Meta-information in linguistics

=Associative Semantics & Meta-Informative Centering Theory (ASMIC)=

The Associative Semantics (AS) theory together with the Meta-Informative Centering (MIC) theorymodify and - in a consistent way - unify two sorts of theories currently admitted in linguistics,i. e.: the theories of Predicate Argument Structure (models of semantic relations as expressed bynatural languages, but with some confusion concerning the proper differentiation of semantic andsyntactic domains) and the theories of Information Structure (in fact, concerning thepresentation of informative contents as conveyed by linguistic utterances but leaving aside animportant part of meta-informative devices of natural languages, these devices usually beingtreated as belonging to the "formal" syntax).

AS and MIC theories are ontology-based approaches (with clear-cut distinctions between theuniversal or - at least - common ontology and the semantics of natural languages). Thus, thesetheories can be used as the basis for comparison-and-contrast making it possible to identifysimilar informative and meta-informative contents that are conveyed by different languages invarious morpho-syntactic forms.

References :Prague School tradition (Mathesius, 1975). Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus and the Mental Representation of Discourse Referents, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Essentials of Associative Semantics (AS) Theory

The semantic situation is defined as a schema and its individuation which contain three parts:relation(s), role(s) and anchor(s). The individuation of a relation is named Frame (the scope ofthe frame is more restrictive than in Minsky, M. or Fillmore, Ch.), that of role - participantand that of anchor - support (anchor is more general here than in Situation Semantics byBarwise, J. and Perry, J. 1983). NB: the frames of semantic situations are closed with respectto inclusion and can be ordered (state < event < ordinary process < granular process).

Various abstract ontological levels are distinguished. Concepts as agentive, objective,experiencer, etc., on the highest (meta-ontological) level are obsolete, instead generalized agentsareintroduced. Such agents are defined by the following ontological features among others: (1)features of control (autonomy): goal and feedback; (2) features of emotion (character): desire andintention, (3) epistemic features (reason): belief and cognition, (4) communication features(language faculty): verbal and visual.

In this theory, roles and anchors are seen as isomorphic abstract tuples of concepts. Roles aredefined ontologically as neutre, active and passive unary relations of associated semanticsituations. The associative combination of their realizations gives rise to median (instrumental,means etc.) roles through derivation. Here are examples of agent meta-roles: (1) active role(Initiator, Causer, Enabler, Benefactor, Executor, Stimulant, Source, Instigator etc.), (2) passiverole (Terminator, Causee, Affect, Enabled, Beneficiary, Executed, Experiencer, Goal, etc.) and (3)median role (Mediator, Instrument, Benefice, Motor, Mean etc.).

Importantly, the same participant (role filler) may play more than one role in the given semanticsituation defined as a bundle of associated situations. Note also that in the process of meaningconstruction the three following levels are distinguished: shallow, standard and deep. There is animportant feature of situation participants which characterizes the shallow level: in active roles,the inanimate entities (figures as opposed to agents) are semantically interpreted as if they wereanimate. Such figures are said to play quasi-active roles (Q-roles).

Essentials of Meta-Informative Centering (MIC) Theory

Meta-information (Greniewski, H.; 1965 Bojar, B. 1991) concerns the way information ispresented: to achieve the ordering of non-linear representations as texts (sequences of linguisticutterances), the speaker must select a centre of attention (CA) and “predicate” about it. Hence, inour centering theory, the term “predicate” is reserved for the meta-informative level and is usedin its initial Aristotelian sense.

The main concept introduced here as a terminological device, namely, as argument of a logicalpredicate, is the Centre of Attention (CA) which refers to meta-information as conveyed byutterances. Global and Local CAs are distinguished in the three following ways:

(a) Subject and Object (in basic utterances),(b) Topic and Focus (in extended utterances) and(c) General Themes and Particular Themes (in discourse sessions, dialogues or texts).

Note that meta-information is more appropriate than information to describe the basic and extended predicate structures of utterances.

The MIC Theory has strong psychological support. According to Gurwitsch, A. (1964, 1974), thethematization which characterizes the field of consciousness is continuous (what is central becomeseasily marginal). However, in the MIC theory, at present only the communicative aspect ofutterances (which are discrete language units) is developped. Indeed, in absence of well-defineduniversal concepts, any farther exploration of communication phenomena (for example discoursesessions coherence and the like) seems inconceivable.

Indeed, on the semantic (information) level, discourse coherence consists in maintainingthe identity of entities and situations in the series of utterances (dialogs, discourses, texts).On the pragmatic (meta-information) level, coherence (or rather cohesion) deals with the change ofNew to Old Centres of Attention. Both informative and meta-informative coherences contribute to thecreation of the global theme of discourse sessions (parts of dialogs, sequences of discourses, textunits) being the result of the particular themes which represent their parts (or paragraphs).

----References :

GRENIEWSKI Henryk (1968) Jezyk nauki (The Language of Science), in "Zagadnienia Naukoznawstwa",(Problems of the Science of Sciences), quarterly, vol. IV, tome 1(13), Polish Academy of Sciences,Warsaw

BOJAR Bożenna (1991) "Metainformacja w języku naturalnym" (Meta-information in natural languages),in "Words are Physicians for an Ailing Mins", ed. by Grochowski, M. and Weiss, D., SagnersSlavistische Sammlung, Vol 17, Verlag Otto SAGNER, München, p. 93-99

Other Publications: [http://www.celta.paris-sorbonne.fr/publications/indiv/wl/] ----

* Subject
* Topic (linguistics)
* Focus (linguistics)