Refine
Year of publication
- 2011 (17) (remove)
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (6)
- Part of a Book (5)
- Article (4)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Other (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (17)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (17)
Keywords
- Computerlinguistik (17) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (8)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (3)
- Postprint (2)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
- Erstveröffentlichung (1)
- Preprint (1)
Reviewstate
Publisher
Linguistics is facing the challenge of many other sciences as it continues to grow into increasingly complex subfields, each with its own separate or overarching branches. While linguists are certainly aware of the overall structure of the research field, they cannot follow all developments other than those of their subfields. It is thus important to help specialists but also newcomers alike to bushwhack through evolved or unknown territory of linguistic data. A considerable amount of research data in linguistics is described with metadata. While studies described and published in archived journals and conference proceedings receive a quite homogeneous set of metadata tags — e.g., author, title, publisher —, this does not hold for the empirical data and analyses that underlie such studies. Moreover, lexicons, grammars, experimental data, and other types of resources come in different forms; and to make things worse, their description in terms of metadata is also not uniform, if existing at all. These problems are well-known and there are now a number of international initiatives — e.g., CLARIN, FlareNet, MetaNet, DARIAH — to build infrastructures for managing linguistic resources. The NaLiDa project, funded by the German Research Foundation, aims at facilitating the management and access to linguistic resources originating from German research institutions. In cooperation with the German SFB 833 research center, we are developing a combination of faceted and full-text search to give integrated access through heterogeneous metadata sets. Our approach is supported by a central registry for metadata field descriptors, and a component repository for structured groups of data categories as larger building blocks.
In this paper, we investigate the role of predicates in opinion holder extraction. We will examine the shape of these predicates, investigate what relationship they bear towards opinion holders, determine what resources are potentially useful for acquiring them, and point out limitations of an opinion holder extraction system based on these predicates. For this study, we will carry out an evaluation on a corpus annotated with opinion holders. Our insights are, in particular, important for situations in which no labelled training data are available and only rule-based methods can be applied.
In order to automatically extract opinion holders, we propose to harness the contexts of prototypical opinion holders, i.e. common nouns, such as experts or analysts, that describe particular groups of people whose profession or occupation is to form and express opinions towards specific items. We assess their effectiveness in supervised learning where these contexts are regarded as labelled training data and in rule-based classification which uses predicates that frequently co-occur with mentions of the prototypical opinion holders. Finally, we also examine in how far knowledge gained from these contexts can compensate the lack of large amounts of labeled training data in supervised learning by considering various amounts of actually labeled training sets.
Discourse parsing of complex text types such as scientific research articles requires the analysis of an input document on linguistic and structural levels that go beyond traditionally employed lexical discourse markers. This chapter describes a text-technological approach to discourse parsing. Discourse parsing with the aim of providing a discourse structure is seen as the addition of a new annotation layer for input documents marked up on several linguistic annotation levels. The discourse parser generates discourse structures according to the Rhetorical Structure Theory. An overview of the knowledge sources and components for parsing scientific joumal articles is given. The parser’s core consists of cascaded applications of the GAP, a Generic Annotation Parser. Details of the chart parsing algorithm are provided, as well as a short evaluation in terms of comparisons with reference annotations from our corpus and with recently developed Systems with a similar task.
In this contribution, we discuss and compare alternative options of modelling the entities and relations of wordnet-like resources in the Web Ontology Language OWL. Based on different modelling options, we developed three models of representing wordnets in OWL, i.e. the instance model, the dass model, and the metaclass model. These OWL models mainly differ with respect to the ontological Status of lexical units (word senses) and the synsets. While in the instance model lexical units and synsets are represented as individuals, in the dass model they are represented as classes; both model types can be encoded in the dialect OWL DL. As a third alternative, we developed a metaclass model in OWL FULL, in which lexical units and synsets are defined as metaclasses, the individuals of which are classes themselves. We apply the three OWL models to each of three wordnet-style resources: (1) a subset of the German wordnet GermaNet, (2) the wordnet-style domain ontology TermNet, and (3) GermaTermNet, in which TermNet technical terms and GermaNet synsets are connected by means of a set of “plug-in” relations. We report on the results of several experiments in which we evaluated the performance of querying and processing these different models: (1) A comparison of all three OWL models (dass, instance, and metaclass model) of TermNet in the context of automatic text-to-hypertext conversion, (2) an investigation of the potential of the GermaTermNet resource by the example of a wordnet-based semantic relatedness calculation.
Schreiben und Redigieren stellen hohe kognitive Anforderungen an Autoren. Selbst publizierte Texte sind nie ganz fehlerfrei. Für viele Fehler kann man die Entstehung rekonstruieren: Funktionen in Textbearbeitungsprogrammen sind zeichenbasiert und berücksichtigen nicht die Elemente und Strukturen der jeweiligen verwendeten Sprache. Autoren müssen ihre Redigierabsichten in eine lange, komplexe Folge solcher zeichenbasierten Funktionen übersetzen.
Editoren für Programmierer hingegen bieten seit langem sprachspezifische Editierfunktionen, die auf den Elementen und Strukturen der verwendeten Programmiersprache operieren. Diese Funktionen tragen dazu bei, das Ändern von Programmcode zu erleichtern und Fehler zu vermeiden.
In dieser Arbeit übertragen wir das Prinzip solcher sprachspezifischen Funktionen in Programmiereditoren auf Funktionen für die Bearbeitung natürlichsprachlicher Texte. Wir entwickeln das Konzept der linguistisch unterstützten Redigierfunktionen unter Berücksichtigung aktueller Erkenntnisse der Schreibforschung. Wir definieren Informations-, Bewegungs- und Modifikationsfunktionen, die auf Elementen und Strukturen natürlicher Sprache operieren. Solche Funktionen sollen Autoren entlasten und helfen, typische Fehler zu vermeiden.
Sprachspezifische Funktionen beruhen auf Methoden zur Erkennung und Bestimmung relevanter Elemente und Strukturen. Wir verwenden dazu computerlinguistische Ressourcen zur morphologischen Analyse und Generierung und zur automatischen Wortartenbestimmung. Die Evaluation verfügbarer Ressourcen ergibt, dass die Situation für die Behandlung des Deutschen nicht so vielversprechend ist, wie ursprünglich angenommen und üblicherweise in der Literatur dargestellt.
Unsere prototypische Implementierung linguistisch unterstützter Redigierfunktionen für die Bearbeitung deutscher Texte zeigt die Möglichkeiten und Grenzen des Konzepts unter Berücksichtigung der Leistungsfähigkeit heute verfügbarer computerlinguistischer Ressourcen und der Eigenschaften des Deutschen.
Wenn man verschiedenartige Forschungsdaten über Metadaten inhaltlich beschreiben möchte, sind bibliografische Angaben allein nicht ausreichend. Vielmehr benötigt man zusätzliche Beschreibungsmittel, die der Natur und Komplexität gegebener Forschungsressourcen Rechnung tragen. Verschiedene Arten von Forschungsdaten bedürfen verschiedener Metadatenprofile, die über gemeinsame Komponenten definiert werden. Solche Forschungsdaten können gesammelt (z.B. über OAI-PMH-Harvesting) und mittels Facetten-basierter Suche über eine einheitliche Schnittstelle exploriert werden. Der beschriebene Anwendungskontext kann über sprachwissenschaftliche Daten hinaus verallgemeinert werden.