
of the situation. (2007:251). It is the experiencer of an event. (Jurafsky and
Martin, 2009)
The children heard the loud noise
g) Theme
The Theme participant is a thing or person whose location is described, or a
thing or person that is perceived by an Experiencer(2007:251). Gruber (1965:48)
characterizes a theme as an entity which is conceived as moving.
The children heard the loud noise
The glass appears before or after the verb smashed (or whether its logical name
g is mentioned first or second in the logical formula), the way in which the glass
participates in the act of smashing described is the same: the door is the object
affected. (Hurford et al., 2007) In short, logical approaches emphasize entailment
relations between sentences.
5. Role Frame Approach
Participant roles can be included in the dictionary. In the dictionary entry for
each verb in the language there will be a role frame. The parentheses indicate that
the roles are optional with this verb. The role not enclosed by parentheses is
obligatory. For examples: (Hurford et al., 2007:253).
OPEN: (AGENT) AFFECTED (INSTRUMENT)
John opened the door
Agent Affected
The key opened the door
Instrument Affected
The door opened
Affected
The Affected role, when it is permitted at all, is obligatory in these examples.
The Agent role is frequently permitted, though never obligatory, in these examples.
These two facts reflect a quite general trend in the language. Briefly, the role-frame
approach concentrates more on the semantic relationships between referring
expressions inside a sentence.
6. Discussion
There are many underlying points to focus on this discussion. They are
describing the extent of representation of particular participant roles; whether the
relation between participant role and sense relation and the possible problems in
assigning semantic roles.
6.1. The Extent of the Participant Role Representation
From the theory of participant roles above, it seems easy to decide whether
certain referring expression of particular predicates tend to fit into. This is
because the examples used are in the form of simple propositions such as simple
sentences. In an example like
Charles eat rice by spoon at home for Elisabeth
The agent of the verb eat is clearly Charles while the affected is rice then spoon
stand the role of instrument and home is the location role and also Elisabeth is a
beneficiary.
The representation of each role within such sentence is easily defined since
the five roles come into a simple sentence with clear doer, the result of the doing,
the means of the doing.
Another simple sentence which seems complicated is when the doer and the
receiver are not clear enough. Such difficulty rises in deciding proper role. A
case below requires further analysis and further elaboration of the theoretical and
descriptive framework. The case appears where the roles cannot be assigned
clearly, for example in comparing these two identical sentences.
Feni bought a goat from Rizal
Rizal sold a goat to Feni
The event described by these sentences, there are three participants, Feni,
Rizal, and the goat. But, in the first sentence Feni seems to be an agent while in
the second sentence she is the beneficiary. The question is whether a referring
expression can accept more than one role relation to the verb.
As a result, it is necessary to define further roles in which perhaps will bring
countless more roles. But the need to postulate relatively few roles. Since the
more roles one postulates, the weaker is the theory of roles, because the
proliferation of roles makes it more difficult to capture broad generalizations on
how participant roles work.
6.2. The Relation between Participant Role and Sense Relation
The concept of participant role gives a new element to the study of sense
relations. In study of sense, the elements involved are the sense of proper
meaning of a particular word such as synonymy, hyponymy, antonym,
homonymy and polysemy. Those terms are encoded either similarity of sense or
oppositeness of sense or an ambiguity.
In the case of participant role, the sense deals with how does predicate (or
possibly predicator) relate to the argument as the participant in particular
sentence. In this regard, the type of sense relation is case relations. The relation
is embedded to refer to relations the main verb and the some argument represents
its role in a sentence. The verbs in a sentence assign roles to the subject or
complement which are sometimes referred to as the arguments of the verbs. For
example, in the sentence Tina bought a watch for John, the case relations
between the verb buy and the arguments role are:
(buy)
Tina [agent]
watch [affected]
John [beneficiary]
The word buy may relate four participants: the buyer, the seller, the thing
that is bought, and the price. Above example illustrates buy with three
participants which are assigned the roles agent (Mary), affected (watch),
beneficiary (John) to distinguish between them.
Each verb sense is associated with a case frame with slots, each slot having a
case role. A case frame specifies the number of entities the verb expects in the
proposition, the case roles assigned to these entities, whether each role is
obligatory or optional specifying the semantic category of the role frame
approach, and the syntactic realization of each role in the simple proposition in
relation to grammatical position, whether the role expressed as subject,
complement.
In a few words, the relation between participant role and sense relation is
correlated to between sense of verb or predicate and the argument role within a
simple proposition so that they relate particular senses of words.
Dowty, D. 1991. Thematic Proto-Roles and Argument Selection. Language Vol. 67 No. 3
pp. 547-619.
Gruber, Jeffrey S. 1965. Studies in Lexical Relations. Unpublished PhD dissertation Thesis,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, MIT Press.
Hurford, J. R., Heasley, B, & Smith, M. B. 2007. Semantics: A Coursebook (2nd ed.). New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Jackendoff, Ray. 1972. Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. Cambridge, Mass:
MIT Press.
Jurafsky, Daniel, & Martin, James H. (Eds.). 2009. Speech and Language Processing: An
Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and
Speech Recognition: Prentice Hall, Pearson Education International.
Koenig, J, G, P Mauner., Bienvenue, B, & Conklin, K. 2008. What With? The Anatomy of a
(Proto)-Role. Journal of Semantics Vol. 25 No. 2 pp. 175-220.
Valin, R. Van, & Wilkins, D. 1996. The Case for 'Effector': Case Roles, Agents, and Agency
Revisited. In M. Shibatani & S. A. Thompson (Eds.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.