Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (35)
- Part of a Book (8)
- Article (1)
Language
- English (44)
Has Fulltext
- yes (44)
Keywords
- Computerlinguistik (19)
- Natürliche Sprache (15)
- Information Extraction (11)
- Sentimentanalyse (11)
- Text Mining (11)
- Automatische Sprachanalyse (10)
- Maschinelles Lernen (10)
- Beleidigung (8)
- Deutsch (7)
- Korpus <Linguistik> (7)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (44) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (38)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (3)
Publisher
- Association for Computational Linguistics (13)
- The Association for Computational Linguistics (6)
- German Society for Computational Linguistics & Language Technology und Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg (3)
- European Language Resources Association (2)
- European language resources association (ELRA) (2)
- Incoma Ltd. (2)
- Northern European Association for Language Technology (2)
- AAAI Press (1)
- Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing (1)
- Austrian Academy of Sciences (1)
We address the task of distinguishing implicitly abusive sentences on identity groups (“Muslims contaminate our planet”) from other group-related negative polar sentences (“Muslims despise terrorism”). Implicitly abusive language are utterances not conveyed by abusive words (e.g. “bimbo” or “scum”). So far, the detection of such utterances could not be properly addressed since existing datasets displaying a high degree of implicit abuse are fairly biased. Following the recently-proposed strategy to solve implicit abuse by separately addressing its different subtypes, we present a new focused and less biased dataset that consists of the subtype of atomic negative sentences about identity groups. For that task, we model components that each address one facet of such implicit abuse, i.e. depiction as perpetrators, aspectual classification and non-conformist views. The approach generalizes across different identity groups and languages.
We propose to use abusive emojis, such as the “middle finger” or “face vomiting”, as a proxy for learning a lexicon of abusive words. Since it represents extralinguistic information, a single emoji can co-occur with different forms of explicitly abusive utterances. We show that our approach generates a lexicon that offers the same performance in cross-domain classification of abusive microposts as the most advanced lexicon induction method. Such an approach, in contrast, is dependent on manually annotated seed words and expensive lexical resources for bootstrapping (e.g. WordNet). We demonstrate that the same emojis can also be effectively used in languages other than English. Finally, we also show that emojis can be exploited for classifying mentions of ambiguous words, such as “fuck” and “bitch”, into generally abusive and just profane usages.
Implicitly abusive language – What does it actually look like and why are we not getting there?
(2021)
Abusive language detection is an emerging field in natural language processing which has received a large amount of attention recently. Still the success of automatic detection is limited. Particularly, the detection of implicitly abusive language, i.e. abusive language that is not conveyed by abusive words (e.g. dumbass or scum), is not working well. In this position paper, we explain why existing datasets make learning implicit abuse difficult and what needs to be changed in the design of such datasets. Arguing for a divide-and-conquer strategy, we present a list of subtypes of implicitly abusive language and formulate research tasks and questions for future research.
We examine the task of detecting implicitly abusive comparisons (e.g. “Your hair looks like you have been electrocuted”). Implicitly abusive comparisons are abusive comparisons in which abusive words (e.g. “dumbass” or “scum”) are absent. We detail the process of creating a novel dataset for this task via crowdsourcing that includes several measures to obtain a sufficiently representative and unbiased set of comparisons. We also present classification experiments that include a range of linguistic features that help us better understand the mechanisms underlying abusive comparisons.
Alleviating pain is good and abandoning hope is bad. We instinctively understand how words like alleviate and abandon affect the polarity of a phrase, inverting or weakening it. When these words are content words, such as verbs, nouns, and adjectives, we refer to them as polarity shifters. Shifters are a frequent occurrence in human language and an important part of successfully modeling negation in sentiment analysis; yet research on negation modeling has focused almost exclusively on a small handful of closed-class negation words, such as not, no, and without. A major reason for this is that shifters are far more lexically diverse than negation words, but no resources exist to help identify them. We seek to remedy this lack of shifter resources by introducing a large lexicon of polarity shifters that covers English verbs, nouns, and adjectives. Creating the lexicon entirely by hand would be prohibitively expensive. Instead, we develop a bootstrapping approach that combines automatic classification with human verification to ensure the high quality of our lexicon while reducing annotation costs by over 70%. Our approach leverages a number of linguistic insights; while some features are based on textual patterns, others use semantic resources or syntactic relatedness. The created lexicon is evaluated both on a polarity shifter gold standard and on a polarity classification task.
We discuss the impact of data bias on abusive language detection. We show that classification scores on popular datasets reported in previous work are much lower under realistic settings in which this bias is reduced. Such biases are most notably observed on datasets that are created by focused sampling instead of random sampling. Datasets with a higher proportion of implicit abuse are more affected than datasets with a lower proportion.
We examine the new task of detecting derogatory compounds (e.g. curry muncher). Derogatory compounds are much more difficult to detect than derogatory unigrams (e.g. idiot) since they are more sparsely represented in lexical resources previously found effective for this task (e.g. Wiktionary). We propose an unsupervised classification approach that incorporates linguistic properties of compounds. It mostly depends on a simple distributional representation. We compare our approach against previously established methods proposed for extracting derogatory unigrams.
Naming and titling have been discussed in sociolinguistics as markers of status or solidarity. However, these functions have not been studied on a larger scale or for social media data. We collect a corpus of tweets mentioning presidents of six G20 countries by various naming forms. We show that naming variation relates to stance towards the president in a way that is suggestive of a framing effect mediated by respectfulness. This confirms sociolinguistic theory of naming and titling as markers of status.
A Supervised learning approach for the extraction of opinion sources and targets from German text
(2019)
We present the first systematic supervised learning approach for the extraction of opinion sources and targets on German language data. A wide choice of different features is presented, particularly syntactic features and generalization features. We point out specific differences between opinion sources and targets. Moreover, we explain why implicit sources can be extracted even with fairly generic features. In order to ensure comparability our classifier is trained and tested on the dataset of the STEPS shared task.
We present the second edition of the GermEval Shared Task on the Identification of Offensive Language. This shared task deals with the classification of German tweets from Twitter. Two subtasks were continued from the first edition, namely a coarse-grained binary classification task and a fine-grained multi-class classification task. As a novel subtask, we introduce the classification of offensive tweets as explicit or implicit.
The shared task had 13 participating groups submitting 28 runs for the coarse-grained
task, another 28 runs for the fine-grained task, and 17 runs for the implicit-explicit
task.
We evaluate the results of the systems submitted to the shared task. The shared task homepage can be found at https://projects.fzai.h-da.de/iggsa/
We present a descriptive analysis on the two datasets from the shared task on Source, Subjective Expression and Target Extraction from Political Speeches (STEPS), the only existing German dataset for opinion role extraction of its size. Our analysis discusses the individual properties of the three components, subjective expressions, sources and targets and their relations towards each other. Our observations should help practitioners and researchers when building a system to extract opinion roles from German data.
We study German affixoids, a type of morpheme in between affixes and free stems. Several properties have been associated with them – increased productivity; a bleached semantics, which is often evaluative and/or intensifying and thus of relevance to sentiment analysis; and the existence of a free morpheme counterpart – but not been validated empirically. In experiments on a new data set that we make available, we put these key assumptions from the morphological literature to the test and show that despite the fact that affixoids generate many low-frequency formations, we can classify these as affixoid or non-affixoid instances with a best F1-score of 74%.
In this paper we use methods for creating a large lexicon of verbal polarity shifters and apply them to German. Polarity shifters are content words that can move the polarity of a phrase towards its opposite, such as the verb “abandon” in “abandon all hope”. This is similar to how negation words like “not” can influence polarity. Both shifters and negation are required for high precision sentiment analysis. Lists of negation words are available for many languages, but the only language for which a sizable lexicon of verbal polarity shifters exists is English. This lexicon was created by bootstrapping a sample of annotated verbs with a supervised classifier that uses a set of data- and resource-driven features. We reproduce and adapt this approach to create a German lexicon of verbal polarity shifters. Thereby, we confirm that the approach works for multiple languages. We further improve classification by leveraging cross-lingual information from the English shifter lexicon. Using this improved approach, we bootstrap a large number of German verbal polarity shifters, reducing the annotation effort drastically. The resulting German lexicon of verbal polarity shifters is made publicly available.
We address the detection of abusive words. The task is to identify such words among a set of negative polar expressions. We propose novel features employing information from both corpora and lexical resources. These features are calibrated on a small manually annotated base lexicon which we use to produce a large lexicon. We show that the word-level information we learn cannot be equally derived from a large dataset of annotated microposts. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our (domain-independent) lexicon in the crossdomain detection of abusive microposts.
Negation is an important contextual phenomenon that needs to be addressed in sentiment analysis. Next to common negation function words, such as not or none, there is also a considerably large class of negation content words, also referred to as shifters, such as the verbs diminish, reduce or reverse. However, many of these shifters are ambiguous. For instance, spoil as in spoil your chance reverses the polarity of the positive polar expression chance while in spoil your loved ones, no negation takes place. We present a supervised learning approach to disambiguating verbal shifters. Our approach takes into consideration various features, particularly generalization features.
We present an approach for modeling German negation in open-domain fine grained sentiment analysis. Unlike most previous work in sentiment analysis, we assume that negation can be conveyed by many lexical units (and not only common negation words) and that different negation words have different scopes. Our approach is examined on a new dataset comprising sentences with mentions of polar expressions and various negation words. We identify different types of negation words that have the same scopes. We show that already negation modeling based on these types largely outperforms traditional negation models which assume the same scope for all negation words and which employ a window-based scope detection rather than a scope detection based on syntactic information.
The sentiment polarity of a phrase does not only depend on the polarities of its words, but also on how these are affected by their context. Negation words (e.g. not, no, never) can change the polarity of a phrase. Similarly, verbs and other content words can also act as polarity shifters (e.g. fail, deny, alleviate). While individually more sparse, they are far more numerous. Among verbs alone, there are more than 1200 shifters. However, sentiment analysis systems barely consider polarity shifters other than negation words. A major reason for this is the scarcity of lexicons and corpora that provide information on them. We introduce a lexicon of verbal polarity shifters that covers the entirety of verbs found in WordNet. We provide a fine-grained annotation of individual word senses, as well as information for each verbal shifter on the syntactic scopes that it can affect.
We present the pilot edition of the GermEval Shared Task on the Identification of Offensive Language. This shared task deals with the classification of German tweets from Twitter. It comprises two tasks, a coarse-grained binary classification task and a fine-grained multi-class classification task. The shared task had 20 participants submitting 51 runs for the coarse-grained task and 25 runs for the fine-grained task. Since this is a pilot task, we describe the process of extracting the raw-data for the data collection and the annotation schema. We evaluate the results of the systems submitted to the shared task. The shared task homepage can be found at https://projects.cai. fbi.h-da.de/iggsa/
We present a major step towards the creation of the first high-coverage lexicon of polarity shifters. In this work, we bootstrap a lexicon of verbs by exploiting various linguistic features. Polarity shifters, such as ‘abandon’, are similar to negations (e.g. ‘not’) in that they move the polarity of a phrase towards its inverse, as in ‘abandon all hope’. While there exist lists of negation words, creating comprehensive lists of polarity shifters is far more challenging due to their sheer number. On a sample of manually annotated verbs we examine a variety of linguistic features for this task. Then we build a supervised classifier to increase coverage. We show that this approach drastically reduces the annotation effort while ensuring a high-precision lexicon. We also show that our acquired knowledge of verbal polarity shifters improves phrase-level sentiment analysis.
Unknown words are a challenge for any NLP task, including sentiment analysis. Here, we evaluate the extent to which sentiment polarity of complex words can be predicted based on their morphological make-up. We do this on German as it has very productive processes of derivation and compounding and many German hapax words, which are likely to bear sentiment, are morphologically complex. We present results of supervised classification experiments on new datasets with morphological parses and polarity annotations.