The Compactness of Construction Grammars

Abstract

We present an argument for {\em construction grammars} based on the minimum description length (MDL) principle (a formal version of the Ockham Razor). The argument consists in using linguistic and computational evidence in setting up a formal model, and then applying the MDL principle to prove its superiority with respect to alternative models. We show that construction-based representations are at least an order of magnitude more compact that the corresponding lexicalized representations of the same linguistic data. The result is significant for our understanding of the relationship between syntax and semantics, and consequently for choosing NLP architectures. For instance, whether the processing should proceed in a pipeline from syntax to semantics to pragmatics, and whether all linguistic information should be combined in a set of constraints. From a broader perspective, this paper does not only argue for a certain model of processing, but also provides a methodology for determining advantages of different approaches to NLP.