Help with modelling a Valency Lexicon using Ontolex

Dear all,

sorry for the very long email. I would be very grateful if anybody could give me some advice with the following problem.

The rest of the LiLa Team and I are working on a new version of our Latin Vallex lexicon that we want to publish as LLOD:

https://itreebank.marginalia.it/view/lvl.php

The Latin Vallex describes the valency frame attached to possible senses of a series of valency-capable words, which are for now limited to verbs. Each sense of a verb is assigned a valency frame that is described with the appropriate set of semantic-role descriptors (called "functors"; a list is available here<https://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/pdt2.0/doc/manuals/en/t-layer/html/ch07.html>). Furthermore, we're defining the senses in close connection with our new Latin WordNet.

So, for instance, the verb "abduco" (remove) in the sense<http://lila-erc.eu/data/lexicalResources/LatinWordNet/id/LexicalSense/l_86867_00173338-v> connected to the synset "remove something concrete, as by lifting, pushing, or taking off, or remove something abstract", is assigned a frame with the roles: ACT (roughly: agent), DIR1 (direction from), DIR3 (direction to), PAT (roughly: patient). Note that "functors" are semantic, rather than syntactic, descriptors.

Since the beginning our Vallex has been closely modeled on the Czech Vallex:

http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/vallex

http://ufal.mff.cuni.cz/%7Elopatkova/literatura/06-TR-vallex-2.0.pdf

In the theoretical frame of Prague's Vallex, "valency frames" and "roles" are assigned to "Lexical Units", i.e (quoting from the PDF linked above) "form-meaning complexes with (relatively) stable and discrete semantic properties. Roughly speaking, LU can be understood as a given word in the given sense"; frames are defined locally for each lexical unit (there are no general classes of frames or of words, like VerbNet or Propbank classes).

As all the LiLa resources are based on Ontolex, I am looking for any Ontolex-based solution that would be coherent with the Lexicon as it was designed.. Now, it seems to me that it would be relatively easy to model it using the older classes and properties of Lemon, and assigning semantic roles to Ontolex senses (as was done with UbyLemon, if I see it right).

I have a much harder time figuring out how I can model this information using SynSem now. One could theoretically say that the Vallex model presupposes a syntactic frame that is linked to a semantic frame (the Czech Vallex does indeed link the two); but I am quite at loss on how I could model this semantic frame using SynSem's ontology mapping, which seems designed to do other things.

I have also considered Premon (https://premon.fbk.eu/), but I am not sure that our lexicon really fits in there either, as Premon is designed to work especially with semantic classes (like FrameNet's frames, or Propbank classes), which we don't have. Also, Premon requires you to attach roles and frames to Ontolex Lexical Concepts, which is not what our Vallex does. The quoted definition of "Lexical Unit" is, I think, compatible with an Ontolex Sense, but not at all with a Lexical Concept.

So, this is why I would be extremely interested in learning of any suggestion or any possible opinion fom you!

Many thanks for your help.

Best regards,

Francesco




[http://Static.unicatt.it/layout/img/layout/Iltuo5x1000bottone.gif]

www.unicatt.it/5permille/<http://www.unicatt.it/5permille/>