Korpuslinguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (26)
- Conference Proceeding (14)
- Article (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (46)
Keywords
- Korpus <Linguistik> (42)
- Deutsch (19)
- Annotation (11)
- Computerunterstützte Kommunikation (10)
- Deutsches Referenzkorpus (DeReKo) (9)
- Chatten <Kommunikation> (5)
- Computerlinguistik (5)
- CMC (4)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache <Mannheim> (4)
- TEI (4)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (34)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (7)
- Postprint (2)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (19)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (18)
- Peer-review (3)
- Verlags-Lektorat (1)
Publisher
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (6)
- de Gruyter (6)
- German Society for Computational Linguistics & Language Technology (GSCL) (2)
- IDS-Verlag (2)
- University of Antwerp (2)
- Academic Publishing Division of the Faculty of Arts of the University of Ljubljana (1)
- Austrian Centre for Digital Humanities, Austrian Academy of Sciences (1)
- CLARIN (1)
- Campus (1)
- Cergy-Pontoise University, France (1)
Der Beitrag beschäftigt sich mit der Frage, wie und inwieweit korpusbasierte Ansätze zur Untersuchung und Bewertung von Sprachwandel beitragen können. Die Bewertung von Sprachwandel erscheint in dieser Hinsicht interessant, da sie erstens von größerem öffentlichen Interesse ist, zweitens nicht zu den Kernthemen der Sprachwissenschaft zählt und drittens sowohl die geisteswissenschaftlichen Aspekte der Sprachwissenschaft berührt als auch die empirischen, die eher für die so genannten harten Wissenschaften typisch sind. Letzteres trifft bei der Frage nach Sprachverfall (gutem vs. schlechtem Deutsch diachron) vermutlich unbestrittener zu als bei der Frage nach richtigem vs. falschem Deutsch, da zu ihrer Beantwortung offensichtlich einerseits empirische, messbare Kriterien herangezogen werden müssen, andererseits aber auch weitere Kriterien notwendig sind und es außerdem einer Entscheidung zur Einordnung und Gewichtung der verschiedenartigen Kriterien sowie einer Begründung dieser Entscheidung bedarf. Zur Annäherung an die Fragestellung werden zunächst gängige, leicht operationalisierbare Hypothesen zu Symptomen eines potenziellen Verfalls des Deutschen auf verschiedenen DeReKo-basierten Korpora überprüft und im Hinblick auf ihre Verallgemeinerbarkeit und Tragweite diskutiert. Im zweiten Teil werden weitere empirische Ansätze zur Untersuchung von Wandel, Variation und Dynamik skizziert, die zur Diskussion spezieller Aspekte von Sprachverfall beitragen könnten. Im Schlussteil werden die vorgestellten Ansätze in den Gesamtkontext einer sprachwissenschaftlichen Untersuchung von Sprachverfall gestellt und vor dem Hintergrund seines gesellschaftlichen Diskurses reflektiert.
This paper reports on the latest developments of the European Reference Corpus EuReCo and the German Reference Corpus in relation to three of the most important CMLC topics: interoperability, collaboration on corpus infrastructure building, and legal issues. Concerning interoperability, we present new ways to access DeReKo via KorAP on the API and on the plugin level. In addition we report about advancements in the EuReCo- and ICC-initiatives with the provision of comparable corpora, and about recent problems with license acquisitions and our solution approaches using an indemnification clause and model licenses that include scientific exploitation.
Valenz und Kookkurrenz
(2015)
This paper presents types and annotation layers of reply relations in computer- mediated communication (CMC). Reply relations hold between post units in CMC interactions and describe references from one given post to a previous post. We classify three types of reply relations in CMC interactions: first, technical replies, i. e. the possibility to reply directly to a previous post by clicking a ‘reply’ button; second, indentations, e. g. in wiki talk pages in which users insert their contributions in the existing talk page by indenting them and third, interpretative reply relations, i. e. the reply action is not realised formally but signalled by other structural or linguistics means such as address markers ‘@’, greetings, citations and/or Q-A structures. We take a look at existing practices in the description and representation of such relations in corpora and examples of chat, Wikipedia talk pages, Twitter and blogs. We then provide an annotation proposal that combines the different levels of description and representation of reply relations and which adheres to the schemas and practices for encoding CMC corpus documents within the TEI framework as defined by the TEI CMC SIG. It constitutes a prerequisite for correctly identifying higher levels of interactional relations such as dialogue acts or discussion trees.
When comparing different tools in the field of natural language processing (NLP), the quality of their results usually has first priority. This is also true for tokenization. In the context of large and diverse corpora for linguistic research purposes, however, other criteria also play a role – not least sufficient speed to process the data in an acceptable amount of time. In this paper we evaluate several state of the art tokenization tools for German – including our own – with regard to theses criteria. We conclude that while not all tools are applicable in this setting, no compromises regarding quality need to be made.
When comparing different tools in the field of natural language processing (NLP), the quality of their results usually has first priority. This is also true for tokenization. In the context of large and diverse corpora for linguistic research purposes, however, other criteria also play a role – not least sufficient speed to process the data in an acceptable amount of time. In this paper we evaluate several state-ofthe-art tokenization tools for German – including our own – with regard to theses criteria. We conclude that while not all tools are applicable in this setting, no compromises regarding quality need to be made.
The paper discusses from various angles the morphosyntactic annotation of DeReKo, the Archive of General Reference Corpora of Contemporary Written German at the Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS), Mannheim. The paper is divided into two parts. The first part covers the practical and technical aspects of this endeavor. We present results from a recent evaluation of tools for the annotation of German text resources that have been applied to DeReKo. These tools include commercial products, especially Xerox' Finite State Tools and the Machinese products developed by the Finnish company Connexor Oy, as well as software for which academic licenses are available free of charge for academic institutions, e.g. Helmut Schmid's Tree Tagger. The second part focuses on the linguistic interpretability of the corpus annotations and more general methodological considerations concerning scientifically sound empirical linguistic research. The main challenge here is that unlike the texts themselves, the morphosyntactic annotations of DeReKo do not have the status of observed data; instead they constitute a theory and implementation-dependent interpretation. In addition, because of the enormous size of DeReKo, a systematic manual verification of the automatic annotations is not feasible. In consequence, the expected degree of inaccuracy is very high, particularly wherever linguistically challenging phenomena, such as lexical or grammatical variation, are concerned. Given these facts, a researcher using the annotations blindly will run the risk of not actually studying the language but rather the annotation tool or the theory behind it. The paper gives an overview of possible pitfalls and ways to circumvent them and discusses the opportunities offered by using annotations in corpus-based and corpus-driven grammatical research against the background of a scientifically sound methodology.