事実を「統一的」に扱うことには，あまり実質がないように私には思われる．それは，分 類のための分類でしかなく，意味型と意味役割のあいだの質的な違いを無視する効果に繋 がる．
以上のような理由から，意味役割に関しては，それが属性であるという点にこだわらな い方がよいように思う．実際，属性という用語に固執することは，意味役割の基盤が状況 であるという性質の重要性を見失わせる可能性が高い．
参考文献
[1] 人工知能学会誌: 特集「事例ベース推論」, Vol. 7, No. 14. 日本人工知能学会, 1992.
[2] ソフトウェア文書のための日本語処理の研究13: IPALの統合化に向けて. Technical report,情報処理振興事業協議会センター, 1997.
[3] B. T. S. Atkins, M. Rundell, and H. Sato. The contribution of FrameNet to practical lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography, Vol. 2003, No. September, pp.
333–357, 2003.
[4] C. F. Baker, C. J. Fillmore, and B. Cronin. The structure of FrameNet database. Inter- national Journal of Lexicography, Vol. 2003, No. September, pp. 281–295, 2003.
[5] C. F. Baker, C. J. Fillmore, and J. B. Lowe. The berkeley FrameNet project. In COLING-ACL 98, Montreal, Canada, pp. 86–90. Association for the Computational Linguistics, 1998.
[6] L. W. Barsalou. Frames, concepts, and conceptual fields. In A. Lehrer and E. F.
Kittay, editors, Frames, Fields and Contrasts: New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization, pp. 21–74. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, 1992.
[7] J. Barwise and J. Etchemendy. The Liar: An Essay on Truth and Circularity. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1987. [邦訳: 『うそつき: 真理と循環をめぐる論考』
(金子洋之 訳).産業図書.].
[8] J. Barwise and J. Perry. Situations and Attitudes. MIT Press, 1983. [邦訳:『状況と態 度』.土屋俊ほか(訳).産業図書.].
[9] N. A. Bernstein. The Coordination and Regulation of Movements. Oxford University Press, 1967.
[10] N. A. Bernstein. On Dexterity and its Development. Lawrence Earlbaum, 1996. edited by M. Turvey, translated from Russian by M. L. Latash. [邦訳: 『デクステリィー: 巧 みさとその発達』.工藤和俊(訳).佐々木正人(監訳).金子書房. 2003.].
[11] D. Blackmore. Understanding Utterances: An Introduction to Pragmatics. Blackwell,
1992. [邦訳: 『ひとは発話をどう理解するか』(武内道子・山崎英一 訳).ひつじ書
房].
参考文献 58 [12] P. Coad and E. Yourdon. Objected-Oriented Design. Prentice-Hall, 1991.
[13] L. Coleman and P. Kay. Prototype semantics: The english verb lie. Language, pp.
26–44, 1981.
[14] S. Coulson. Semantic Leaps: Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[15] G. R. Fauconnier. Mental Spaces: Aspects of Meaning Construction in Natural Lan- guage. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1985.
[16] G. R. Fauconnier. Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
[17] G. R. Fauconnier and M. Turner. Conceptual Projections and Middle Spaces. Cogni- tive Science Technical Report TR-9401, Cognitive Science Department, UCSD, 1994.
[18] G. R. Fauconnier and M. Turner. Blending as a central process of grammar. In A. D.
Goldberg, editor, Conceptual Structure, Discourse, and Language. CSLI Publications, 1996.
[19] G. R. Fauconnier and M. Turner. Conceptual integration networks. Cognitive Science, Vol. 22, pp. 133–187, 1998.
[20] C. Fellbaum, editor. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, 1998.
[21] C. J. Fillmore. The case for case. In W. Bach and R. T. Harms, editors, Universals in Linguistic Theory. New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1968.
[22] C. J. Fillmore. Some problems for case grammar. In R. O’Brien, editor, Report of the Twenty-Second Round Table Meeting on Linguistics and Language Studies, pp. 35–56.
Georgetown University Press, Washington, D.C., 1971. [Reprinted in R. Dirven and G.
Rodden, eds. (1987). Fillmore’s Case Grammar — A Reader, pp. 59–69. Heidelberg:
Julius Groos Verlag].
[23] C. J. Fillmore. The case for case reopened. In Peter Cole and Jerrold M. Sadock, editors, Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 8: Grammatical Relations, pp. 59–82. Academic Press, New York, 1977. [Reprinted in Fillmore (2003), Form and Meaning in Lan- guage, Vol. 1: Papers on Semantic Roles, pp. 175–199. CSLI Publications.].
[24] C. J. Fillmore. Frame semantics. In Linguistics in the Morning Calm, pp. 111–137.
Linguistic Society of Korea, 1982.
[25] C. J. Fillmore. Frames and the semantics of understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, Vol. 6, No. 2, pp. 222–254, 1985.
[26] C. J. Fillmore. Form and Meaning in Language, Vol. 1: Papers on Semantic Roles.
CSLI Publications, 2003.
[27] C. J. Fillmore and B. T. S. Atkins. Towards a frame-based lexicon: The semantics of RISK and its neighbors. In A. Lehrer and Eva F. Kittay, editors, Frames, Fields and
参考文献 59 Contrasts: New Essays in Semantic and Lexical Organization, pp. 75–102. Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, 1992.
[28] C. J. Fillmore and B. T. S. Atkins. Starting where the dictionaries stop: The challenge for computational lexicography. In B. T. S. Atkins and A. Zampoli, editors, Compua- tional Approaches to the Lexicon, pp. 349–393. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, 1994.
[29] C. J. Fillmore and B. T. S. Atkins. Describing polysemy: the case of ‘crawl’. In Y. Ravin and C. Leacock, editors, Polysemy: Theoretical and Computational Ap- proaches, pp. 91–110. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1999.
[30] C. J. Fillmore, C. R. Johnson, and M. R. L. Petruck. Background to FrameNet. Inter- national Journal of Lexicography, Vol. 16, No. 3, pp. 235–250, 2003.
[31] C. J. Fillmore, C. Wooters, and C. F. Baker. Building a large lexical databank which provides deep semantics. In Proceedings of the Pacific Asian Conference on Language, Information and Computation. 2001.
[32] D. Gentner. Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Sci- ence, Vol. 7, pp. 155–170, 1983.
[33] D. Gentner and C. Clement. Evidence for relational selectivity in the interpretation of analogy and metaphor. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Vol. 22, pp.
307–358, 1988.
[34] J. J. Gibson. Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Lawrence Earlbaum Asso- ciates, 1979. [邦訳:『生態学的視覚論』.古崎ほか(訳).サイエンス社.].
[35] S. Glucksberg, M. S. McGlone, and D. A. Manfredi. Property attribution in metaphor comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, Vol. 36, pp. 50–67, 1997.
[36] E. Goffman. Frame Analysis. New York: Harper, 1974.
[37] J. Grady. Foundations of Meaning: Primary Metaphors and Primary Scenes. Ph. D.
dissertation, University of California, Berkeley, CA, 1997.
[38] J. Grady. THEORIES ARE BUILDINGSrevisited. Cognitive Linguistics, Vol. 8, No. 4, pp. 267–290, 1997.
[39] J. Grady. A typology of motivation for conceptual metaphor: Correlation vs. resem- blance. In R. Gibbs and G. Steen, editors, Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. John Benjamins, 1999.
[40] P. Grice. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. Morgan, editors, Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 3. Academic Press, 1968.
[41] P. Harder. Partial autonomy: Ontology and methodology in cognitive linguistics. In Theo Janssen and Gisela Redeker, editors, Cognitive Linguistics: Foundations, Scope, and Methodology, pp. 195–222. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter, 1999.
[42] K. J. Holyoak, E. N. Junn, and D. O. Billman. Development of analogical problem-
参考文献 60 solving skill. Child Development, Vol. 55, pp. 2042–2055, 1984.
[43] K. Holyoak and P. Thagard. Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. MIT Press, 1994. [邦訳:『アナロジーの力』(鈴木宏昭・河原哲雄 訳).新曜社.].
[44] M. Johnson. Body in the Mind. University of Chicago Press, 1987.
[45] J. L. Kolodner, editor. Case-Based Learning. Kluwer Academic Press, Amsterdam, 1993. [Reprint of Machine Learning, Vol. 10 (3), (1993)].
[46] J. L. Kolodner, editor. Case-Based Reasoning. Morgan Kauffman, San Francicso, CA, 1993.
[47] G. Lakoff. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. University of Chicago Press, 1987.
[邦訳: 『認知意味論』(池上 嘉彦・河上 誓作 訳).紀伊国屋書店.].
[48] G. Lakoff. The invariance hypothesis: Is the abstract reasoning based on image schemas? Cognitive Linguistics, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 39–74, 1991. [邦訳: 不変性仮 説: 抽象推論はイメージ・スキーマに基づくか? (杉本孝司訳). In坂原 茂(編), 『認 知言語学の発展』, 1–59.東京:ひつじ書房.].
[49] G. Lakoff. Contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Orthony, editor, Metaphor and Thought, pp. 202–251. Cambridge University Press, 2nd edition, 1993.
[50] G. Lakoff and M. Johnson. The Philosophy in the Flesh. Basic Books, 1999.
[51] G. Lakoff and M. Turner. More than Cool Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989. [邦訳:『詩と認知』(大堀壽夫 訳).紀伊国屋書店.].
[52] R. W. Langacker. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequi- sites. Stanford University Press, 1987.
[53] R. W. Langacker. Foundations of Cognitive Grammar, Vol. 2: Descriptive Applica- tions. Stanford University Press, 1991.
[54] J. Lave and E. Wenger. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Ox- ford University Press, 1991. [邦訳:『状況に埋め込まれた学習:正統的周辺参加』(佐 伯胖 訳).産業図書.].
[55] D. B. Leake, editor. Case-Based Reasoning: Experiences, Lessons, and Future Direc- tions. AAAI Press/MIT Press, 1996.
[56] J. Mandler. Stories, Scripts, and Scenes: Aspects of Schema Theory. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, 1984.
[57] J. D. McCawley. Speech acts and Goffman’s participant roles. In Proceedings of the 1st Eastern States Conference on Linguistics, pp. 260–274, 1985.
[58] M. S. McGlone and D. A. Manfredi. Topic-vehicle interaction in metaphor compre- hension. Memory & Cogntion, Vol. 29, pp. 1209–1219, 2001.
[59] M. L. Minsky. A framework for representing knowledge. In P. H. Winston, editor, The Psychology of Computer Vision, pp. 211–277. McGraw-Hill, 1975.
参考文献 61 [60] M. W. Morris and G. L. Murphy. Converging operations on a basic level in event
taxonomies. Memory and Cognition, Vol. 18, pp. 407–418, 1990.
[61] K. H. Ohara, S. Fujii, T. Ohori, R. Suzuki, H. Saito, and S. Ishizaki. The japanese FrameNet project: An introduction. In Proceedings of LREC-04 Satellite Workshop
“Building Lexical Resources from Semantically Annotated Corpora” (LREC 2004: 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation), pp. 9–11, 2004.
[62] K. H. Ohara, S. Fujii, H. Sato, S. Ishizaki, T. Ohori, and R. Suzuki. The japanese FrameNet project: A preliminary report. In Proceedings of PACLING ’03, pp. 249–
254, 2003.
[63] A. Pansky and A. Koriat. The basic level convergence effect in memory distortions.
Psychological Science, Vol. 15, pp. 52–59, 2004.
[64] M. R. L. Petruck. Frame semantics. In Jef Vershueren, Jan-Ola Ostman, and Jan Blommaert, editors, Handbook of Pragmatics. John Benjamins, 1996.
[65] A. Pilkington. A relevance-theoretic view of metaphor. Parlance, Vol. 2, pp. 102–117, 1990.
[66] J. Pustejovsky. The generative lexicon. Computational Linguistics, Vol. 17, No. 4, pp.
409–440, 1991.
[67] J. Pustejovsky. The Generative Lexicon. MIT Press, 1995.
[68] J. Pustejovsky and B. Boguraev. A richer characterization of dictionary entries: The role of knowledge representation. In B. T. S. Atkins and A. Zampolli, editors, Com- putational Approaches to the Lexicon, pp. 295–311. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1994.
[69] J. Pustejovsky and P. Bouillon. Aspectual coercion and logical polysemy. In J. Puste- jovsky and B. Boguraev, editors, Lexical Semantics: The Problem of Polysemy, pp.
133–162. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK, 1996.
[70] E. S. Reed. Encountering the World: Towards an Ecological Psychology. Oxford University Press, 1996. [邦訳:『アフォーダンスの心理学』.細田直哉(訳).新曜社.].
[71] E. Rosch, C. B. Mervis, W. Gray, D. Johnson, and P. Boyes-Braem. Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, Vol. 8, pp. 382–439, 1976.
[72] D. Sperber and D. Wilson. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Blackwell, 2nd edition, 1995.
[73] E. E. Sweetser. The definition of lie. In D. Holland and N. Quinn, editors, Cultural Models in Language and Thought, pp. 43–66. Cambridge University Press, 1987.
[74] R. D. Van Valin, Jr. and D. P. Wilkins. The case for “effector”: case roles, agents, and agency revisited. In M. Shibatani and S. A. Thompson, editors, Grammatical Constructions: Their Form and Meaning, pp. 289–322. Oxford: Oxford University
参考文献 62 Press, 1996).
[75] J. M. Zacks and B. Tversky. Event structure in perception and conception. Psycholog- ical Bulletin, Vol. 127, pp. 3–21, 2001.
[76] 谷口一美. 認知意味論の新展開: メタファーとメトニミー. 研究社, 2003.
[77] 冨永英夫, 野澤元. 総称文についての一考察: 発話行為論・認知言語学の観点から. 日本語用論学会第7回(2004年度)大会予稿集, pp. 60–66.日本語用論学会, 2004.
[78] NTTコミュニケーション科学研究所(監修). 日本語語彙大系. 東京: 岩波書店, 1997.
[79] 大石亨,松本裕治. 格パターン分析に基づく動詞の語彙知識獲得. 情報処理学会論文 誌, Vol. 36, No. 11, pp. 2597–2610, 1995.
[80] 東森勲,吉村あき子. 関連性理論の新展開: 認知とコミュニケーション. 研究社, 2003.
[81] 中本敬子. 意味フレームの実在性: HFN/FOCALの心理学的妥当性の検証. 日本認知 言語学会第5回大会Conference Handbook, pp. 138–141, 2004.
[82] 中 本 敬 子, 野 澤 元, 黒 田 航. 動 詞「 襲 う 」の 多 義 性: カ ー ド 分 類 課 題 と 意 味 素 性 評 定 課 題 に よ る 検 討. 認 知 心 理 学 会 第 二 回 大 会 口 頭 発 表, p. 39, 2004. [http://clsl.hi.h.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kkuroda/papers/
Nakamoto-et-al-CogPsy2004-Original.pdf].
[83] 中本敬子, 黒田航, 野澤元, 金丸敏幸, 龍岡昌弘. FOCAL/PDS 入門: フレーム指向 概念分析/並列分散意味論の具体的紹介. [http://clsl.hi.h.kyoto-u.ac.jp/
~kkuroda/papers/introduction-to-focal.pdf], 2004.
[84] 村田賢一, 岡部了也, 井口厚夫, 後藤恒男. 計算機用日本語生成辞書 IPAL (SUR-
FACE/DEEP)の枠組み. 自然言語処理, Vol. 130, No. 13, pp. 97–104, 1999.
[85] 野澤元. メタファーと適応的行動: 言語使用の行動生態学的アプローチ. 日本認知科 学会第21回大会発表論文集, pp. 126–127.日本認知科学会(Japan Cognitive Science Society), 2004.
[86] 野澤元. メタファーにおける意味フレーム. 日本認知言語会第五回 Conference Handbook, pp. 150–153.日本認知言語学会(JCLA), 2004.
[87] 野澤元,山嵜章裕. 言葉は行為の費用と利益を伝える:「わざわざ」「いちいち」の行 動生態学的考察. 日本語用論学会第7回(2004年度)大会予稿集, pp. 56–59.日本語 用論学会, 2004.
[88] 井口厚夫. 計算機用日本語生成辞書IPAL (SURFACE/DEEP). Technical report,第19 回IPA技術発表会, 2000.
[89] 荻野孝野,小林正博,井佐原均. 日本語動詞の結合価. 東京: 三省堂, 2003.
[90] 鈴木宏昭. 類推と思考. 東京: 共立出版, 1996.
[91] 辻幸夫（編）. ことばの認知科学辞典. 東京: 大修館, 1994.
[92] 黒 田 航. “(意 味) フ レ ー ム” と い う 説 明 概 念 の 再 規 定. [http://clsl.hi.h.
kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kkuroda/papers/revising-the-frame-concept.pdf],
参考文献 63 2004.
[93] 黒田航, 井佐原均. 意味フレームを用いた知識構造の言語への効果的な結びつ け. 電子情報通信学会技術研究報告, 第104 (416) 巻, pp. 65–70. 電子情報通信学 会, 2004. [増補改訂版: http://clsl.hi.h.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kkuroda/papers/
linking-l-to-k-v3.pdf].
[94] 黒田航,井佐原均. 日本語の意味タグ体系を定義する試み: FrameNetの視点から. 言 語処理学会第10回年次大会発表論文集, pp. 148–151.言語処理学会, 2004. [増補改訂 版: http://clsl.hi.h.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kkuroda/papers/jfn-nlp10-rev4.
pdf].
[95] 黒田航, 井佐原均. 意味フレーム分析は言語を知識構造に結びつける: 日本語の動 詞「襲う」の意味記述の場合. In KLS 25: Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of Kansai Linguistic Society.関西言語学会(KLS), to appear. [準備版: http://clsl.
hi.h.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kkuroda/papers/sfal-osou-kls29-rev1.pdf].
[96] 黒田航,中本敬子, 野澤元. 状況理解の単位としての意味フレームの実在性に関する 研究. 日本認知科学会 第21回大会 発表論文集, pp. 190–191, 2004.
[97] 黒田航, 野澤元,中本敬子. 比喩写像における“領域”は単なる副作用である: 「yが xに襲われた」に関する比喩写像の成立条件. 日本語文法学会 第5回大会発表論文 集, pp. 205–214.日本語文法学会 (SJG), 2004. [増補改訂版: http://clsl.hi.h.
kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kkuroda/papers/domains-are-derivative.pdf].
[98] 黒田航,中本敬子,金丸敏幸,龍岡昌弘,野澤元. 「意味フレーム」に基づく概念分析 の射程: Berkeley FrameNet and Beyond. 日本認知言語学会第5回大会Conference Handbook, pp. 133–153.日本認知言語学会(JCLA), 2004.
[99] 黒田航, 中本敬子,金丸敏幸,龍岡昌弘, 野澤元. フレーム指向概念分析(FOCAL)の 目標と手法: Berkeley FrameNetを超えて. [http://clsl.hi.h.kyoto-u.ac.jp/
~kkuroda/papers/focal-manifesto.pdf], 2004.
[100] 三島次郎. トマトはなぜ赤い:生態学入門. 東洋館出版社, 1992.
[101] 情報通信研究機構. EDR電子化辞書仕様説明書, 2003. [http://www2.crl.go.jp/
kk/e416/EDR/J_index.html].
[102] 佐々木正人. アフォーダンス:新しい認知の理論. 岩波科学ライブラリー, 1994.
[103] 山梨正明. 認知言語学原理. くろしお出版, 2000.
[104] 河原大輔, 黒橋禎夫. 用言と直前の格要素の組を単位とする格フレームの自動獲得.
自然言語処理, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 1–16, 2002.
[105] 金丸敏幸. 副詞的表現が表す話者の態度について: 認知言語学の観点から. 日本語用
論学会第7回(2004年度)大会予稿集, pp. 25–28.日本語用論学会, 2004.
[106] 長谷部陽一郎. コンピュータ・アナロジー再考:認知言語学とオブジェクト指向の観
点から. 日本認知言語学会第5回記念大会Conference Handbook, pp. 53–56.日本認