Wielotomowa gramatyka konfrontatywna języka bułgarskiego i polskiego

2015

Self Cite

The Dictionary of Semantic Equivalents in Polish, Bulgarian and Russian that we (Wojciech Sosnowski, Violetta Koseska-Toszewa and Anna Kisiel) are currently developing has no precedent as far as its theoretical foundations and its structure are concerned. The dictionary offers a unique combination of three Slavic languages that belong to three different groups: a West Slavic language (Polish), a South Slavic language (Bulgarian) and an East Slavic language (Russian). The dictionary describes semantic and syntactic equivalents of words between the languages. When completed, the dictionary will contain around 15,000 entries. The principle we build the dictionary on is that every language should be given equal status. Many of our data come from the Parallel Polish-Bulgarian-Russian corpus developed by us as part of the CLARIN-PL initiative. In the print version, the entries come in the order of the Cyrillic alphabet and they are not numbered (except for homonyms, which are disambiguated with Roman numbers). We selected the lemmas for the dictionary on the basis of their frequency in the corpus. Our dictionary is the first dictionary to include forms of address and most recent neologisms in the three languages. Faithful to the recent developments in contrastive linguistics, we begin with a form from the dictionary's primary language and we define it in Polish. Subsequently, based on this definition, we try to find an equivalent in the second and the third language. Therefore, the meaning comes first and only then we look for the form (i.e. the equivalent) that corresponds to this meaning. This principle, outlined in Gramatyka konfrontatywna języków polskiego i bułgarskiego (GKBP), allows us to treat data from multiple languages as equal. In the dictionary, we draw attention to the correct choice of equivalents in translation; we also provide categorisers that indicate the meaning of verbal tenses and aspects. The definitions of states, events and their different configurations follow those outlined in the net model of verbal tense and aspect. The transitive vs. intransitive categorisers are vital for the languages in question, since they belong to two different types: synthetic (Polish and Russian) and analytic (Bulgarian). We predict that

Section: Theoretical Foundations Of the Dictionarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Multilingualism and Dictionaries

Sosnowski

2015

Self Cite

“…Using the generally adopted definitions of logical quantifiers and the iotaoperator, I employ here three basic notions whose meanings are determined by language exponents of logical quantification (Rasiowa 1975: 211-255) and definite description (Russell 1967: 253-293), see (Koseska 1982). Quantification of natural language expressions can concern names (first-order logic), but also predicates (second-order logic).…”

Section: Basic Notions Connected With Logical Quantificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 (Koseska, Gargov 1990), where that model concerned also the verbal phrase and the whole sentence. The thesis that the definiteness / indefiniteness category is not a category of the nominal phrase, as authors of the subject literature used to think, but a category of the sentence, was first proved in: (Koseska 1982).…”

Section: Basic Notions Connected With Logical Quantificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A review of the contexts of occurrence of Polish ktoś, ktokolwiek and Bulgarian njakoj, vse njakoi, koj i da e; Polish od czasu do czasu, czasami, czasem, chwilami and Bulgarian ponjakoga, ot vreme na vreme is also very interesting. Even a very superficial comparison of Polish and Bulgarian lexical exponents for existentiality of time indicates an interesting fact, which is, e.g., the large number of those exponents in Polish compared to their analogues in Bulgarian (Koseska, Gargov 1990), (Koseska 2006).…”

Section: Basic Notions Connected With Logical Quantificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As I have already mentioned, in Bulgarian the same article form can express both uniqueness and universality (and hence, respectively, definiteness and indefiniteness). In the already cited book (Koseska, 1982), I posed a hypothesis regarding the semantic development of the Bulgarian article. In my opinion, the article initially expressed uniqueness of an element (object), and then started to express also uniqueness of a set.…”

Section: The Definiteness/indefiniteness Category -A Sentence Categorymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Definiteness-indefiniteness category and logical quantification

2015

Self Cite

This work has been written within the "Logic and Language" project, realized under a cooperation agreement between the Institute of Slavic Studies of the Polish Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Bulgarian Language of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. The publication of a many-volume Bulgarian Polish Grammar (12 monographs), and of a Polish-Bulgarian Contrastive Grammar, from now on: Synthesis, is completed. Theories of mathematical logic are satisfied in perfect way in a natural language, which is shown by our understanding of the semantic definiteness / indefiniteness category as a system of scope-based quantification notions. A natural language complements and modifies logical theories. For example, understanding of the definiteness / indefiniteness category as a sentence category follows from the language material, especially in article languages. In such languages, quantification of the predicate is a necessary prerequisite for interpretation. Also introduction of the notions of strong and weak quantification meanings is motivated, for example, by the need to distinguish between the meanings of expressions like Pol. pewien x, jakiś x / bułg. njakoj x, njakakyv x on the nominal phrase level, and by understanding of the ambiguity of quantification expressions like Bulg. vinagi, ponjakoga / Pol. zawsze, czasami. The fact of treating the definiteness / indefiniteness category as a sentence category expands understanding of the incomplete quantification notion also with respect to the verbal phrase, rather than, as in Ajdukiewicz's approach, with respect to the nominal phrase only. Similarly, a proper name in a natural language is not a unique name, like in mathematical logic, but requires additional unique quantification. A networkbased description of time is the first attempt at this type of description in the subject literature. In the present article, I stress that fact that quantification of states and events understood as in Petri net theory reveals the dependence between the aspectual and temporal meanings of verb, and proves that the information on time and aspect need not be dealt with separately. Keywords: scope-based quantification, definiteness/indefiniteness, strong and weak quantification meanings, incomplete quantification, state quantification and imperfect aspect, event quantification and perfect aspect, network-based description of time, Petri nets.

Constructing catalogue of temporal situations

Mazurkiewicz

2015

Self Cite

Constructing catalogue of temporal situationsThe paper is aiming to create a common basis for description, comparing, and analysis natural languages. As a subject of comparison we have chosen temporal structures of some languages. For such a choice there exists a perfect tool, describing basic temporal phenomena, namely an ordering of states and events in time, certainty and uncertainty, independency of histories of separate objects, necessity and possibility. This tool is supported by the Petri nets formalism, which seems to be well suited for expressing the above mentioned phenomena. Petri nets are built form three primitive notions: of states, of events that begin or end the states, and so-called flow relation indicating succession of states and events. This simple constituents give rise to many possibilities of representing temporal phenomena; it turns out that such representations are sufficient for many (clearly, not necessarily all) temporal situations appearing in natural languages.In description formalisms used till now there is no possibility of expressing such reality phenomena as temporal dependencies in compound statement, or combination of temporality and modality. Moreover, using these formalisms one cannot distinguish between two different sources of uncertainty of the speaker while describing the reality: one, due to the lack of knowledge of the speaker what is going on in outside world, the second, due to objective impossibility of foreseen ways in which some conflict situations will be (or already have been) resolved. Petri net formalism seems to be perfectly suited for such differentiations.There are two main description principles that encompassed this paper. First, that assigns meaning to names of grammatical structures in different languages may lead to misunderstanding. Two grammatical structures with apparently close names may describe different reality. Additionally, some grammatical terms used in one language may be absent and not understandable in the other. It leads to assign meanings to situations, rather than to linguistic forms used for their expression. The second principle is limit the discussed issues to such a piece of reality that can be possible for precise description. The third is to avoid introducing such information to the described reality that is not explicitly mentioned by linguistic means. The authors try to following these principles in the present paper.The paper is organized as follows. First, some samples of situations related to present tense are given together with examples of their expressions in four languages: English, (as a reference language) and three Slavic languages, representing South slavonic languages (Bulgarian), West slavonic languages (Polish), and East slavonic languages (Russian). Within the same framework the next parts of the paper are constructed, supplying samples of using Past tenses and, finally, future tenses and modalities.The formal tools for description purposes are introduced stepwise, according to needs caused be the described reality. There are mainly Petri nets, equipped additionally with inscriptions or labeling in order to keep proper assignations of description units to described objects.