Korpuslinguistik
Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (13)
- Article (8)
- Part of a Book (3)
- Book (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (27)
Keywords
- corpus linguistics (27) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (22)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (4)
- Postprint (1)
Reviewstate
Publisher
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (11)
- Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Darmstadt (2)
- ACM (1)
- Erich Schmidt (1)
- European Language Resources Association (1)
- IDS-Verlag; Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (1)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (1)
- Lexical Computing CZ s.r.o. (1)
- Narr Francke Attempto (1)
- Sprachenzentrum der Technischen Universität Darmstadt ; Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Darmstadt (1)
A key difference between traditional humanities research and the emerging field of digital humanities is that the latter aims to complement qualitative methods with quantitative data. In linguistics, this means the use of large corpora of text, which are usually annotated automatically using natural language processing tools. However, these tools do not exist for historical texts, so scholars have to work with unannotated data. We have developed a system for systematic iterative exploration and annotation of historical text corpora, which relies on an XML database (BaseX) and in particular on the Full Text and Update facilities of XQuery.
We discovered several recurring errors in the current version of the Europarl Corpus originating both from the web site of the European Parliament and the corpus compilation based thereon. The most frequent error was incompletely extracted metadata leaving non-textual fragments within the textual parts of the corpus files. This is, on average, the case for every second speaker change. We not only cleaned the Europarl Corpus by correcting several kinds of errors, but also aligned the speakers’ contributions of all available languages and compiled every- thing into a new XML-structured corpus. This facilitates a more sophisticated selection of data, e.g. querying the corpus for speeches by speakers of a particular political group or in particular language combinations.
Dieser Beitrag stellt das Forschungs- und Lehrkorpus Gesprochenes Deutsch (FOLK) und die Datenbank für Gesprochenes Deutsch (DGD) als Instrumente gesprächsanalytischer Arbeit vor. Nach einer allgemeinen Einführung in FOLK und DGD im zweiten Abschnitt werden im dritten Abschnitt die methodischen Beziehungen zwischen Korpuslinguistik und Gesprächsforschung und die Herausforde-rungen, die sich bei der Begegnung dieser beiden Herangehensweisen an authenti-sches Sprachmaterial stellen, kurz skizziert. Der vierte Abschnitt illustriert dann ausgehend vom Beispiel der Formel ich sag mal, wie eine korpus- und datenbankgesteuerte Analyse zur Untersuchung von Gesprächsphänomenen beitragen kann.
Common Crawl is a considerably large, heterogeneous multilingual corpus comprised of crawled documents from the internet, surpassing 20TB of data and distributed as a set of more than 50 thousand plain text files where each contains many documents written in a wide variety of languages. Even though each document has a metadata block associated to it, this data lacks any information about the language in which each document is written, making it extremely difficult to use Common Crawl for monolingual applications. We propose a general, highly parallel, multithreaded pipeline to clean and classify Common Crawl by language; we specifically design it so that it runs efficiently on medium to low resource infrastructures where I/O speeds are the main constraint. We develop the pipeline so that it can be easily reapplied to any kind of heterogeneous corpus and so that it can be parameterised to a wide range of infrastructures. We also distribute a 6.3TB version of Common Crawl, filtered, classified by language, shuffled at line level in order to avoid copyright issues, and ready to be used for NLP applications.
Text corpora come in many different shapes and sizes and carry heterogeneous annotations, depending on their purpose and design. The true benefit of corpora is rooted in their annotation and the method by which this data is encoded is an important factor in their interoperability. We have accumulated a large collection of multilingual and parallel corpora and encoded it in a unified format which is compatible with a broad range of NLP tools and corpus linguistic applications. In this paper, we present our corpus collection and describe a data model and the extensions to the popular CoNLL-U format that enable us to encode it.
As the Web ought to be considered as a series of sources rather than as a source in itself, a problem facing corpus construction resides in meta-information and categorization. In addition, we need focused data to shed light on particular subfields of the digital public sphere. Blogs are relevant to that end, especially if the resulting web texts can be extracted along with metadata and made available in coherent and clearly describable collections.
Nearly all of the very large corpora of English are “static”, which allows a wide range of one-time, pre-processed data, such as collocates. The challenge comes with large “dynamic” corpora, which are updated regularly, and where preprocessing is much more difficult. This paper provides an overview of the NOW corpus (News on the Web), which is currently 8.2 billion words in size, and which grows by about 170 million words each month. We discuss the architecture of NOW, and provide many examples that show how data from NOW can (uniquely) be extracted to look at a wide range of ongoing changes in English.
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.