Korpuslinguistik
Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (10)
- Book (1)
- Part of a Book (1)
Language
- English (12)
Has Fulltext
- yes (12)
Keywords
- Corpus technology (12) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (12)
Publisher
Contents:
1. Andreas Dittrich: Intra-connecting a small exemplary literary corpus with semantic web technologies for exploratory literary studies, S. 1
2. John Kirk, Anna Čermáková: From ICE to ICC: The new International Comparable Corpus, S. 7
3. Dawn Knight, Tess Fitzpatrick, Steve Morris, Jeremy Evas, Paul Rayson, Irena Spasic, Mark Stonelake, Enlli Môn Thomas, Steven Neale, Jennifer Needs, Scott Piao, Mair Rees, Gareth Watkins, Laurence Anthony, Thomas Michael Cobb, Margaret Deuchar, Kevin Donnelly, Michael McCarthy, Kevin Scannell: Creating CorCenCC (Corpws Cenedlaethol Cymraeg Cyfoes – The National Corpus of Contemporary Welsh), S. 13
4. Marc Kupietz, Andreas Witt, Piotr Bański, Dan Tufiş, Dan Cristea, Tamás Váradi: EuReCo - Joining Forces for a European Reference Corpus as a sustainable base for cross-linguistic research, S. 15
5. Harald Lüngen, Marc Kupietz: CMC Corpora in DeReKo, S. 20
6. David McClure, Mark Algee-Hewitt, Douris Steele, Erik Fredner, Hannah Walser: Organizing corpora at the Stanford Literary Lab, S. 25
7. Radoslav Rábara, Pavel Rychlý ,Ondřej Herman: Accelerating corpus search using multiple cores, S. 30
8. John Vidler, Stephen Wattam: Keeping Properties with the Data: CL-MetaHeaders – An Open Specification, S. 35
9. Vladimir Benko: Are Web Corpora Inferior? The Case of Czech and Slovak, S. 43
10. Edyta Jurkiewicz-Rohrbacher, Zrinka Kolaković, Björn Hansen: Web Corpora – the best possible solution for tracking phenomena in underresourced languages: clitics in Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian, S. 49
11. Vít Suchomel: Removing Spam from Web Corpora Through Supervised Learning Using FastText, S. 56
Unlike traditional text corpora collected from trustworthy sources, the content of web based corpora has to be filtered. This study briefly discusses the impact of web spam on corpus usability and emphasizes the importance of removing computer generated text from web corpora.
The paper also presents a keyword comparison of an unfiltered corpus with the same collection of texts cleaned by a supervised classifier trained using FastText. The classifier was able to recognize 71% of web spam documents similar to the training set but lacked both precision and recall when applied to short texts from another data set.
Corpus researchers, along with many other disciplines in science are being put under continual pressure to show accountability and reproducibility in their work. This is unsurprisingly difficult when the researcher is faced with a wide array of methods and tools through which to do their work; simply tracking the operations done can be problematic, especially when toolchains are often configured by the developers, but left largely as a black box to the user. Here we present a scheme for encoding this ‘meta data’ inside the corpus files themselves in a structured data format, along with a proof-of-concept tool to record the operations performed on a file.
The Manatee corpus management system on which the Sketch Engine is built is efficient, but unable to harness the power of today’s multiprocessor machines. We describe a new, compatible implementation of Manatee which we develop in the Go language and report on the performance gains that we obtained.
This article describes a series of ongoing efforts at the Stanford Literary Lab to manage a large collection of literary corpora (~40 billion words). This work is marked by a tension between two competing requirements – the corpora need to be merged together into higher-order collections that can be analyzed as units; but, at the same time, it’s also necessary to preserve granular access to the original metadata and relational organization of each individual corpus. We describe a set of data management practices that try to accommodate both of these requirements – Apache Spark is used to index data as Parquet tables on an HPC cluster at Stanford. Crucially, the approach distinguishes between what we call “canonical” and “combined” corpora, a variation on the well-established notion of a “virtual corpus” (Kupietz et al., 2014; Jakubíek et al., 2014; van Uytvanck, 2010).
With an increasing amount of text data available it is possible to automatically extract a variety of information about language. One way to obtain knowledge about subtle relations and analogies between words is to observe words which are used in the same context. Recently, Mikolov et al. proposed a method to efficiently compute Euclidean word representations which seem to capture subtle relations and analogies between words in the English language. We demonstrate that this method also captures analogies in the German language. Furthermore, we show that we can transfer information extracted from large non-annotated corpora into small annotated corpora, which are then, in turn, used for training NLP systems.
The IMS Open Corpus Workbench (CWB) software currently uses a simple tabular data model with proven limitations. We outline and justify the need for a new data model to underlie the next major version of CWB. This data model, dubbed Ziggurat, defines a series of types of data layer to represent different structures and relations within an annotated corpus; each such layer may contain variables of different types. Ziggurat will allow us to gradually extend and enhance CWB’s existing CQP-syntax for corpus queries, and also make possible more radical departures relative not only to the current version of CWB but also to other contemporary corpus-analysis software.
The availability of large multi-parallel corpora offers an enormous wealth of material to contrastive corpus linguists, translators and language learners, if we can exploit the data properly. Necessary preparation steps include sentence and word alignment across multiple languages. Additionally, linguistic annotation such as partof- speech tagging, lemmatisation, chunking, and dependency parsing facilitate precise querying of linguistic properties and can be used to extend word alignment to sub-sentential groups. Such highly interconnected data is stored in a relational database to allow for efficient retrieval and linguistic data mining, which may include the statistics-based selection of good example sentences. The varying information needs of contrastive linguists require a flexible linguistic query language for ad hoc searches. Such queries in the format of generalised treebank query languages will be automatically translated into SQL queries.
In this paper, I present the COW14 tool chain, which comprises a web corpus creation tool called texrex, wrappers for existing linguistic annotation tools as well as an online query software called Colibri2. By detailed descriptions of the implementation and systematic evaluations of the performance of the software on different types of systems, I show that the COW14 architecture is capable of handling the creation of corpora of up to at least 100 billion tokens. I also introduce our running demo system which currently serves corpora of up to roughly 20 billion tokens in Dutch, English, French, German, Spanish, and Swedish