# Lexical and Derivational Meaning in Vector-Based Models of Relativisation

arXiv: https://arxiv.org/abs/1711.11513 · HTML: https://mlsanity.com/paper/1711.11513/

## Key facts

- Cited by 2 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026).
- First posted on arXiv 30 Nov 2017.

## Built on by (most cited first, 2 of 2)

- [Does CLIP Bind Concepts? Probing Compositionality in Large Image Models](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2212.10537/) (2022)
- [Structural Ambiguity and its Disambiguation in Language Model Based Parsers: the Case of Dutch Clause Relativization](https://mlsanity.com/paper/2305.14917/) (2023)

## Abstract (arXiv)

Sadrzadeh et al (2013) present a compositional distributional analysis of relative clauses in English in terms of the Frobenius algebraic structure of finite dimensional vector spaces. The analysis relies on distinct type assignments and lexical recipes for subject vs object relativisation. The situation for Dutch is different: because of the verb final nature of Dutch, relative clauses are ambiguous between a subject vs object relativisation reading. Using an extended version of Lambek calculus, we present a compositional distributional framework that accounts for this derivational ambiguity, and that allows us to give a single meaning recipe for the relative pronoun reconciling the Frobenius semantics with the demands of Dutch derivational syntax.