Archaeology / Cultural Heritage

[Archaeology] [twocolumns]

Anthropology / Human Evolution

[Anthropology] [twocolumns]

Palaeontology / Earth Sciences

[Palaeontology] [twocolumns]

Evolution / Genetics


Semantically speaking: Does meaning structure unite languages?

We create words to label people, places, actions, thoughts, and more so we can express ourselves meaningfully to others. Do humans' shared cognitive abilities and dependence on languages naturally provide a universal means of organizing certain concepts? Or do environment and culture influence each language uniquely?

Semantically speaking: Does meaning structure unite languages?
The semantic network inferred from data on words with more than one meaning (polysemous). Concepts are linked when 
polysemous words cover both concepts. Swadesh words (the starting concepts) are capitalized. The size of a node and the 
width of a link to another node are proportional to the number of polysemies associated with the concept, and with the two 
connected concepts, respectively. The thick link from SKY to heaven, for example, shows that a large number of words in 
various languages have both SKY and heaven as meanings. Three distinct clusters, colored red, blue, and yellow, are 
identified. These may indicate a set of relationships among concepts that reflects a human conceptual structure
 in these domains [Credit: Hyejin Youn et al.]
Using a new methodology that measures how closely words' meanings are related within and between languages, an international team of researchers has revealed that for many universal concepts, the world's languages feature a common structure of semantic relatedness.

"Before this work, little was known about how to measure [a culture's sense of] the semantic nearness between concepts," says co-author and Santa Fe Institute Professor Tanmoy Bhattacharya. "For example, are the concepts of sun and moon close to each other, as they are both bright blobs in the sky? How about sand and sea, as they occur close by? Which of these pairs is the closer? How do we know?"

Translation, the mapping of relative word meanings across languages, would provide clues. But examining the problem with scientific rigor called for an empirical means to denote the degree of semantic relatedness between concepts.

Semantically speaking: Does meaning structure unite languages?
Schematic figure of the construction of semantic networks. (a) Bipartite semantic network constructed through translation 
(links from the first to the second layer) and back-translation (links from the second to the third layer) for the cases of 
MOON and SUN in two American languages: Coast Tsimshian (red links) and Lakhota (blue links). The authors write 
the starting concepts from the Swadesh list (SUN, MOON) in capital letters, whereas other concepts that arise through 
translations (month, heat) are in lower case. (b) They link each pair of concepts with a weight equal to the 
number of translation-back-translation paths. (c) The resulting weighted graph [Credit: Hyejin Youn et al.]
To get reliable answers, Bhattacharya needed to fully quantify a comparative method that is commonly used to infer linguistic history qualitatively. (He and collaborators had previously developed this quantitative method to study changes in sounds of words as languages evolve.)

"Translation uncovers a disagreement between two languages on how concepts are grouped under a single word," says co-author and Santa Fe Institute and Oxford researcher Hyejin Youn. "Spanish, for example, groups 'fire' and 'passion' under 'incendio,' whereas Swahili groups 'fire' with 'anger' (but not 'passion')."

To quantify the problem, the researchers chose a few basic concepts that we see in nature (sun, moon, mountain, fire, and so on). Each concept was translated from English into 81 diverse languages, then back into English. Based on these translations, a weighted network was created. The structure of the network was used to compare languages' ways of partitioning concepts. (Visualize language meaning networks using the researchers' online tool).

The team found that the translated concepts consistently formed three theme clusters in a network, densely connected within themselves and weakly to one another: water, solid natural materials, and earth and sky.

"For the first time, we now have a method to quantify how universal these relations are," says Bhattacharya. "What is universal - and what is not - about how we group clusters of meanings teaches us a lot about psycholinguistics, the conceptual structures that underlie language use."

The researchers hope to expand this study's domain, adding more concepts, then investigating how the universal structure they reveal underlies meaning shift.

Their research was published in PNAS.

Source: Santa Fe Institute [February 01, 2016]

Post A Comment
  • Blogger Comment using Blogger
  • Facebook Comment using Facebook
  • Disqus Comment using Disqus

1 comment :

  1. can someone tell me how to get the little avatars to appear in my comments section? thanks!
    meaning of palaeontology


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Exhibitions / Travel

[Exhibitions] [bsummary]

Natural Heritage / Environment / Wildlife

[Natural Heritage] [list]

Astronomy / Astrobiology / Space Exploration

[Universe] [list]