Francis Jeffry Pelletier · 2004
Abstract The Principle of Semantic Compositionality is the principle that the meaning of an expression is a function of, and only of, the meanings of its parts together with the method by which those parts are combined. As stated, the Principle is vague or underspecified at a number of points such as “what counts as a part,” “what is a meaning,” “what kind of function is allowed,” and the like. But this hasn’t stopped some people from treating it as an obviously true principle, true almost by definition, nor has it stopped some others from attacking it both on “empirical grounds” and on theoretico-methodological grounds.
Cited by 16
Gabriel Sandu, ProtoSociology Project · ProtoSociology · 2006
Cited by 0
Toy, Tolgahan · OpenMETU (Middle East Technical University) · 2016
Cited by 0
Karl Heinz Wagner · 2015
The starting point for the following remarks is WOLFGANG WILDGEN'S paper “Zur Dynamik lokaler Kompositionsprozesse: Am Beispiel nominaler ad hoc-Komposita ” (WILDGEN 1982) written more than twenty years ago. Wildgen begins his paper with the following statement: Nominal composition still is a challenge to the available models of grammar, since on the one hand it
Cited by 0
Françoise Gayral, Daniel Kayser, François Lévy · 2005
The paper aims at emphasizing that, even relaxed, the hypothesis of compositionality has to face many problems when used for interpreting natural language texts. Rather than fixing these problems within the compositional framework, we believe that a more radical change is necessary, and propose another approach.
Cited by 17
Lucian Olteanu · 2014
Cited by 0
Isabelle Tellier · 2007
Introduction In Chomskyan views of linguistics, syntax is a preeminent independent level whose knowledge is mainly innate. Semantics is then usually seen as a secondary structure deduced from the syntactic analysis. The Principle of Compositionality is, in this context, a precise way of specifying the passage from syntax to semantics. But from an emergence perspective, this conception is very awkward. As a matter of fact, the ability to communicate meanings is of far higher priority than the ability to build a formal grammar, so semantics must precede syntax. We still assume a computational point of view on syntax and semantics, but we propose to reinterpret the Principle of Compositionality to show that syntax can derive from semantics. The idea, inspired by recent results in the domain of Machine Learning, is to prove that a grammar can be completely specified by the description of the way semantic items (roughly corresponding with word mean
Cited by 0
Antonio Rauti · dialectica · 2009
Paul Horwich has claimed that we can derive a certain form of the principle of compositionality from a deflationary account of what it is to understand a complex expression. If this were the case, we would realize a surprising theoretical economy, and if the derivation involved basic ideas from a use theory of meaning, we would have a novel argument for use theories of meaning. Horwich does not offer a detailed derivation. In this paper I reconstruct a possible derivation and show that it begs the question. I then extend my discussion to explain why it is unlikely that alternative arguments can fare better.
Cited by 0
Marcella Dehara Pereira Castelucci · LA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2019
Propositional attitudes are a subject involved in many philosophy of language problems discussed on the writings of Frege, such as the distinction on sense and reference. Propositional attitudes consist of a mental phenomena in which the object is identified as a proposition, and this is what makes it possible for it to be semantically analyzed. Such analysis investigate the truth value of the propositions performed on many mental states. By examining the composition of the necessary elements to the comprehension of the meaning of a name or a sentence, Frege acknowledged a new objective semantic element, the thought. The Fregean explanational scheme covers different semantic possibilities, since it proposes that a name or an expression points to the sense and not to the object that it denotes, by means of a indirect reference. Such feature of his semantic theory will support the verification of sentences involving propositional attitudes, associated with the application of his compositionality principle and respecting the Leibniz's s substitutability principle.
Cited by 0Open access
Noortje J. Venhuizen, Harm Brouwer · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · 2025
Cited by 1
Linton, Kathy, Bouffard, Neal · Carleton University's Institutional Repository (MacOdrum Library, Carleton University) · 2004
Cited by 0Open access
Sebastian Löbner, Hhu Düsseldorf, Principle Of Compositionality · 2013
The meaning of a complex expression is a function of the lexical meanings of its components and the syntactic structure of the whole. Regularity of semantic composition The meaning of a syntactically regular expression derives from the meanings of its components in a regular way. PoC> The doctrine> Sub-compositionality> Verb gradation> Semantics> Cognition> Life 2 1.2 Syntactic composition and semantic composition Syntactic composition (in terms of constituency or in terms of dependency, or both) follows grammatical rules. · The rules of syntactic composition are in terms of syntactic types (“syntactic categories”) of expressions to be composed, and of the results. · The rules are constrained by principles which, at least partly, may be assumed to apply to syntactic composition only: constraints due to the requirements such as linearization, parsability, syntactic interpretability. (Other constraints, such as economy and faithfulness apply more generally.)
Cited by 0
Lorraine Juliano Keller, John A. Keller · Thought A Journal of Philosophy · 2013
In this article, we evaluate the Compositionality Argument for structured propositions. This argument hinges on two seemingly innocuous and widely accepted premises: the Principle of Semantic Compositionality and Propositionalism (the thesis that sentential semantic values are propositions). We show that the Compositionality Argument presupposes that compositionality involves a form of building, and that this metaphysically robust account of compositionality is subject to counter-example: there are compositional representational systems that this principle cannot accommodate. If this is correct, one of the most important arguments for structured propositions is undermined.
Cited by 11
bahaodin movahhed abtahi, lotfo allah nabavi, mohammad ali hojati · SHILAP Revista de lepidopterología · 2015
Compositionality is an important principle in new semantics. On this principle, the meanings of compound words are determined by the meaning of its parts and the way in which how to be composed. Every system of semantics must be compositional on a priory arguments of this principle. The history of the principle usually returned to Frege but the supreme status of Muslim thinkers has been forgotten. So al-Farabi as a great Muslim thinker is a good candidate. In the article, I tried to introduce a suitable conceptual framework in al-Farabi for research in compositionality. Then to separate epistemological compositionality from semantic one and based on pragmatic approach, we study al-Farabi's speaks. It seems that al-Farabi accepts at least some of explanations of compositionality.
Cited by 0Open access
Ryouhei Takaya · Kagaku tetsugaku · 2025
There has been extensive debate about the principle of compositionality among philosophers of language and formal semanticists, according to which the meaning of a complex expression is determined by the meanings of its parts and the way these parts are combined. Questions about this principle can be broadly divided into three categories: why we want compositionality, what the proper definition of compositionality should be, and how various semantic phenomena can be analyzed compositionally. In this paper, I will focus on the first question. After briefly surveying well-known arguments for compositionality, I will present two methodological arguments and examine their validity.
Cited by 0Open access
Lucian Olteanu · International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology · 2014
This paper contains a discussion of how the concept of critical aspects and the principle of compositionality can provide a powerful tool to analyse and understand the communications that occur in the classroom. It is grounded in data collected in a longitudinal study. The content chosen is algebra. It is argued that the critical aspects and the principle of compositionality should be considered as a methodological principle that describes how communication in the classroom should be designed. Here, I present the power of using variation theory whose main purpose is to generate an understanding of critical aspects and compositionality in practice.
Cited by 8
Vitaliy Klos · 2011
This book systematically applies the so-called principle of compositionality to substantive composition and investigates whether this semantic principle can be judged a sufficient basis for the understanding of unknown terms. The central question concerns how far the meaning of a substantive composite with two nominal elements can be 'calculated' from the meaning of its constituents. Using various empirical studies, the author shows that the principle of compositionality must be reformulated.
Cited by 12
Jönsson, Martin · Lund University Publications (Lund University) · 2008
The goal of inquiry in this essay is to ascertain to what extent the Principle of Compositionality – the thesis that the meaning of a complex expression is determined by the meaning of its parts and its mode of composition – can be justifiably imposed as a constraint on semantic theories, and thereby provide information about what meanings are. Apart from the introduction (Chapter One) and the concluding chapter (Chapter Seven) the thesis is divided into five chapters addressing different questions pertaining to the overarching goal of inquiry. Chapter Two is an attempt to determine whether the Principle of Compositionality is a trivial principle. It is argued that this is not the case in the context of providing the semantics of natural languages since it is an open question whether the best theories that respect available syntactic and semantic data are compositional. Chapter Three and Chapter Four ask whether there are reasons to think that the Principle of Compositionality is true. It is argued that the three most commonly cited reasons for thinking that correct semantic theories must be compositional – Linguistic Creativity, Productivity and Systematicity – in fact only give us reasons to think that the meaning of complex expressions depend on the meanings of their parts and their modes of composition, but not that the meaning of complex expressions depend ONLY on those factors. Chapter Five asks whether there are any reasons to think that the Principle of Compositionality is false. It is argued that all the phenomena that have been suggested entail non-compositionality are in fact compatible with some versions of compositionality. Even if this conclusion is reached in this chapter, the conclusion of the previous two chapters entails that we are not justified in imposing the Principle of Compositionality as an adequacy constraint on Semantic theories. Chapter Six explores the ways in which information about what meanings are can be derived by imposing constraints on semantic theories. It is argued that the distinction emphasized in Chapter Three and Chapter Four between depending on and depending ONLY on is of critical importance. It is demonstrated that the informative potential of the Principle of Compositionality goes far beyond that of the principle we are in fact justified in imposing on semantic theories. So not only is it the case that we cannot learn anything about meanings from the justified imposition of the Principle of Compositionality – since we cannot justifiably impose it as a constraint on semantic theories – what we could have learned from it had we been justified in imposing it is very different from what we can learn from the principle that we are justified in imposing.
Cited by 0Open access
Theo M. V. Janssen · 1997
The first topic of the paper is to provide a formalization of the principle of compositionality of meaning. A mathematical model (based upon universal algebra) is presented, and its properties are investigated. The second topic is to discuss arguments from the literature against compositionality (of Hintikka, Higginbotham, Pelletier, Partee, Schiffer and others). Methods are presented that help to obtain compositionality. It is argued that the principle is should not be considered an empirical verifyable restriction, but a methodological principle that describes how a system for syntax and semantics should be designed. The paper has an appendix by B. Partee on the compositional treatment of genitives.
Cited by 0
Pagin, Peter, Westerståhl, Dag · KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) · 2011
This article is concerned with the principle of compositionality, i.e. the principle that the meaning of a complex expression is a function of the meanings of its parts and its mode of composition. After a brief historical background, a formal algebraic framework for syntax and semantics is presented. In this framework, both syntactic operations and semantic functions are (normally) partial. Using 20 the framework, the basic idea of compositionality is given a precise statement, and several variants, both weaker and stronger, as well as related properties, are distinguished. Several arguments for compositionality are discussed, and the standard arguments are found inconclusive. Also, several arguments against compositionality, and for the claim that it is a trivial property, are discussed, 25 and are found to be flawed. Finally, a number of real or apparent problems for compositionality are considered, and some solutions are proposed.
Cited by 0Open access