Overview
What is wordnet?
Unlike a standard dictionary, which takes the word as its elementary building block, a wordnet is an online lexical reference system which is organized by concepts.
The basic building block of a wordnet is Synonym set (Synset), a group of words that can all refer to the same concept, such as shut and close or car and automobile. Words and synsets are linked by means of conceptual-semantic relations in wordnet.
The core conceptual-semantic relations among synsets are called Constitutive relations, such as:
- Super-subordinate relation (hypernym and hyponym)
- Part-whole relation (meronym and holonym)
- Semantic contract and similar relation (antonym and synonym)
Synsets are connected into a net framework to form the structure of wordnet, you can refer to this document for the details of Constitutive and other types of relations.
Currently, Princeton Wordnet of English is the most complete and accurate wordnet, and is commonly used as a reference for other wordnets. You can also visit Princeton Wordnet project homepage to learn more of this wordnet.
Open Multilingual Wordnet (OMW) is a collection of wordnets in a variety of languages, all linked through the Collaborative Interlingual Index (CILI), the goal is to make it easy to use wordnets across multiple languages, you can browse and search for cross-lingual matches in OMW.
What is Global Wordnet Association?
The Global WordNet Association (GWA) is a free, public and non-commercial organization that provides a platform for discussing, sharing and connecting semantic lexicons (wordnets) for all languages in the world. Our goal is to make compatible, linked, open lexical resources useful for both humans and computers.
"a concept that is more general than a given concept"
| symbol |
⊃
|
| applicability |
|
| reverse |
hyponym
|
| example |
animal is a hypernym of dog
|
Definition
A hypernym of something is its supertype:
if A is a hypernym of B, then all B are A.
Examples
- meat is a hypernym of beef
- edible fruit is a hypernym of pear
- wordbook is a hypernym of dictionary
Tests
Hyperonymy/hyponymy between verb synsets ([EWN] test 11, p23)
| yes |
a |
to A is to B + AdvP/AdjP/NP/PP |
| no |
b |
to B is to A + AdvP/AdjP/NP/PP |
- Conditions:
- A is a verb in the infinitive form
- B is a verb in the infinitive form
- there is at least one specifying modifier (AdvP, NP or PP) that
applies to the B-phrase
Comments
This is the fundamental relation, generally used for nouns and
verbs. In the original Princeton WordNet the name 'troponym' was used
for this relation when relating to verbs. In plWordNet it is also
extended to adjectives and adverbs.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="hypernym"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"an occurrence of something"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept A (instance_hyponym)
is a type of concept B (instance_hypernym), and where A is an
individual entity. A will be a terminal node in the hierarchy.
Instances are expressed by proper nouns.
An instance hyponym can also be referred to as a type
Examples
Tests
| Yes |
A is one of the Bs |
| No |
B is one of the As |
Condition: A is a proper noun (or named entity), B is a common noun.
Comments
Hyponymy is a relation between classes of entities. Individual entities can also be said to belong to some class.
Although we do not find many instances in a lexical database, the relation is useful for users
that want to add particular instances and do not want to consult a separate database.
To distinguish it from class hyponymy the relation is dubbed has_instance.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="instance_hyponym"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"the type of an instance"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept A (instance_hyponym)
is a type of concept B (instance_hypernym), and where A is an
individual entity. A will be a terminal node in the hierarchy.
Instances are expressed by proper nouns.
An instance hypernym can also be referred to as a type
Examples
Tests
| Yes |
A is one of the Bs |
| No |
B is one of the As |
Condition: A is a proper noun (or named entity), B is a common noun.
Comments
Sometimes modelled as hyponomy/hypernymy relations.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="instance_hypernym"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"An opposite and inherently incompatible word"
| symbol |
⇔
|
| applicability |
- synset–synset
- sense–sense
|
| reverse |
antonym
|
| example |
smart has antonym stupid
|
Definition
Two words are antonyms if their meanings are opposite in some way such as:
- The two words show binary opposition: superior vs inferior (simple)
- The two words are near the opposite ends of a spectrum: hot vs cold (gradable)
- The two words express change or movement in opposite directions: buy vs sell (converse)
Antonymy can link any two members of any part-of-speech — verbs
(e.g. dress vs. undress), adverbs (e.g. naturally vs. unnaturally),
adjectives (e.g. superior vs. inferior) and nouns (e.g. catalyst
vs. anti-catalyst), but should only ever link concepts with the same
part-of-speech.
Antonymy is not transitive: If A is an antonym of B and B an antonym
of C, then A is not necessarily and antonym of A. Consider domestic
⇔ national ⇔ international: it does not follow that domestic
⇔ international, or sister ⇔ brother ⇔ sister does not imply sister ⇔ sister.
Examples
Tests
Antonym-relation between nouns (EWN 16)
| yes |
a |
A and B are both a kind of C but A is the opposite of B |
| . |
b |
the converse of (a) |
- Conditions:
- A and B are singular or plural nouns
- C is a hyperonym of both A and C and within a reasonable, competitive denotational range.
Antonym-relation between verb (EWN 17)
| yes |
a |
If something/someone/it As then something/someone/it does not B |
| . |
b |
If something/someone/it Bs then something/someone/it does not A) |
- Conditions:
- A is a synset variant in the third person singular form
- B is a synset variant in the third person singular form
- A and B are members of co-hyponym synsets
- there is a hyperonym of A which is opposite to a hyperonym of B
- the situation referred to by A has an addressee and the addressee is the
protagonist of the situation referred to by B
Antonym-relation between verbs and adjectives (or adverbs) EWN 20
| yes |
a |
If something/someone/it As then something/someone/it is not B |
| . |
b |
If something/someone/it is B then something/someone/it does not A |
- Conditions:
- A is a verb in the third person singular form
- B is an adjective
- A and B are (XPOS) co-hyponyms
Comments
It is primarily a relation between senses, but sense level antonymy
implies a looser synset level relation, which we automatically add to
make it avaiable for wordnets that do not yet have sense level links.
plWordnet distinguishes between 'conversion' which is the same relationship form different points of vie, like wife and husband and normal antonymy, (plwordnet p27), proper and complementary antonymy.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="antonym"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
<Sense id="wn-sense-A" synset="wn-synset-A">
<SenseRelation relType="antonym"
target="wn-sense-B"/>
</Sense>
Project-specific Names
"A and B are equivalent concepts but their nature requires that they remain separate (e.g. Exemplifies)"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where A and B are equivalent concepts
but their nature requires that they remain separate.
Equality is a self-reciprocal link (the two directions of this
relation share the same meaning) — Concept-A is equal to Concept-B,
and Concept-B is equal to Concept-A.
It denotes a special kind full synonimity that allows separation of
synonym lemmas in two different synsets. It can occur with any type of
part-of-speech.
At the moment, we're currently making use of this in order to isolate
chengyu (成语), a traditional four-character Chinese idiom.
Examples
Tests
Equal Synonym-relation between nouns (EWN 1)
| yes |
a |
if it is (a/an) A then it is also (a/an) B |
| . |
b |
if it is (a/an) B then it is also (a/an) A |
- Conditions:
- A and B are singular or plural nouns
Equal Synonym-relation between verbs (EWN 2)
| yes |
a |
If something/someone/it As then something/someone/it Bs |
| . |
b |
If something/someone/it Bs then something/someone/it As |
- Conditions:
- A is a verb in the third person singular form
- B is a verb in the third person singular form
- there are no specifying PPs that apply to the A-phrase or the B-phrase
Comments
In principle all semantically equivalent words should belong to the same synsets
(where they can be differentiated by labels on the appropriate usage).
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="eq_synonym"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"(of words) expressing closely related meanings"
| applicability |
- synset–synset
- sense–sense
|
| reverse |
similar
|
| example |
|
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept A and concept B are
closely related in meaning but are not in the same synset. Similarity
is a self-reciprocal link (the two directions of this relation share
the same meaning) — Concept-A is similar to Concept-B, and Concept-B
is similar to Concept-A.
This link was originally used to relate adjectives, but we have
unconstrained this use, and we're making use of this link to relate
all parts-of-speech.
Similarity can be understood as weak synonymy, opposed to the full
synonymy that all lemmas in a concept must share. As adjectives are
not structured hierarchically (hyponymy/hypernymy) like verbs or
nouns, the similarity link helps showing relations between them.
Examples
Tests
Similar-relation between nouns (EWN 3)
| yes |
a |
if it is a/an A then it is also a kind of B but you usually do not call Cn Bs |
| . |
b |
if it is a/an B then it is also a kind of A but you usually do not call Cm As |
- Conditions:
- Cn are hyponyms of A, Cm are hypnyms of B.
Comments
This relation coerces PWN Similar to relation for adjectives, Verb
Group relation for verbs and EWN NEAR_SYNONYM for nouns and verbs. In
plWN Similarity relation for adjectives to nouns is a unilateral sense
relation which is why it is not given in the mappings below.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="similar"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
<Sense id="wn-sense-A" synset="wn-synset-A">
<SenseRelation relType="similar"
target="wn-sense-B"/>
</Sense>
Project-specific Names
"concept A is a component of concept B"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept A is a component of
concept B. Meronym and Holonym Part is a paired relation that denotes
proper parts (separable, in principle), which preserve a belonging
relation even if the physical link is broken — Concept-A can be
separated into Concept-B”; and Concept-B is a part of some Concept-A.
This relation is also frequently used to denote geographical
inclusiveness relations.
Examples
Tests
Meronymy-relation between nouns (EWN test 24)
| yes |
a |
a/an A is a component of a/an B |
| . |
b |
a/an B is a whole/system/complex/network/arrangement/construction of parts/components among which a/an A |
Condition:
- A and B are concrete nouns denoting objects, there must be several As
Comments
This relation is also frequently used by PWN to denote
geographical inclusiveness relations.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="mero_part"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"Concept B is the whole where Concept A is a part"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept B is the whole of the different component of
concept A. Meronym and Holonym Part is a paired relation that denotes
proper parts (separable, in principle), which preserve a belonging
relation even if the physical link is broken — Concept-A can be
separated into Concept-B”; and Concept-B is a part of some Concept-A.
This relation is also frequently used to denote geographical
inclusiveness relations.
Examples
Tests
Holonymy-relation between nouns (EWN test 24)
| yes |
a |
a/an B is a whole/system/complex/network/arrangement/construction of parts/components among which a/an A |
| . |
b |
a/an A is a component of a/an B |
Condition:
- B and A are concrete nouns denoting objects, B typically includes a larger entity
Comments
The has_holo-part relation typically relates components to their wholes, namely: something which is either topologically or temporally included in a larger entity and which as well bears some kind of autonomy (non-arbitrary boundaries) and a definite function with respect to the whole.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="holo_part"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"Concept A is made of concept B."
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept A is made of concept
B. Meronym and Holonym Substance is a paired relation that denotes a
higher bound between part and whole. Separating/removing the substance
part, will change the whole — Concept-A is made of Concept-B; and
Concept-B is a substance of Concept-A”.
Examples
Tests
Substance meronymy -relation between nouns (EWN test 25)
| yes |
a |
a/an A is made of B |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a). |
Conditions:
- A is a concrete object
- B is a concrete substance
Comments
There are two basic ways of viewing entities in the world,
namely either as an individuated thing or as the stuff from
which they are made of. This way, for instance a book can
be alternatively named “a book” or “paper”.
The relation between things and the stuff which compose them is called MADE_OF.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="mero_substance"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"a word having a loose semantic relation to another word"
| symbol |
☞
|
| applicability |
- synset–synset
- sense–sense
|
| reverse |
also
|
| example |
time see also moment
|
Definition
‘See Also’ is a self-reciprocal link (the two directions of this
relation share the same meaning) — Concept-A relates to Concept-B, and
Concept-B relates to Concept-A.
It denotes a relation of related meaning with another concept (going
beyond synonymy and similarity).
This link was only used to relate adjectives and verbs in Princeton
wordnet, but we have unconstrained this use, and we're making use of
this link to relate all parts-of-speech.
Examples
Tests
| yes |
a |
A has some loose relation to B |
| no |
b |
the converse of any of the (a) sentences. |
Comments
This could perhaps be merged with other
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="also"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
<Sense id="wn-sense-A" synset="wn-synset-A">
<SenseRelation relType="also"
target="wn-sense-B"/>
</Sense>
Project-specific Names
"Concept A is an entity that produces an effect or is responsible for events or
results of Concept B."
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept B comes into existence
as a result of concept A. Entailment is a relation that links two
verbs, and it is currently unilateral — Verb-A causes Verb-B, without
a reciprocal or tracing link. Causation presupposes/requires that some
Verb-B will, inevitably, take place during or after Verb-A (e.g. if
Verb-A occurs, then Verb-B will also occur).
While not exclusive to these types of verbs, many verbs that have both
a transitive and an intransitive form will frequently be submitted to
this relation.
Examples
Tests
Causes - relation (EWN 36)
| yes |
a |
(To/A/an) A causes (to/a/an) B to take place |
| . |
. |
(To/A/an) A has (to/a/an) B as a consequence |
| . |
. |
(To/A/an) A leads to (to/a/an) B |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a) |
- Conditions:
- A is a verb in the infinitive form or A is a noun in the singular
- B is a verb in the infinitive form or B is a noun in the singular
Causes - relation between verbs and adjectives (or adverbs) (EWN 37)
| yes |
a |
A causes to be B |
| . |
. |
A has being B as a consequence |
| . |
. |
A leads to be(ing) B |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a) |
Conditions:
- A is a verb in the infinitive form
- B is and adjective
Comments
EUWN's definition of CAUSES is broader than that of PWN. It
seems possible to just absorb PWN's links.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="causes"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A comes about because of B"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept A comes into existence
as a result of concept B.
Examples
Tests
Is Caused By - relation (EWN 36)
| yes |
a |
(To/A/an) B takes place because of A |
| . |
. |
(To/A/an) B is the consequence A |
| . |
. |
(To/A/an) B is the result of A |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a) |
- Conditions:
- A is a verb in the infinitive form or A is a noun in the singular
- B is a verb in the infinitive form or B is a noun in the singular
Is Caused By - relation between verbs and adjectives (or adverbs) (EWN 37)
| yes |
a |
B is caused by A |
| . |
. |
B is the consequence of A |
| . |
. |
B is the result of A |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a) |
Conditions:
- A is a verb in the infinitive form
- B is and adjective
Comments
The 'is caused by' relation was missing from PWN before.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="is_caused_by"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"B takes place during or as part of A, and whenever B takes place, A takes place"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept B takes place
during or as part of concept A, and whenever concept B takes
place, concept A takes place.
Examples
Tests
Subevent - relation between verbs/nouns (a) (EWN 41)
| yes |
a |
B takes place during or as a part of A, and whenever B takes place, A takes place |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a) |
Conditions:
- A is a verb in the gerundive form
- B is a verb in the gerundive form
Subevent - relation between verbs/nouns (b) (EWN 42)
| yes |
a |
A consists of B and other events or processes |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a) |
Conditions:
- B is a verb in the gerundive form
- A is a verb in the gerundive form buying consists of paying and other events or processes
Comments
The SUBEVENT relation is very useful for many closely related verbs and appeals more directly to human-intuitions
(parallel to part-whole relation of concrete entities).
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="subevent"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A takes place during or as part of B, and whenever A takes place, B takes place"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept A takes place
during or as part of concept B, and whenever concept A takes
place, concept B takes place.
Examples
Tests
Is Subevent Of - relation between verbs/nouns (a) (EWN 41)
| yes |
a |
A takes place during or as a part of B, and whenever A takes place, B takes place |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a) |
Conditions:
- A is a verb in the gerundive form
- B is a verb in the gerundive form
Is Subevent Of - relation between verbs/nouns (b) (EWN 42)
| yes |
a |
A consists of B and other events or processes |
| no |
b |
the converse of (a) |
Conditions:
- B is a verb in the gerundive form
- A is a verb in the gerundive form buying consists of paying and other events or processes
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="is_subevent_of"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"B qualifies the manner in which an action or event expressed by A takes place"
Definition
A relation between two concepts where concept B qualifies
the manner in which an action or event expressed by concept
A takes place.
Examples
Tests
In Manner - relation between verbs/adverb (EWN 43)
| yes |
a |
to A is to B in a C manner/way. |
Conditions:
- A and B are verbs
- B is the hyperonym of A
- C is an adjective/adverb
Comments
In EuroWordNet, we decided not to differentiate between troponymy and hyponymy but to use the IN_MANNER and MANNER_OF
relation in addition to normal hyponymy to make the manner component explicit (if it is significant in the meaning of the verb):
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="in_manner"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"an abstraction belonging to or characteristic of an entity"
Definition
A relation between nominal and adjectival concepts where the concept A
is an attribute of concept B. ‘Attributes’ is a self-reciprocal link
(the two directions of this relation share the same meaning) —
Concept-A attributes to Concept-B, and Concept-B attributes to
Concept-A.
It denotes a relation between a noun and its adjectival attributes,
and vice-versa — for this reason it should only link adjectives to
nouns and vice-versa.
Examples
Tests
Attribute-relation between nouns and adjectives (EWN 14)
| yes |
a |
A is an attribute of B |
| . |
. |
B is an attribute of A |
| no |
b |
the converse of any of the (a) sentences. |
Conditions:
- A is a noun in the singular
- B is an adjective
- there is at least one specifying adverb, NP or PP that applies to the A- phrase or the B-phrase
- preferably there is a no morphological link between the noun and the adjective
Comments
In plWN Value_of_the_attribute is a unilateral relation from
adjectives to nouns.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="attribute"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A concept A used when counting concept B"
Definition
A concept A used when counting concept B.
English does not really use this relationship, but it is common in
many languages, such as Chinese, Japanese or Indonesian. A classifier
is a word (or often a bound morpheme) which accompanies a noun in
certain grammatical contexts, typically individuation, and generally
reflects some kind of conceptual classification of nouns, based
principally on features of their referents. Thus a language might have
one classifier for nouns representing persons, another for nouns
representing flat objects, another for nouns denoting periods of time,
and so on. The assignment of classifier to noun may also be to some
degree unpredictable, with certain nouns taking certain classifiers by
historically established convention.
Note that the in a classifier language a classifier does not introduce
a new referent, so we treat it as as non-referential.
Examples
- head classifies cattle
- rasher classifies bacon
- ekor classifiers kucil (Indonesian)
- 匹 classifies 猫 (Japanese)
Contribute test
Comments
This relation was introduced in [DaCosta:Bond:2016]
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="classifies"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A concept which is a Topic, Region or Usage pointer of a given concept."
Definition
Domain is an underspecified relation between two concepts where Concept B is a Topic (scientific category),
Region or Usage pointer of Concept A.
Contribute more examples
Contribute test
Comments
This is an underspecified relation that covers Domain Topic, Domain Region, and Is Exemplified By.
As such, it is not specified as a relation directly by wordnets, but a wordnet application may
employ it as a general relation covering all its subtypes.
In EuroWordNet, Domain is moved to a separate ontology.(EuroWordNet General Document pp 8–10)
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="domain"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A concept which is a term of a given Topic, Region or Usage concept."
Definition
In Domain is an underspecified relation between two concepts where Concept A is a Topic (scientific category,
Region or Usage term of Concept B.
Contribute more examples
Contribute test
Comments
This is an underspecified relation that covers Has Domain Topic, Has Domain Region, and Exemplifies.
As such, it is not specified as a relation directly by wordnets, but a wordnet application may
employ it as a general relation covering all its subtypes.
In EuroWordNet, In Domain is moved to a separate ontology.(EuroWordNet General Document pp 8–10)
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="has_domain"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A concept which is involved in the action or event expressed by a given concept."
Definition
Role is an underspecified relation between two concepts where concept A is typically involved
in the action or event expressed by concept B.
Contribute more examples
Tests
Role / Involved as general relation (EWN test 29)
| yes |
(a/an) A is the one/that who/which is typically involved in Bing |
| Conditions |
A is a noun |
| . |
B is a verb in the infinitive form |
| Example: |
A hammer is that which is typically involved in hammering |
| Effect: |
{hammer}(A) ROLE {to hammer}(B) |
| . |
{to hammer}(B) INVOLVED {hammer}(A) |
Comments
This is an underspecified relation that covers Agent, Patient, Result, Instrument,
Location, Direction, Target Direction, and Source Direction.
As such, it is not specified as a relation directly by wordnets, but a wordnet application may
employ it as a general relation covering all its subtypes.
In plWordNet it is a relation between lexical units.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="role"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A concept which is the action or event a given concept typically involved in."
Definition
Involved is an underspecified relation between two concepts where concept B is the action
or event concept A typically involved in.
Contribute more examples
Tests
Role / Involved as general relation (EWN test 29)
| yes |
(a/an) A is the one/that who/which is typically involved in Bing |
| Conditions |
A is a noun |
| . |
B is a verb in the infinitive form |
| Example: |
A hammer is that which is typically involved in hammering |
| Effect: |
{hammer}(A) ROLE {to hammer}(B) |
| . |
{to hammer}(B) INVOLVED {hammer}(A) |
Comments
This is an underspecified relation that covers Involved Agent, Involved Patient, Involved Result,
Involved Instrument, Involved Location, Involved Direction, Involved Target Direction, and
Involved Source Direction.
As such, it is not specified as a relation directly by wordnets, but a wordnet application may
employ it as a general relation covering all its subtypes.
In plWordNet it is a relation between lexical units.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="involved"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A concept undergoes an action in which a given concept is involved."
Definition
Co Role is an underspecified relation between two concepts where Concept A undergoes an action in
which Concept B is involved (bidirectional).
Contribute more examples
Contribute test
Comments
This is an underspecified relation that covers Co Agent Patient, Co Patient Agent,
Co Agent Instrument, Co Instrument Agent, Co Agent Result, Co Result Agent,
Co Patient Instrument, Co Instrument Patient, Co Result Instrument, and Co Instrument Result.
As such, it is not specified as a relation directly by wordnets, but a wordnet application may
employ it as a general relation covering all its subtypes.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Synset id="wn-synset-A" ili="iXYZ" partOfSpeech="x">
<SynsetRelation relType="co_role"
target="wn-synset-B"/>
</Synset>
Project-specific Names
"A concept which is of or pertaining to a given concept."
Definition
Pertainym is a relation between two concepts where Concept A is related or applicable to Concept B. Typically A will be an adjective and B a noun, or A an adverb and B an adjective. It is typically used for adjectives that are morphologically related to the noun they are related to, are not gradable and do not have antonyms. It is also used for nouns that are semantically related but not morphologically related, typically because came from different languages historically, so lunar for moon or arborial for tree.
Examples
Contribute test
Comments
This may be specialized further. It includes zero derivations. Gnerally
it is used for different syntactic categories that have the same root form and are
semantically related. Wordnet does not say which is the baseform, the relationship
is fully reversible.
XML
In the XML
format for Wordnet LMF the relation should be shown like
this:
<Sense id="wn-sense-A" synset="wn-synset-A">
<SenseRelation relType="pertainym"
target="wn-sense-B"/>
</Sense>
Project-specific Names