The distinction between linguistic and conceptual semantics in medical terminology and its implication for NLP-based knowledge acquisition (original) (raw)

Abstract

Natural language understanding systems have to exploit various kinds of knowledge to be able to represent the meaning behind texts. Getting this knowledge in place is often such a huge enterprise that it is tempting to look for systems that can discover such knowledge automatically. In this paper, we describe how the distinction between conceptual and linguistic semantics probably can assist in reaching this objective, provided that distinguishing between them is not done to rigorously.

Loading...

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

References (36)

  1. Rector AL, Nowlan WA, Glowinski A. Goals for Concept Representation in the GALEN project. In Safran C. (ed). SCAMC 93 Proceedings. New York: McGraw-Hill 1993, 414-418.
  2. Rector AL, Glowinski A, Nowlan WA, Rossi-Mori A. Medical concept models and medical records: an approach based on GALEN and PEN&PAD. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 1995, 2: 19-35.
  3. Rector AL, Nowlan WA, Kay S. Conceptual Knowledge: the core of medical information systems. In Lun KC, Degoulet P, Piemme TE, Rienhoff O (eds.). MEDINFO 92 Proceedings. Amsterdam: North -Holland 1992, 1420-1426.
  4. Rector AL. Compositional models of medical concepts: towards re-usable application independent medical terminologies. In Barahona P & Christensen JP (eds.) Knowledge and decisions in health telematics. Amsterdam: IOS Press 1994, 133-142.
  5. Ceusters W, Deville G, Buekens F. The chimera of purpose-and language-independent concept systems in healthcare. In Barahona P, Veloso M, Bryant J (eds.) MIE 94
  6. Ceusters W, Deville G, De Moor G. Automated extraction of neurosurgical procedure expressions from full text reports: the Multi-TALE experience. In Brender J, Christensen JP, Scherrer J-R, McNair P (eds.) MIE 96 Proceedings. Amsterdam: IOS Press 1996, 154-158.
  7. Ceusters W, Deville G. A mixed syntactic-semantic grammar for the analysis of neurosurgical procedure reports: the Multi-TALE experience. In Sevens C, De Moor G (eds.)
  8. MIC'96 Proceedings, 1996, 59-68.
  9. Ceusters W, Lovis C, Rector A, Baud R. Natural language processing tools for the computerised patient record: present and future. In P. Waegemann (ed.) Toward an Electronic Health Record Europe '96 Proceedings, 1996:294- 300.
  10. GALEN Consortium. Guidelines and Recipes for Completing templates. Internal document VUM02/96 version
  11. GALEN Consortium. Links and Templates Summary. Internal document VUM/03/96 version 1.0.
  12. Ceusters W, Spyns P. From natural language to formal language: when Multi-TALE meets GALEN. (Submitted for MIE 97).
  13. Ceusters W, Buekens F, De Moor G, Waagmeester A. The distinction between linguistic and conceptual semantics in medical terminology and its implications for NLP-based knowledge acquisition. Meth Inform Med 1998; 37:327-33.
  14. Allen J. Natural Language Understanding. Menlo Park: The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company Inc 1987.
  15. Quine W. Two Dogma's of Empiricism. In Quine W (ed.) From a logical point of view, New York, 1953.
  16. Searle JR, Kiefer F, Bierwisch M (eds.) Speech Act Theory and Pragmatics. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1980.
  17. Bach E. Informal lectures on formal semantics.
  18. Albany, NY: Suny Press, 1989. 16. Rossi-Mori A. Towards a new generation of terminologies and coding systems. In Barahona P & Christensen JP (eds.) Knowledge and decisions in health telematics. Amsterdam: IOS Press 1994, 208-212.
  19. Jackendoff R. Conceptual semantics. In Eco U et al. (eds.) Meaning and mental representation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press 1988, 81-97.
  20. Lakoff G. Cogintive semantics. In Eco U et al. (eds.)
  21. Meaning and mental representation. Bloomington: Indiana University Press 1988, 119-154.
  22. Frawley W. Linguistic Semantics. Hilsdale, Hove and London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1992.
  23. de Saussure F. Course in General Linguistics. New York: Philisophical Library, 1959.
  24. Ogden CK & Richards IA. The meaning of meaning. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co, 1923.
  25. Salton G. Automatic thesaurus construction for information retrieval. Information Processing, 71:115-123, North Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam 1972.
  26. Chen H, Lynch KJ, Basu K, Ng T. Generating, integrating, and activating thesauri for concept-based document retrieval. IEEE EXPERT, Special Series on Artificial Intelligence in Text-Based Information Systems, 1993: 8 (2):25- 34. 24. Ingenerf J. Taxonomic vocabularies in medicine: the intention of usage determines different established structures. In Greenes RA, Peterson HE, Protty DJ (eds.). MEDINFO 95 Proceedings. Amsterdam: North -Holland 1995, 136-139.
  27. Bernauer J, Franz M, Schoop M, Schoop D, Pretschner DP. The compositional approach for representing medical concept systems. In Greenes RA, Peterson HE, Protty DJ (eds.). MEDINFO 95 Proceedings. Amsterdam: North -Holland 1995, 70-74.
  28. Oehrle RT, Bach E, Wheeler D (eds.) Categorial Grammars and Natural Language Structures. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1988.
  29. Rector AL, Rogers JE, Pole P. The GALEN High Level Ontology. In Brender J, Christensen JP, Scherrer J-R, McNair P (eds.) MIE 96 Proceedings. Amsterdam: IOS Press 1996, 174-178.
  30. Bateman JA. Ontology construction and natural language. In Proc. International Workshop on Formal Ontology. Padua, Italy, 1993, 83-93.
  31. Kripke S. Naming and Necessity. In Davidson D & Harman G (eds.) Semantics of natural language. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1972, 253-355.
  32. Welsh C. On the non-existence of natural kind terms as a linguistically relevant category. Paper presented at the Liguistic Society of America, New Orleans, LA, 1988.
  33. Mahesh K & Nirenburg S. A situated ontology for practical NLP. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Basic Ontological Issues in Knowledge Sharing, IJCAI-95. Montreal, Canada, 1995.
  34. Deville G, Ceusters W. A multi-dimensional view on natural language modelling in medicine: identifying key- features for successful applications. Supplementary paper in Proceedings of the Third International Working Conference of IMIA WG6, Geneva, 1994.
  35. Mahesh K. Ontology Development for Machine Translation: ideology and methodology. Technical Report MCCS-96-292, Computing Research Laboratory, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM, 1996.
  36. Bateman JA, Henschel R, Rinaldi F. Generalized upper model 2.0. Technical report, GMD/Institute für Integrierte Publikations-und Informationssysteme, Darmstadt, Germany, 1995.