Hyponymy and hypernymy
In linguistics, a hyponym is a word or phrase whose semantic field is included within that of another word, its hypernym (sometimes spelled hyperonym outside of the natural language processing community). In simpler terms, a hyponym shares a type-of relationship with its hypernym. For example, pigeon, crow, eagle and seagull are all hyponyms of bird (their hypernym); which, in turn, is a hyponym of animal.
Hyponyms and hypernyms
Hyponymy shows the relationship between the more general terms (hypernyms) and the more specific instances of it (hyponyms). A hyponym is a word or phrase whose semantic field is more specific than its hypernym. The semantic field of a hypernym, also known as a superordinate, is broader than that of a hyponym. An approach to the relationship between hyponyms and hypernyms is to view a hypernym as consisting of hyponyms. This, however, becomes more difficult with abstract words such as imagine, understand and knowledge. While hyponyms are typically used to refer to nouns, it can also be used on other parts of speech. Like nouns, hyponyms in verbs are words that refer to a broad category of actions. For example, verbs such as stare , gaze , view and peer can also be considered hyponyms of the verb 'to look'.
Hypernyms and hyponyms are asymmetric. Hyponymy can be tested by substituting X and Y in the sentence ‘X is a kind of Y’ and determining if it makes sense. For example, ‘A screwdriver is a kind of tool’ makes sense but not ‘A tool is a kind of screwdriver’.
In addition, the meaning relation between hyponyms and hypernyms apply to lexical items of the same word class (or parts of speech), and at the sense level. For instance, the word screwdriver used in the previous example refers to the hand tool for turning a screw, and not to the drink made with vodka and orange juice.
Also, as hyponymy is a transitive relation, if X is a hyponym of Y, and Y is a hyponym of Z, then X is a hyponym of Z. For example, violet is a hyponym of purple and purple is a hyponym of color; therefore violet is a hyponym of color. In addition, it should be noted that a word can be a hypernym in one context and also be a hyponym when used in another context. This can be seen in the example of purple, a hyponym of colour but itself is a hypernym of the broad spectrum of shades of purple between the range of crimson and violet.
The hierarchical structure of semantic fields can be mostly seen in hyponymy. They could be observed from top to bottom, where the higher level is more general and the lower level is more specific. For example, living things will be the highest level followed by plants and animals, and the lowest level may comprise of dog, cat and wolf.
Under the relations of hyponymy and incompatibility, taxonomic hierarchical structures too can be formed. It consists of two relations; the first one being exemplified in 'An X is a Y' (simple hyponymy) while the second relation is 'An X is a kind/type of Y'. The second relation is said to be more discriminating and can be classified more specifically under the concept of taxonomy.
If the hypernym Z consists of hyponyms X and Y, X and Y are identified as co-hyponyms. Co-hyponyms are labelled as such when separate hyponyms share the same hypernym but are not hyponyms of one another, unless they happen to be synonymous. For example, screwdriver, scissors, knife, hammer are all co-hyponyms of tool, but not hyponyms of one another: ‘That hammer is a knife’ does not make sense.
Co-hyponyms are often but may not always be related to one another by the relation of incompatibility. For example, apple, peach and plum are co-hyponyms of fruit. However, an apple is not a peach, which is also not a plum. Thus, they are incompatible. Nevertheless, co-hyponyms are not necessarily incompatible in all senses. A queen and mother are both hyponyms of woman but there is nothing preventing the queen from being a mother. This shows that compatibility may be relevant.
Relation of class to subclass
Hyponymy is the semantic relation in which a word is categorized as part of a bigger category of word. This means that they are connected through meanings. This is not to be confused with meronymy in which the word is a constituent of a broader category.
For example, a leaf is part of a plant and therefore leaf is a meronymy to the object plant. However, when talking about hyponymy, we can also say that bushes or flowers or trees are hyponymy of the broad category of plants as these words are semantically related to it and need not necessarily be a constituent of it.
Similarly, hypernymy is the semantic relation in which one word is the hypernym of another. It should not be confused with holonymy, which is the relation in which words stand when the things that they denote stand in the relation of whole to part.
Hyponymy and Hypernymy are one of the more frequently encoded relations among synsets used in lexical databases such as WordNet, using ontology alignment to link general synsets like animals to specific ones like bear and deer. These semantic relation can also be used to compare semantic similarity by judging the distance between two synsets and to analyse Anaphora.
The notion of hyponymy is particularly relevant to language translation, as hyponyms are very common across languages. For example, in Japanese the word for older brother is Ani (兄 Ani?), and the word for younger brother is Otōto (弟 Otōto?). An English-to-Japanese translator presented with a phrase containing the English word brother would have to choose which Japanese word equivalent to use. This would be difficult, because abstract information (such as the speakers' relative ages) is often not available during machine translation.
- Blanket terminology
- Contrast set
- Umbrella term
- WordNet (a semantic lexicon for the English language, which puts words in semantic relations to each other, mainly by using the concepts hypernym and hyponym)
- Brinton, Laurel J. (2000). The Structure of Modern English: A Linguistic Introduction (Illustrated ed.). John Benjamins Publishing Company. p. 112. ISBN 978-90-272-2567-2.
- Stede, Manfred (June 2000). "The hyperonym problem revisited: Conceptual and lexical hierarchies in language generation - W00-1413" (PDF). Association for Computational Linguistics. pp. 93–99. doi:10.3115/1118253.1118267. Retrieved 5 January 2014.
- Fromkin, Victoria; Robert, Rodman (1998). Introduction to Language (6th ed.). Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace College Publishers. ISBN 0-03-018682-X.[page needed]
- Maienborn, Claudia; von Heusinger, Klaus; Portner, Paul (eds.) (2011). Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ISBN 978-3-11-018470-9.
- Lyons, John (1977). Semantics. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-52-129165-1.
- Gao, Chunming; Xu, Bin (November 2013). "The Application of Semantic Field Theory to English Vocabulary Learning". Theory and Practice in Language studies 3 (11): 2030–2035. Retrieved 6 October 2014.
- Green, Rebecca; Bean, Carol A.; Sung, Hyon Myaeng (2002). The Semantics of Relationships: An Interdisciplinary Perspective. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. p. 12. Retrieved 2014-10-17.
- Cruse, D. A. (2004). Meaning in Language: An Introduction to Semantics and Pragmatics (2 ed.). Oxford University Press. p. 162. Retrieved 2014-10-17.
- Snow, Rion; Daniel Jurafsky; Andrew Y. Ng (2004). "Learning syntactic patterns for automatic hypernym discovery" (PDF). Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 17.
- Hearst, M. (1992). "Automatic acquisition of hyponyms from large text corpora". Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Computational Linguistics 2: 539. doi:10.3115/992133.992154.