3 research outputs found
Interpolated PLSI for Learning Plausible Verb Arguments
PACLIC 23 / City University of Hong Kong / 3-5 December 200
Alternative Approaches to Correction of Malapropisms in AIML Based Conversational Agents
The use of Conversational Agents (CAs) utilizing Artificial Intelligence Markup Language (AIML) has been studied in a number of disciplines. Previous research has shown a great deal of promise. It has also documented significant limitations in the abilities of these CAs. Many of these limitations are related specifically to the method employed by AIML to resolve ambiguities in the meaning and context of words. While methods exist to detect and correct common errors in spelling and grammar of sentences and queries submitted by a user, one class of input error that is particularly difficult to detect and correct is the malapropism. In this research a malapropism is defined a verbal blunder in which one word is replaced by another similar in sound but different in meaning ( malapropism, 2013).
This research explored the use of alternative methods of correcting malapropisms in sentences input to AIML CAs using measures of Semantic Distance and tri-gram probabilities. Results of these alternate methods were compared against AIML CAs using only the Symbolic Reductions built into AIML.
This research found that the use of the two methodologies studied here did indeed lead to a small, but measurable improvement in the performance of the CA in terms of the appropriateness of its responses as classified by human judges. However, it was also noted that in a large number of cases, the CA simply ignored the existence of a malapropism altogether in formulating its responses. In most of these cases, the interpretation and response to the user\u27s input was of such a general nature that one might question the overall efficacy of the AIML engine. The answer to this question is a matter for further study
Paronymy in contemporary Serbian language ; ΠΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡ Π² ΡΠΎΠ²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π½ΠΎΠΌ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ±ΡΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΡΠ·ΡΠΊΠ΅
ΠΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΌΠ΅Ρ ΡΠ°Π΄Π° Π΄ΠΎΠΊΡΠΎΡΡΠΊΠ΅ Π΄ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅ ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ΅ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ΅ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΡΡΡΠΈΠΊΡΠΈΡΠ°Π½ΠΈΠΌ
Π·Π°ΡΠ΅Π΄Π½ΠΈΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠ°ΠΌΠ°, Π° Π½Π΅ΠΊΠΈ ΠΎΠ΄ Π³Π»Π°Π²Π½ΠΈΡ
ΡΠΈΡΠ΅Π²Π° ΡΠ΅ΡΡ: 1) ΠΏΠΎΠΊΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ ΠΈΡΡΡΠ°ΠΆΠΈΠ²Π°ΡΠ°
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ΅ ΠΊΠ°ΠΎ Π½Π°ΡΠ·Π°ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ°Π²ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅Π³ ΠΈ Π½Π°ΡΠΌΠ°ΡΠ³ΠΈΠ½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅Π³ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠ°Π΄ΠΈΠ³ΠΌΠ°ΡΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠ³
ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΠ°, ΠΊΠΎΡΠΈ Ρ Π΄ΡΡΠ³ΠΈΠΌ ΡΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ½Π°ΠΌΠ°, ΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅Π±Π½ΠΎ Ρ Π ΡΡΠΈΡΠΈ, Π²Π΅Ρ Π΄ΡΠ³ΠΎ ΠΏΡΠΈΠ²Π»Π°ΡΠΈ ΠΏΠ°ΠΆΡΡ ΠΊΠ°ΠΊΠΎ
Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³Π°, ΡΠ°ΠΊΠΎ ΠΈ ΡΡΠΈΠ»ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠ°ΡΠ°, Π½ΠΎΡΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΠ²ΠΈΡΡΠ° ΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΈΡΠ°ΡΠ°; 2) ΠΈΠ·Π΄Π²Π°ΡΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ·Π½ΠΈΡΠΈΡ
ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΡΡΠΌΠ° ΠΈ Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠ°ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΠ° Π·Π° ΠΈΠ΄Π΅Π½ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ²Π°ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎΠ»Π°ΠΆΠ΅ΡΠ΅ Π΄ΠΎ
ΠΏΡΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ·Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅ ΠΈ ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠΏΠ»Π΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΡΠ΅ Π΄Π΅ΡΠΈΠ½ΠΈΡΠΈΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ΅ ΠΎΠ΄ ΠΎΠ½ΠΈΡ
ΠΊΠΎΡΠ΅ ΡΠ΅ ΠΌΠΎΠ³Ρ ΡΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΈ Ρ ΡΠ΅Π»Π΅Π²Π°Π½ΡΠ½ΠΎΡ
Π»ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΡΡΠΈ; 3) Π΄ΠΎΠ»Π°ΠΆΠ΅ΡΠ΅ Π΄ΠΎ ΠΎΠ΄Π³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΠ° Π½Π° Π±ΡΠΎΡΠ½Π° ΠΏΠΈΡΠ°ΡΠ° ΠΊΠΎΡΠ° ΡΠ΅ Ρ Π²Π΅Π·ΠΈ ΡΠ° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠΎΠΌ
ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ°Π²ΡΠ°ΡΡ, ΠΏΠΎΠΏΡΡ ΠΎΠ½ΠΎΠ³Π° Π΄Π° Π»ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ° ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΡΠΊΠ° ΠΏΠΎΡΠ°Π²Π° ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π΅, Π΄Π° Π»ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈ
ΡΠ°Π²ΡΠ°ΡΡ ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠΈΠ²ΠΎ Ρ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠΌΠ°, ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎ Π΄Π° Π»ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ²Π΅ΠΊ ΡΠ΅Ρ ΠΎ Π±ΠΈΠ½Π°ΡΠ½ΠΎΡ ΡΠ΅Π»Π°ΡΠΈΡΠΈ, Π΄Π° Π»ΠΈ Π·Π°ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π°
ΡΠ΅Π΄Π½ΠΎΠ³ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° Π΄ΡΡΠ³ΠΈΠΌ ΠΎΠ±Π°Π²Π΅Π·Π½ΠΎ Π΄ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎ Π³ΡΠ΅ΡΠΊΠ΅, ΠΊΠ°ΠΊΠ°Π² ΡΠ΅ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡ ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΈ
ΠΈΡΡΠΎΠΊΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΡΠΈΠ½ΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΈ ΠΊΠ°ΠΊΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ²ΡΡΠΈ ΡΠ°ΡΠ½ΠΈΡΡ Π³ΡΠ°Π½ΠΈΡΡ ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΎΠ²Π° Π΄Π²Π° ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΠ°, ΠΊΠ°ΠΊΠΎ
ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠ΅ΠΌΠΈΡΠ° ΡΡΠΈΡΠ΅ Π½Π° ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡ ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΈ ΡΠ».; 4) ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄ΡΡΠ°Π²ΡΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΡΠΈΡΠ΅ ΡΠ»ΠΈΠΊΠ΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΠΌΠ΅Π½Π° ΠΊΠΎΡΠ΅
ΡΡ ΡΠ΅ Ρ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ, ΠΊΠ°ΠΎ Π½Π°ΡΠ΄ΠΈΠ½Π°ΠΌΠΈΡΠ½ΠΈΡΠ΅ΠΌ ΠΈ ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅Π½Π°ΠΌΠ° Π½Π°ΡΠΏΠΎΠ΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ½ΠΈΡΠ΅ΠΌ ΡΠ΅Π·ΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠΌ
ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ, Π΄Π΅ΡΠΈΠ»Π΅ ΠΎΠ΄ ΡΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ½Π΅ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ»ΠΎΠ³ Π²Π΅ΠΊΠ° Π΄ΠΎ Π΄Π°Π½Π°Ρ; 5) ΡΠ°Π·Π»ΠΈΡΠΈΡΠ΅ ΡΠ²ΠΎΡΠ±Π΅Π½Π΅ ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°Π½ΡΠΈΡΠΊΠ΅
ΠΊΠ»Π°ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ°; 6) ΠΎΡΠ²Π΅ΡΡΠ°Π²Π°ΡΠ΅ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΠ° ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΈ Π½ΠΎΡΠΌΠ΅, ΠΊΠ°ΠΎ ΠΈ ΠΏΡΠΈΡΡΡΠΏΠ°
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ° Ρ Π½Π°ΡΡΠ°Π²Π½ΠΎΠΌ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΈ Π½Π°ΡΠΈΠ½Π° ΡΠΈΡ
ΠΎΠ²Π΅ ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π΄Π΅ Ρ Π΄Π΅ΡΠΊΡΠΈΠΏΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΈΠΌ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΡΠΈΠΌΠ°
ΡΠ°Π²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΎΠ³ ΡΡΠΏΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ ΡΠ΅Π·ΠΈΠΊΠ°; 7) ΡΠΊΠ°Π·ΠΈΠ²Π°ΡΠ΅ Π½Π° ΠΌΠΎΠ³ΡΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡ ΠΈΠ·ΡΠ°Π΄Π΅ ΡΠΏΠ΅ΡΠΈΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°Π½ΠΎΠ³ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠ°
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ°.
ΠΠ°ΠΎ Π³Π»Π°Π²Π½ΠΈ ΠΈΠ·Π²ΠΎΡ Π³ΡΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅Π½ ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΌΠ½ΠΈ Π Π΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊ ΡΡΠΏΡΠΊΠΎΡ
ΡΠ²Π°ΡΡΠΊΠΎΠ³Π° ΠΊΡΠΈΠΆΠ΅Π²Π½ΠΎΠ³
ΡΠ΅Π·ΠΈΠΊΠ° ΠΠ°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠΏΡΠΊΠ΅, Π΄ΠΎΠΊ ΡΡ ΡΠ²ΠΈ ΠΎΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΡΠΈ ΡΠ»ΡΠΆΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΠΊΠ°ΠΎ Π΄ΠΎΠΏΡΠ½ΡΠΊΠΈ ΠΈΠ·Π²ΠΎΡΠΈ. ΠΡΠΈΠ»ΠΈΠΊΠΎΠΌ
Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Π΅ Π³ΡΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΈΡΡΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΡΠΌΠΎ ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ°Π·Π»ΠΈΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΌ Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄Π°ΠΌΠ°, ΠΏΡΠ΅ ΡΠ²Π΅Π³Π°
Π΄Π΅ΡΠΊΡΠΈΠΏΡΠΈΠ²Π½ΠΎΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠΌ, ΡΠ°Π΄ΠΈ ΡΡΠΎ ΡΠΈΡΠ΅Π³ ΠΈ ΡΠ²Π΅ΠΎΠ±ΡΡ
Π²Π°ΡΠ½ΠΈΡΠ΅Π³ ΠΎΠΏΠΈΡΠ° Π΅ΠΊΡΡΠ΅ΡΠΏΠΈΡΠ°Π½Π΅ Π³ΡΠ°ΡΠ΅, ΠΊΠ°ΠΎ ΠΈ
ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠΏΠΎΠ½Π΅Π½ΡΠΈΡΠ°Π»Π½ΠΎΠΌ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠΌ, ΠΊΠΎΡΠ° ΡΠ΅ Π²Π΅ΠΎΠΌΠ° ΠΏΠΎΠ³ΠΎΠ΄Π½Π° Π·Π° Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Ρ ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠ° ΡΠ° ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΠΊΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌ
Π·Π½Π°ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅ΠΌ ΠΈ ΠΈΠ·Π΄Π²Π°ΡΠ°ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°Π½ΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠΏΠΎΠ½Π΅Π½Π°ΡΠ° ΠΏΠΎ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΈΠΌΠ° ΡΠ΅ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅ Ρ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ΅
ΡΠ°Π·Π»ΠΈΠΊΡΡΡ. ΠΠΎΡΠ΅Π΄ ΡΠΎΠ³Π°, Ρ ΡΠ°Π΄Ρ ΡΠΌΠΎ ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ»ΡΠΆΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄ΠΎΠΌ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΏΡΡΠ½Π΅ Π»ΠΈΠ½Π³Π²ΠΈΡΡΠΈΠΊΠ΅ ΠΊΠ°ΠΊΠΎ Π±ΠΈΡΠΌΠΎ Π½Π°
ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎΠ²Ρ ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΡΠ° Ρ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΈΠΌΠ° ΡΠ΅ ΠΈΡΠΏΠΈΡΠΈΠ²Π°Π½Π΅ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΊΠ΅ ΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΡΠ΅ ΡΠ°Π²ΡΠ°ΡΡ Π΄ΠΎΠ½Π΅Π»ΠΈ Π·Π°ΠΊΡΡΡΠΊΠ΅ ΠΎ
ΡΠΈΡ
ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΌ Π°ΠΊΡΡΠ΅Π»Π½ΠΎΠΌ ΡΡΠ°ΡΡΡΡ Ρ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ ΡΠ°Π²ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΎΠ³ ΡΡΠΏΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ ΡΠ΅Π·ΠΈΠΊΠ°, Π΄ΠΎΠΊ ΡΠΌΠΎ Π½Π°
ΠΎΠ΄Π³ΠΎΠ²Π°ΡΠ°ΡΡΡΠΈΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΏΡΠΈΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΈΠ²Π°Π»ΠΈ ΠΈ ΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡΡΠΈΡΠΊΠ΅ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠΎΠ΄Π΅.
ΠΡΠΎΠ· Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Ρ 2.099 Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ° ΠΊΠΎΡΠ΅ ΡΡ ΡΠ΅ Π½Π°ΡΠ»Π΅ Ρ Π³Π»Π°Π²Π½ΠΎΠΌ Π΄Π΅Π»Ρ ΠΈΡΡΡΠ°ΠΆΠΈΠ²Π°ΡΠ° Π΄ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΈ ΡΠΌΠΎ
Π΄ΠΎ ΠΌΠ½ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΡ
Π²Π°ΠΆΠ½ΠΈΡ
ΠΈ Π·Π°Π½ΠΈΠΌΡΠΈΠ²ΠΈΡ
Π·Π°ΠΊΡΡΡΠ°ΠΊΠ° Ρ Π²Π΅Π·ΠΈ ΡΠ° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΈ ΡΠΈΡ
ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠΌ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡΠΎΠΌ Ρ
Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠΌ ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ. ΠΠ°ΠΈΠΌΠ΅, Ρ ΡΠ°Π΄Ρ ΡΠΌΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π»ΠΈ Π΄Π° ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈ Π½Π°Π»Π°Π·Π΅ ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΡΠΈΠ½ΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ°, ΡΠ°
ΡΠ΅Π΄Π½Π΅, ΠΈ ΡΠ²ΠΎΡΠ±Π΅Π½ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ²Π΅Π·Π°Π½ΠΈΡ
Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°, ΡΠ° Π΄ΡΡΠ³Π΅ ΡΡΡΠ°Π½Π΅, ΠΏΡΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ ΡΠ΅, ΡΠ· ΡΠ²Π°ΠΆΠ°Π²Π°ΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠΈΡΠ°ΡΠ°
ΠΏΠΎΠ»ΠΈΡΠ΅ΠΌΠΈΡΠ΅, ΠΌΠΎΠΆΠ΅ Π³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠΈ ΠΎ ΡΠΈΠ½ΠΎΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ°, ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΡΠΈΠ½ΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ°, ΠΏΠΎΡΠΏΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌ ΠΈ Π½Π΅ΠΏΠΎΡΠΏΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌ
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ°. ΠΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅ ΠΈΠ· ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠΎΡΠΏΡΠ½ΠΈΡ
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° Π΄Π°ΡΠ΅ ΡΠΌΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ Π½Π° ΠΏΡΠΈΠΌΠ°ΡΠ½Π΅ ΠΈ
ΡΠ΅ΠΊΡΠ½Π΄Π°ΡΠ½Π΅ (ΠΈΠ½Π΄ΡΠΊΠΎΠ²Π°Π½Π΅), Ρ Π·Π°Π²ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΎΠ΄ ΡΠΎΠ³Π° Π΄Π° Π»ΠΈ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ΅ Π±Π΅Π»Π΅ΠΆΠΈ ΠΈ Π¨Π΅ΡΡΠΎΡΠΎΠΌΠ½ΠΈΠΊ
ΠΈΠ»ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ Π΄ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π³Π° Π΄ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΎ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΠΎΠΌ Π΄Π΅ΡΠΈΠ½ΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠ·Π°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅, ΠΊΠ°ΠΎ ΠΈ Π½Π° ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΡΠ°ΠΊΡΠ½Π΅ ΠΈ Π΄ΠΈΡΡΠ°Π½ΡΠ½Π΅, Ρ
Π·Π°Π²ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ ΠΎΠ΄ ΡΡΠ΅ΠΏΠ΅Π½Π° ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°Π½ΡΠΈΡΠΊΠ΅ Π±Π»ΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΡΡΠΈ. ΠΠ°Π΄Π° ΡΠ΅ Ρ ΠΎΠ±Π·ΠΈΡ Π½Π΅ ΡΠ·ΠΈΠΌΠ°ΡΡ ΡΠ΅Π»ΠΎΠΊΡΠΏΠ½Π΅ Π·Π½Π°ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠΊΠ΅
ΡΡΡΡΠΊΡΡΡΠ΅ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°, ΠΌΠΎΠΆΠ΅ ΡΠ΅ Π³ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠΈ ΠΎ ΠΏΡΠ°Π²ΠΈΠΌ ΠΈ Π½Π΅ΠΏΡΠ°Π²ΠΈΠΌ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ°.
ΠΠ½Π°ΡΠ΅ΡΠ° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΡΡ Ρ ΠΎΠ²ΠΎΠΌ ΡΠ°Π΄Ρ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡΠ°Π½Π° ΠΈ ΠΈΠ· ΡΠ³Π»Π° ΠΊΠΎΠΌΠΏΠΎΠ½Π΅Π½ΡΠΈΡΠ°Π»Π½Π΅ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Π΅, ΠΏΡΠΈ
ΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ ΡΠ΅Π΄Π°Π½ ΠΎΠ΄ Π²Π°ΠΆΠ½ΠΈΡΠΈΡ
Π·Π°ΠΊΡΡΡΠ°ΠΊΠ° ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ΅ Π΄Π° ΡΠ΅ ΠΊΠΎΠ΄ Π²Π΅Π»ΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ³ Π±ΡΠΎΡΠ° Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ° Ρ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ΅
ΡΠ°Π·Π»ΠΈΠΊΡΡΠ΅ Π°ΡΡ
ΠΈΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°, Π° Π΄Π° ΡΠ΅ Ρ ΠΎΡΡΠ°Π»ΠΈΠΌ ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°ΡΠ΅Π²ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΎΠ±ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎ ΡΠ΅Ρ ΠΎ Π½Π΅ΠΊΠΎΡ ΠΎΠ΄ ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ° Π½ΠΈΠΆΠ΅Π³ ΡΠ°Π½Π³Π° ΠΊΠΎΡΠ°
Π·Π°ΡΠ΅Π΄Π½ΠΎ ΡΠ° Π°ΡΡ
ΠΈΡΠ΅ΠΌΠΎΠΌ ΡΠΈΠ½ΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°Π½ΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΎ ΡΠ΅Π·Π³ΡΠΎ, ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΠ½ΠΎ ΠΈΠ΄Π΅Π½ΡΠΈΡΠΈΠΊΠ°ΡΠΎΡ. Π¨ΡΠΎ ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ°Π·Π»ΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ²Π½Π°
ΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ° ΠΏΠ΅ΡΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΡΠ°, ΡΠΎ ΡΡ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅ ΡΠ΄Π°ΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅ ΠΎΠ΄ ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠΎΡΠΈΠΏΠΈΡΠ½ΠΈΡ
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ°, Π° Π±Π»ΠΈΠΆΠ΅ ΡΠΈΠ½ΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ°.
ΠΠ°Π΄Π° ΡΠ΅ ΡΠ΅Ρ ΠΎ Π³ΡΠ°ΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΠΈ ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠ°Π»Π½ΠΈΠΌ ΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Π΅Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΈΠΌΠ° Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·ΠΈΡΠ°Π½ΠΈΡ
ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ°, ΡΠ΅Π΄Π°Π½ ΠΎΠ΄ Π²Π°ΠΆΠ½ΠΈΡΠΈΡ
Π·Π°ΠΊΡΡΡΠ°ΠΊΠ° ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ΅ Π΄Π° ΠΎΠ½ΠΈ Π½Π΅ ΠΌΠΎΡΠ°ΡΡ Π½ΡΠΆΠ½ΠΎ Π±ΠΈΡΠΈ ΠΈΡΡΠΎΠ³ ΡΠΎΠ΄Π°, ΠΊΠ°ΠΊΠΎ ΡΠ΅
ΡΠΎ Ρ Π»ΠΈΡΠ΅ΡΠ°ΡΡΡΠΈ ΠΎΠ±ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎ Π½Π°Π²ΠΎΠ΄ΠΈ, Π°Π»ΠΈ Π΄Π° Ρ Π½Π°ΡΠ²Π΅ΡΠ΅ΠΌ Π±ΡΠΎΡΡ ΡΠ»ΡΡΠ°ΡΠ΅Π²Π° Π΄ΠΎΠ»Π°Π·ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎ ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ»Π°ΠΏΠ°ΡΠ° ΠΏΠΎ
ΡΠΎΠ΄Ρ. Π’Π°ΠΊΠΎΡΠ΅, ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π»ΠΈ ΡΠΌΠΎ ΠΈ Π΄Π° ΡΠ΅ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ΅ Π½Π΅ ΠΌΠΎΡΠ° ΠΎΡΡΠ²Π°ΡΠΈΠ²Π°ΡΠΈ ΠΈΡΠΊΡΡΡΠΈΠ²ΠΎ ΠΊΡΠΎΠ·
Π±ΠΈΠ½Π°ΡΠ½Π΅ ΡΠ΅Π»Π°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅, Π²Π΅Ρ ΠΈ ΠΊΡΠΎΠ· Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΅ ΡΡΡΡΠΎΡΠ΅Π½Π΅ Ρ Π½ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΠΌΠ°, ΠΏΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ΄Π° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΡΠΊΠΈΡ
ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ²Π° ΠΈΠΌΠ°
Π΄Π°Π»Π΅ΠΊΠΎ Π²ΠΈΡΠ΅ Π½Π΅Π³ΠΎ Π½ΠΈΠ·ΠΎΠ²Π°. ΠΠΎΡΠ΅Π΄ ΡΠΎΠ³Π°, ΠΊΡΠΎΠ· Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Ρ ΠΊΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ΠΎΡΠΈΡΠ°Π»Π½Π΅ ΠΏΡΠΈΠΏΠ°Π΄Π½ΠΎΡΡΠΈ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°, Π΄ΠΎΡΠ»ΠΈ
ΡΠΌΠΎ Π΄ΠΎ Π·Π°ΠΊΡΡΡΠΊΠ° Π΄Π° Π½Π°ΡΠ²Π΅ΡΠΈ Π±ΡΠΎΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΎΠ·Π½Π°ΡΠ°Π²Π° ΠΎΡΠΎΠ±Π΅, Π·Π°ΡΠΈΠΌ Π΄ΠΎΠ»Π°Π·Π΅ Π½Π°Π·ΠΈΠ²ΠΈ Π·Π° ΠΈΠ½ΡΡΡΡΠΌΠ΅Π½ΡΠ΅
ΠΈ Π½Π° ΠΊΡΠ°ΡΡ ΠΈΠΌΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅ ΡΠ° ΠΌΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΌ Π·Π½Π°ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅ΠΌ.
Π’Π²ΠΎΡΠ±Π΅Π½Π° Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Π° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΡΠ΅ ΠΏΠΎΠΊΠ°Π·Π°Π»Π° Π΄Π° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ° ΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ΅ ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΡΠΊΠ° ΠΏΠΎΡΠ°Π²Π° ΡΠ΅Ρ ΡΠ΅
ΠΎΠ΄Π²ΠΈΡΠ° Ρ ΠΎΠΊΠ²ΠΈΡΡ Π΄Π΅ΡΠΈΠ²Π°ΡΠΈΠΎΠ½ΠΈΡ
Π³Π½Π΅Π·Π΄Π° ΠΊΠ°ΠΎ Π²Π°ΠΆΠ½ΠΈΡ
ΠΏΠΎΠ΄ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ° Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠ³, Π° ΡΠ°ΠΌΠΈΠΌ ΡΠΈΠΌ ΠΈ
ΡΠ΅Π·ΠΈΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ ΡΠΈΡΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ° Π³Π΅Π½Π΅ΡΠ°Π»Π½ΠΎ, Π° Π½Π΅ Π½Π°ΡΡΠΌΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ Π±ΠΈΠ»ΠΎ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΈΠΌ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΊΠΈΠΌ ΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΈΠ½ΠΈΡΠ°ΠΌΠ°, Π°Π»ΠΈ Π΄Π° ΡΠ΅
ΠΏΠΎΡΡΠ΅Π΄ΠΈ Π²ΡΠ»ΠΎ Π½Π΅ΡΠ΅Π³ΡΠ»Π°ΡΠ½Π° ΠΈ Π½Π΅ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π²ΠΈΠ΄ΠΈΠ²Π° ΡΠ΅Π·ΠΈΡΠΊΠ° ΠΏΠΎΡΠ°Π²Π°. Π£ ΠΎΠΊΠ²ΠΈΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ³Π»Π°Π²ΡΠ° ΠΈΠ·Π΄Π²ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈ ΡΡ
ΡΡΡΠΈΠΊΡΠΈ ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΊΠΎΡΠΈΠΌΠ° Π½Π°ΡΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ΅ Π΄ΠΎΠ»Π°Π·ΠΈ Π΄ΠΎ ΡΡΠ²Π°ΡΠ°ΡΠ° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΡΠΊΠ΅ ΡΠ΅Π»Π°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅: ΠΊΠΎΠ΄ Π΄ΠΎΠΌΠ°ΡΠΈΡ
ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°Π½Π°ΡΠ° ΡΠ΅Ρ ΡΠ΅ ΠΎ ΠΎΠ΄Π½ΠΎΡΡ ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠ΅ΡΡ ΡΡΡΠΈΠΊΡΠ° -Π»Π°Ρ ΠΈ -ΡΠ΅Ρ, -Π°Ρ ΠΈ -Π»Π°Ρ, -Π°Ρ ΠΈ -ΡΠ΅Ρ, ΡΠ΅ΡΠ΅ ΠΊΠΎΠ΄ Π΄ΡΡΠ³ΠΈΡ
ΡΡΡΠΈΠΊΡΠ° (ΠΏΠΎΠΏΡΡ -(Π½)ΠΈΠΊ, -(Π°)Ρ, -Π°Ρ, -ΠΈΡ ΠΈ ΡΠ».), Π΄ΠΎΠΊ ΡΠ΅ ΠΊΠΎΠ΄ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ° ΡΡΡΠ°Π½ΠΎΠ³ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅ΠΊΠ»Π° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠ°
Π½Π°ΡΡΠ΅ΡΡΠ΅ ΡΡΠ²Π°ΡΠ° ΠΊΠ°Π΄Π° ΡΡ ΠΏΠΎΠ·Π°ΡΠΌΡΠ΅Π½ΠΈΡΠ΅ ΡΠ²ΠΎΡΠ΅Π½Π΅ ΡΠΎΡΠΌΠ°Π½ΡΠΈΠΌΠ° -(Π°)ΡΠΎΡ/-(ΠΈ)ΡΠΎΡ ΠΈ -ΠΈΡΡ(Π°).
ΠΠΎΡΠ΅Π±Π½Π° ΠΏΠ°ΠΆΡΠ° Ρ ΡΠ°Π΄Ρ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ²Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½Π° ΡΠ΅ ΠΈ Π·Π°ΡΡΠ°ΡΠ΅Π»ΠΈΠΌ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ° ΠΈ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ°-
-Π½Π΅ΠΎΠ»ΠΎΠ³ΠΈΠ·ΠΌΠΈΠΌΠ°, ΠΊΡΠΎΠ· ΡΠΈΡΡ ΡΠ΅ Π°Π½Π°Π»ΠΈΠ·Ρ ΠΎΠ΄Π»ΠΈΡΠ½ΠΎ Π²ΠΈΠ΄Π΅ Π±ΡΠΎΡΠ½Π΅ Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΡΠΊΠ΅ ΡΠ΅Π½Π΄Π΅Π½ΡΠΈΡΠ΅ β ΠΎΠ΄ ΡΠ·ΠΌΠΈΡΠ°ΡΠ°
Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ° Π΄ΠΎΠΌΠ°ΡΠ΅Π³ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ΅ΠΊΠ»Π°, ΠΏΡΠΈΠ»ΠΈΠ²Π° ΡΡΡΠ°Π½ΠΈΡ
Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠ΅ΠΌΠ°, ΠΈΠ·ΡΠΌΠΈΡΠ°ΡΠ° ΡΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡ
ΠΈ ΠΏΠΎΡΠ°Π²Π΅ Π½ΠΎΠ²ΠΈΡ
Π·Π°Π½ΠΈΠΌΠ°ΡΠ° ΠΈ ΠΈΠ½ΡΡΡΡΠΌΠ΅Π½Π°ΡΠ° ΠΈ ΡΠ».
ΠΠ°Π²ΡΡΠ½Π° ΠΏΠΎΠ³Π»Π°Π²ΡΠ° ΠΏΠΎΡΠ²Π΅ΡΠ΅Π½Π° ΡΡ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠΈ Ρ Π½Π°ΡΡΠ°Π²ΠΈ ΠΈ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠΈΡΠΈ ΠΈΠ· ΡΠ³Π»Π°
Π»Π΅ΠΊΡΠΈΠΊΠΎΠ³ΡΠ°ΡΠΈΡΠ΅, ΠΏΡΠΈ ΡΠ΅ΠΌΡ ΡΡ ΠΏΡΠ΅Π΄Π»ΠΎΠΆΠ΅Π½ΠΈ ΠΊΠΎΠ½ΠΊΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈ ΠΌΠΎΠ΄Π΅Π»ΠΈ Π·Π° ΠΎΠ±ΡΠ°Π΄Ρ ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° Ρ Π½Π°ΡΡΠ°Π²Π½ΠΎΠΌ
ΠΏΡΠΎΡΠ΅ΡΡ ΠΈ ΠΈΠ·ΡΠ°Π΄Ρ Π±ΡΠ΄ΡΡΠ΅Π³ ΡΠ΅ΡΠ½ΠΈΠΊΠ° ΠΏΠ°ΡΠΎΠ½ΠΈΠΌΠ° ΡΡΠΏΡΠΊΠΎΠ³ ΡΠ΅Π·ΠΈΠΊΠ°.The doctoral thesis focuses on the paronymyc relations between suffixed common nouns. The
main aims of the thesis are: 1) initiating the systematic research of paronymy as the most neglected
and marginalized paradigmatic lexical relation, which has managed to attract attention not only of
lexicologists, but also of stylistics, normativists and methodologists in other environments, especially
in Russia; 2) distinguishing more precise criteria and linguistic parameters for identifying paronyms
and obtaining a more precise and complete definition of paronymy than those existing in relevant
scientific literature; 3) ascertaining the answers to numerous questions that are posed in relation to
paronymy, such as whether paronymy is a systematic phenomenon or not, whether paronyms occur
exclusively in pairs (i.e. whether they always occur in binary relations), whether interchanging one
paronym for another necessarily leads to mistake, what kind of relation exists between paronyms and
same-root synonyms and how to make a more apparent distinction between these two relations, how
polysemy affects relations between paronyms and other; 4) representing a broader scope of the
changes that have happened in the lexical system, a subsystem that is most dynamic and most exposed
to changes, from the middle of last century until today; 5) composing different word-formation and
semantic classifications of paronyms; 6) highlighting the relation between paronyms and the norm,
as well as the approach to paronymy in the teaching process and manners of its processing in
descriptive dictionaries of contemporary Serbian language; 7) indicating the possibility of compiling
a specialized dictionary of paronyms.
As the primary source of material, the author uses the six-volume Dictionary of Serbo-
Croatian Literary Language by Matica Srpska, whereas all other dictionaries have served as
additional sources. During the materials analysis, the author has used different linguistic methods.
Primarily, the descriptive method has been used to describe the excerpted material comprehensively.
Furthermore, the author has used componential analysis, which is highly suitable for analyzing nouns
with a factual meaning and separating semantic components which differentiate lexemes in
paronymyc relations. In addition, the thesis has included the method of corpus linguistics in order to
establish the actual status of the examined lexical units within the lexical system of contemporary
Serbian language, based on the context in which they appear. Finally, in some pertinent parts,
statistical methods have been employed.
Through analyzing 2099 lexemes, which have occurred in the central part of the research, we
have drawn various significant conclusions related to paronyms and their place within the lexical
system. Namely, the thesis indicates that paronyms are located between synonyms on the one hand
and word-formation lexemes on the other hand. In the latter case, we can discuss synoparonyms,
parosynonyms, complete and incomplete paronyms, while acknowledging the influence of polysemy.
Lexemes from the category of complete paronyms have further been divided into primary and
secondary (induced), depending on whether the relation of paronymy is noted by the six-volume
Dictionary or it has occurred in the process of desynonymization, as well as into contact and distant,
depending on the level of their semantic closeness. If we exclude cumulative semantic structures of
lexemes, we can discuss proper and improper paronyms.
Meanings of paronyms have been analyzed in this paper both from the perspective of
componential analysis, which has led to one of the most critical conclusions: that, for a large number
of lexemes in the relation of paronymy, the archisem is different, whereas in other cases, some of the
sems of lower rank occur, which, together with archisem, form a semantic core, or an identifier. The
more the differentiated sem is peripheral, the farther the lexemes are from prototypical paronyms and
closer to synonyms.
Concerning the grammatical and categorical traits of analyzed paronyms, one of the most
important conclusions is that they do not have to be necessarily of the same gender, as the existing
literature usually notes, but that the gender does match in the majority of cases. Moreover, the author
demonstrates that the relation of paronymy does not have to be exclusively established through binary
relations but can occur through sequenced lexemes, although there are far more paronymyc pairs than
sequences. Moreover, through the analysis of category membership of lexemes, we have concluded
that most paronyms denote persons, followed by the names of instruments, and finally, the nouns
with spatial meaning.
Word formation analysis of paronyms has demonstrated that paronymy is a systematic
phenomenon because it transpires within derivational nests as significant subsystems of the lexical,
and thus linguistic, system in general, and not randomly among any lexical units. Rather, it is a very
irregular and unpredictable linguistic phenomenon. Within the chapters, we have distinguished
suffixes in which the creation of paronymyc relations occurs most frequently: in Serbian formants,
there appears the relation between suffixes -lac and -telj, -aΔ and -lac, - aΔ and -telj, and more rarely
in other suffixes (such as -(n)ik, -(a)c, -ar, -iΔ and other), while in the lexemes of foreign origin
paronymy is mainly created when loan words are made of formants -(a)tor/-(i)tor and -ist(a).
Special attention in the thesis has been dedicated to archaic paronyms and paronymsneologisms.
Through their analysis, we can perceive numerous lexical tendencies β from the lexical
retrieval of Serbian lexemes, the input of foreign lexemes, the disappearance of old professions and
instruments, and appearance of new ones, and other.
The final chapters are dedicated to paronymy in teaching and paronymy from the perspective
of lexicography, in which the author suggests particular models for approaching paronyms in the
teaching process and compiling a future dictionary of paronyms in Serbian