Building a semantic map: top-down versus bottom-up approaches

Abstract

This paper contrasts two methods for constructing semantic maps: the top-down model and the bottom-up model.It is argued that the bottom-up approach can be illuminating in solving longstanding issues.First, a sharp distinction is made between functions and domains: functions are indivisible semantic units, and domains are sets of functions.A bottom-up model starts with the functions and works its way up to the domain level.The difference between a bottom-up and a top-down model is illustrated by looking at the problem of evidentiality and epistemic modality, specifically the question of whether the verb /must/ is epistemic or evidential.It is argued that by looking at the functions of /must/ and related verbs (such as /be bound to, will/ and the Dutch cognate verb /moeten/) we can construct a semantic map that is both more accurate and more open to linguistic inquiry than a top-down map.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 88 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.