Literature DB >> 27424842

The Latent Structure of Dictionaries.

Philippe Vincent-Lamarre1,2, Alexandre Blondin Massé3, Marcos Lopes4, Mélanie Lord3, Odile Marcotte3, Stevan Harnad1,5.   

Abstract

How many words-and which ones-are sufficient to define all other words? When dictionaries are analyzed as directed graphs with links from defining words to defined words, they reveal a latent structure. Recursively removing all words that are reachable by definition but that do not define any further words reduces the dictionary to a Kernel of about 10% of its size. This is still not the smallest number of words that can define all the rest. About 75% of the Kernel turns out to be its Core, a "Strongly Connected Subset" of words with a definitional path to and from any pair of its words and no word's definition depending on a word outside the set. But the Core cannot define all the rest of the dictionary. The 25% of the Kernel surrounding the Core consists of small strongly connected subsets of words: the Satellites. The size of the smallest set of words that can define all the rest-the graph's "minimum feedback vertex set" or MinSet-is about 1% of the dictionary, about 15% of the Kernel, and part-Core/part-Satellite. But every dictionary has a huge number of MinSets. The Core words are learned earlier, more frequent, and less concrete than the Satellites, which are in turn learned earlier, more frequent, but more concrete than the rest of the Dictionary. In principle, only one MinSet's words would need to be grounded through the sensorimotor capacity to recognize and categorize their referents. In a dual-code sensorimotor/symbolic model of the mental lexicon, the symbolic code could do all the rest through recombinatory definition.
Copyright © 2016 Cognitive Science Society, Inc.

Keywords:  Categorization; Dictionary definition; Dual coding; Graph theory; Lexical semantics; Meaning; Mental lexicon; Symbol grounding

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27424842     DOI: 10.1111/tops.12211

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Top Cogn Sci        ISSN: 1756-8757


  6 in total

1.  Modelling concrete and abstract concepts using brain-constrained deep neural networks.

Authors:  Malte R Henningsen-Schomers; Friedemann Pulvermüller
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2021-11-11

2.  Dutch sensory modality norms.

Authors:  Laura J Speed; Marc Brybaert
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2021-09-10

3.  Visual cortex recruitment during language processing in blind individuals is explained by Hebbian learning.

Authors:  Max Garagnani; Friedemann Pulvermüller; Rosario Tomasello; Thomas Wennekers
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-03-05       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Connecting concepts in the brain by mapping cortical representations of semantic relations.

Authors:  Yizhen Zhang; Kuan Han; Robert Worth; Zhongming Liu
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-04-20       Impact factor: 14.919

5.  Category learning can alter perception and its neural correlates.

Authors:  Fernanda Pérez-Gay Juárez; Tomy Sicotte; Christian Thériault; Stevan Harnad
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-06       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  A test of indirect grounding of abstract concepts using multimodal distributional semantics.

Authors:  Akira Utsumi
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2022-10-04
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.