Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (13)
- Part of a Book (8)
- Article (1)
Language
- English (22)
Has Fulltext
- yes (22)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (22) (remove)
Keywords
- Beleidigung (8)
- Automatische Sprachanalyse (6)
- Deutsch (6)
- Semantische Analyse (6)
- Polarität (5)
- Social Media (5)
- Automatische Sprachverarbeitung (4)
- Beschimpfung (4)
- Computerlinguistik (4)
- Natürliche Sprache (4)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (22)
Publisher
- The Association for Computational Linguistics (5)
- Association for Computational Linguistics (4)
- 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)
- Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing (1)
- Austrian Academy of Sciences (1)
- Cambridge University Press (1)
- Incoma Ltd. (1)
- Springer (1)
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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 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%.
Entity framing is the selection of aspects of an entity to promote a particular viewpoint towards that entity. We investigate entity framing of political figures through the use of names and titles in German online discourse, enhancing current research in entity framing through titling and naming that concentrates on English only. We collect tweets that mention prominent German politicians and annotate them for stance. We find that the formality of naming in these tweets correlates positively with their stance. This confirms sociolinguistic observations that naming and titling can have a status-indicating function and suggests that this function is dominant in German tweets mentioning political figures. We also find that this status-indicating function is much weaker in tweets from users that are politically left-leaning than in tweets by right leaning users. This is in line with observations from moral psychology that left-leaning and right-leaning users assign different importance to maintaining social hierarchies.
The sentiment polarity of an expression (whether it is perceived as positive, negative or neutral) can be influenced by a number of phenomena, foremost among them negation. Apart from closed-class negation words like no, not or without, negation can also be caused by so-called polarity shifters. These are content words, such as verbs, nouns or adjectives, that shift polarities in their opposite direction, e. g. abandoned in “abandoned hope” or alleviate in “alleviate pain”. Many polarity shifters can affect both positive and negative polar expressions, shifting them towards the opposing polarity. However, other shifters are restricted to a single shifting direction. Recoup shifts negative to positive in “recoup your losses”, but does not affect the positive polarity of fortune in “recoup a fortune”. Existing polarity shifter lexica only specify whether a word can, in general, cause shifting, but they do not specify when this is limited to one shifting direction. To address this issue we introduce a supervised classifier that determines the shifting direction of shifters. This classifier uses both resource-driven features, such as WordNet relations, and data-driven features like in-context polarity conflicts. Using this classifier we enhance the largest available polarity shifter lexicon.