P2: Mündliche Korpora
Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (5)
- Part of a Book (1)
Language
- English (6)
Has Fulltext
- yes (6)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (6)
Keywords
- Beleidigung (4)
- Beschimpfung (4)
- abusive language (4)
- Datensatz (3)
- Social Media (2)
- Akademischer Grad (1)
- Ambiguität (1)
- Automatische Sprachanalyse (1)
- Computerlinguistik (1)
- Computerunterstützte Kommunikation (1)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (6)
Publisher
We address the task of distinguishing implicitly abusive sentences on identity groups (“Muslims contaminate our planet”) from other group-related negative polar sentences (“Muslims despise terrorism”). Implicitly abusive language are utterances not conveyed by abusive words (e.g. “bimbo” or “scum”). So far, the detection of such utterances could not be properly addressed since existing datasets displaying a high degree of implicit abuse are fairly biased. Following the recently-proposed strategy to solve implicit abuse by separately addressing its different subtypes, we present a new focused and less biased dataset that consists of the subtype of atomic negative sentences about identity groups. For that task, we model components that each address one facet of such implicit abuse, i.e. depiction as perpetrators, aspectual classification and non-conformist views. The approach generalizes across different identity groups and languages.
Implicitly abusive language – What does it actually look like and why are we not getting there?
(2021)
Abusive language detection is an emerging field in natural language processing which has received a large amount of attention recently. Still the success of automatic detection is limited. Particularly, the detection of implicitly abusive language, i.e. abusive language that is not conveyed by abusive words (e.g. dumbass or scum), is not working well. In this position paper, we explain why existing datasets make learning implicit abuse difficult and what needs to be changed in the design of such datasets. Arguing for a divide-and-conquer strategy, we present a list of subtypes of implicitly abusive language and formulate research tasks and questions for future research.
We propose to use abusive emojis, such as the “middle finger” or “face vomiting”, as a proxy for learning a lexicon of abusive words. Since it represents extralinguistic information, a single emoji can co-occur with different forms of explicitly abusive utterances. We show that our approach generates a lexicon that offers the same performance in cross-domain classification of abusive microposts as the most advanced lexicon induction method. Such an approach, in contrast, is dependent on manually annotated seed words and expensive lexical resources for bootstrapping (e.g. WordNet). We demonstrate that the same emojis can also be effectively used in languages other than English. Finally, we also show that emojis can be exploited for classifying mentions of ambiguous words, such as “fuck” and “bitch”, into generally abusive and just profane usages.
We examine the task of detecting implicitly abusive comparisons (e.g. “Your hair looks like you have been electrocuted”). Implicitly abusive comparisons are abusive comparisons in which abusive words (e.g. “dumbass” or “scum”) are absent. We detail the process of creating a novel dataset for this task via crowdsourcing that includes several measures to obtain a sufficiently representative and unbiased set of comparisons. We also present classification experiments that include a range of linguistic features that help us better understand the mechanisms underlying abusive comparisons.
The sentiment polarity of an expression (whether it is perceived as positive, negative or neutral) can be influenced by a number of phenomena, foremost among them negation. Apart from closed-class negation words like no, not or without, negation can also be caused by so-called polarity shifters. These are content words, such as verbs, nouns or adjectives, that shift polarities in their opposite direction, e. g. abandoned in “abandoned hope” or alleviate in “alleviate pain”. Many polarity shifters can affect both positive and negative polar expressions, shifting them towards the opposing polarity. However, other shifters are restricted to a single shifting direction. Recoup shifts negative to positive in “recoup your losses”, but does not affect the positive polarity of fortune in “recoup a fortune”. Existing polarity shifter lexica only specify whether a word can, in general, cause shifting, but they do not specify when this is limited to one shifting direction. To address this issue we introduce a supervised classifier that determines the shifting direction of shifters. This classifier uses both resource-driven features, such as WordNet relations, and data-driven features like in-context polarity conflicts. Using this classifier we enhance the largest available polarity shifter lexicon.
Entity framing is the selection of aspects of an entity to promote a particular viewpoint towards that entity. We investigate entity framing of political figures through the use of names and titles in German online discourse, enhancing current research in entity framing through titling and naming that concentrates on English only. We collect tweets that mention prominent German politicians and annotate them for stance. We find that the formality of naming in these tweets correlates positively with their stance. This confirms sociolinguistic observations that naming and titling can have a status-indicating function and suggests that this function is dominant in German tweets mentioning political figures. We also find that this status-indicating function is much weaker in tweets from users that are politically left-leaning than in tweets by right leaning users. This is in line with observations from moral psychology that left-leaning and right-leaning users assign different importance to maintaining social hierarchies.