Korpuslinguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (28)
- Part of a Book (21)
- Article (5)
- Book (1)
- Working Paper (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (56)
Keywords
- Annotation (56) (remove)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (38)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (15)
- Postprint (1)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (26)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (22)
- Peer-review (2)
- Review-Status-unbekannt (1)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (10)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (6)
- Association for Computational Linguistics (4)
- European Language Resources Association (4)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (3)
- German Society for Computational Linguistics & Language Technology (GSCL) (2)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (2)
- Linköping University Electronic Press (2)
- Narr (2)
- University of Antwerp (2)
This paper deals with the problem of how to interrelate theory-specific treebanks and how to transform one treebank format to another. Currently, two approaches to achieve these goals can be differentiated. The first creates a mapping algorithm between treebank formats. Categories of a source format are transformed into a target format via a given set of general or language-specific mapping rules. The second relates treebanks via a transformation to a general model of linguistic categories, for example based on the EAGLES recommendations for syntactic annotations of corpora, or relying on the HPSG framework. This paper proposes a new methodology as a solution for these desiderata.
We present the annotation of information structure in the MULI project. To learn more about the information structuring means in prosody, syntax and discourse, theory- independent features were defined for each level. We describe the features and illustrate them on an example sentence. To investigate the interplay of features, the representation has to allow for inspecting all three layers at the same time. This is realised by a stand-off XML mark-up with the word as the basic unit. The theory-neutral XML stand-off annotation allows integrating this resource with other linguistic resources such as the Tiger Treebank for German or the Penn treebank for English.
The aim of this paper is to highlight the actual need for corpora that have been annotated based on acoustic information. The acoustic information should be coded in features or properties and is needed to inform further processing systems, i.e. to present a basis for a speech recognition system using linguistic information. Feature annotation of existing corpora in combination with segmental annotation can provide a powerful training material for speech recognition systems, but will as well challenge the further processing of features to segments and syllables. We present here the theoretical preliminaries for our multilingual feature extraction system, that we are currently working on.
This paper describes a corpus of Japanese task-oriented dialogues, i.e. its data, annotations, analysis methodology and preliminary results for the modeling of co-referential phenomena. Current corpus based approaches to co-reference concentrate on textual data from English or other European languages. Hence, the emerging language-general models of co-reference miss input from dialogue data of non-European languages. We aim to fill this gap and contribute to a model of co-reference on various language-specific and language-general levels.
Discourse segmentation is the division of a text into minimal discourse segments, which form the leaves in the trees that are used to represent discourse structures. A definition of elementary discourse segments in German is provided by adapting widely used segmentation principles for English minimal units, while considering punctuation, morphology, sytax, and aspects of the logical document structure of a complex text type, namely scientific articles. The algorithm and implementation of a discourse segmenter based on these principles is presented, as well an evaluation of test runs.
Es gibt viele linguistische Forschungsfragen, für deren Beantwortung man Korpusdaten qualitativ und quantitativ auswerten möchte. Beide Auswertungsmethoden können sich auf den Korpustext, aber auch auf Annotationsebenen beziehen. Jede Art von Annotation, also Kategorisierung, stellt einen kontrollierten und notwendigen Informationsverlust dar. Das bedeutet, dass jede Art von Kategorisierung auch eine Interpretation der Daten ist. In den meisten großen Korpora wird zu jeder vorgesehenen Annotationsebene, wie z. B. Wortart-Ebene oder Lemma-Ebene, genau eine Interpretation angeboten. In den letzten Jahren haben sich neben den großen, ,,flach“ annotierten Korpora Korpusmodelle herausgebildet, mit denen man konfligierende Informationen kodieren kann, die so genannten Mehrebenen-Modelle (multilevel standoff corpora), in denen alle Annotationsebenen unabhängig vom Text gespeichert werden und nur auf bestimmte Textanker verweisen. Ich argumentiere anhand der Fehlerannotation in einem Lernerkorpus dafür, dass zumindest Korpora, in denen es stark variierende Annotationsbedürfnisse und umstrittene Analysen geben kann, davon profitieren, in Mehrebenen-Modellen kodiert zu werden.
This paper is a contribution to the ongoing discussion on treebank annotation schemes and their impact on PCFG parsing results. We provide a thorough comparison of two German treebanks: the TIGER treebank and the TüBa-D/Z. We use simple statistics on sentence length and vocabulary size, and more refined methods such as perplexity and its correlation with PCFG parsing results, as well as a Principal Components Analysis. Finally we present a qualitative evaluation of a set of 100 sentences from the TüBa- D/Z, manually annotated in the TIGER as well as in the TüBa-D/Z annotation scheme, and show that even the existence of a parallel subcorpus does not support a straightforward and easy comparison of both annotation schemes.
Recent studies focussed on the question whether less-configurational languages like German are harder to parse than English, or whether the lower parsing scores are an artefact of treebank encoding schemes and data structures, as claimed by Kübler et al. (2006). This claim is based on the assumption that PARSEVAL metrics fully reflect parse quality across treebank encoding schemes. In this paper we present new experiments to test this claim. We use the PARSEVAL metric, the Leaf-Ancestor metric as well as a dependency-based evaluation, and present novel approaches measuring the effect of controlled error insertion on treebank trees and parser output. We also provide extensive past-parsing crosstreebank conversion. The results of the experiments show that, contrary to Kübler et al. (2006), the question whether or not German is harder to parse than English remains undecided.