Korpuslinguistik
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Part of a Book (200)
- Conference Proceeding (160)
- Article (105)
- Book (34)
- Part of Periodical (10)
- Working Paper (7)
- Other (4)
- Review (4)
- Doctoral Thesis (3)
- Preprint (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (533) (remove)
Keywords
- Korpus <Linguistik> (450)
- Deutsch (163)
- Gesprochene Sprache (63)
- Annotation (56)
- Forschungsdaten (36)
- Computerlinguistik (33)
- Korpuslinguistik (28)
- corpus linguistics (27)
- Deutsches Referenzkorpus (DeReKo) (25)
- Datenmanagement (22)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (319)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (141)
- Postprint (23)
- Erstveröffentlichung (1)
Reviewstate
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (236)
- Peer-Review (201)
- Peer-review (5)
- Qualifikationsarbeit (Dissertation, Habilitationsschrift) (5)
- Zweitveröffentlichung (3)
- Abschlussarbeit (Bachelor, Master, Diplom, Magister) (Bachelor, Master, Diss.) (2)
- Verlags-Lektorat (2)
- Peer-reviewed (1)
- Review-Status-unbekannt (1)
- Verlagslektorat (1)
Publisher
- de Gruyter (81)
- Institut für Deutsche Sprache (56)
- Narr (33)
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (25)
- European Language Resources Association (23)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (IDS) (17)
- Narr Francke Attempto (15)
- Leibniz-Institut für Deutsche Sprache (11)
- Linköping University Electronic Press (10)
- CLARIN (8)
The IFCASL corpus is a French-German bilingual phonetic learner corpus designed, recorded and annotated in a project on individualized feedback in computer-assisted spoken language learning. The motivation for setting up this corpus was that there is no phonetically annotated and segmented corpus for this language pair of comparable of size and coverage. In contrast to most learner corpora, the IFCASL corpus incorporate data for a language pair in both directions, i.e. in our case French learners of German, and German learners of French. In addition, the corpus is complemented by two sub-corpora of native speech by the same speakers. The corpus provides spoken data by about 100 speakers with comparable productions, annotated and segmented on the word and the phone level, with more than 50% manually corrected data. The paper reports on inter-annotator agreement and the optimization of the acoustic models for forced speech-text alignment in exercises for computer-assisted pronunciation training. Example studies based on the corpus data with a phonetic focus include topics such as the realization of /h/ and glottal stop, final devoicing of obstruents, vowel quantity and quality, pitch range, and tempo.
The paper presents best practices and results from projects in four countries dedicated to the creation of corpora of computer-mediated communication and social media interactions (CMC). Even though there are still many open issues related to building and annotating corpora of that type, there already exists a range of accessible solutions which have been tested in projects and which may serve as a starting point for a more precise discussion of how future standards for CMC corpora may (and should) be shaped like.
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.
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 presents a thorough examination of the validity of three evaluation measures on parser output. We assess parser performance of an unlexicalised probabilistic parser trained on two German treebanks with different annotation schemes and evaluate parsing results using the PARSEVAL metric, the Leaf-Ancestor metric and a dependency-based evaluation. We reject the claim that the TüBa-D/Z annotation scheme is more adequate then the TIGER scheme for PCFG parsing and show that PARSEVAL should not be used to compare parser performance for parsers trained on treebanks with different annotation schemes. An analysis of specific error types indicates that the dependency-based evaluation is most appropriate to reflect parse quality.
Dieser Beitrag nimmt Bezug auf ein lexikologisches Arbeitsprojekt des Instituts für deutsche Sprache (Mannheim) und will einen Einblick in die Voraussetzungen und Ziele dieses Vorhabens sowie in die Arbeitsweise der Projektmitarbeiter geben. Dabei soll Aspekten der Korpus- und Computernutzung in den einzelnen Arbeitsetappen besondere Aufmerksamkeit gelten.
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.