Refine
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (9)
- Book (2)
- Part of a Book (1)
Language
- English (12)
Has Fulltext
- yes (12)
Keywords
- Natürliche Sprache (12) (remove)
Publicationstate
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (11)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (1)
We present the German Sentiment Analysis Shared Task (GESTALT) which consists of two main tasks: Source, Subjective Expression and Target Extraction from Political Speeches (STEPS) and Subjective Phrase and Aspect Extraction from Product Reviews (StAR). Both tasks focused on fine-grained sentiment analysis, extracting aspects and targets with their associated subjective expressions in the German language. STEPS focused on political discussions from a corpus of speeches in the Swiss parliament. StAR fostered the analysis of product reviews as they are available from the website Amazon.de. Each shared task led to one participating submission, providing baselines for future editions of this task and highlighting specific challenges. The shared task homepage can be found at https://sites.google.com/site/iggsasharedtask/.
We present a major step towards the creation of the first high-coverage lexicon of polarity shifters. In this work, we bootstrap a lexicon of verbs by exploiting various linguistic features. Polarity shifters, such as ‘abandon’, are similar to negations (e.g. ‘not’) in that they move the polarity of a phrase towards its inverse, as in ‘abandon all hope’. While there exist lists of negation words, creating comprehensive lists of polarity shifters is far more challenging due to their sheer number. On a sample of manually annotated verbs we examine a variety of linguistic features for this task. Then we build a supervised classifier to increase coverage. We show that this approach drastically reduces the annotation effort while ensuring a high-precision lexicon. We also show that our acquired knowledge of verbal polarity shifters improves phrase-level sentiment analysis.
Unknown words are a challenge for any NLP task, including sentiment analysis. Here, we evaluate the extent to which sentiment polarity of complex words can be predicted based on their morphological make-up. We do this on German as it has very productive processes of derivation and compounding and many German hapax words, which are likely to bear sentiment, are morphologically complex. We present results of supervised classification experiments on new datasets with morphological parses and polarity annotations.
We present a new resource for German causal language, with annotations in context for verbs, nouns and adpositions. Our dataset includes 4,390 annotated instances for more than 150 different triggers. The annotation scheme distinguishes three different types of causal events (CONSEQUENCE, MOTIVATION, PURPOSE). We also provide annotations for semantic roles, i.e. of the cause and effect for the causal event as well as the actor and affected party, if present. In the paper, we present inter-annotator agreement scores for our dataset and discuss problems for annotating causal language. Finally, we present experiments where we frame causal annotation as a sequence labelling problem and report baseline results for the prediciton of causal arguments and for predicting different types of causation.
The paper presents a discussion on the main linguistic phenomena of user-generated texts found in web and social media, and proposes a set of annotation guidelines for their treatment within the Universal Dependencies (UD) framework. Given on the one hand the increasing number of treebanks featuring user-generated content, and its somewhat inconsistent treatment in these resources on the other, the aim of this paper is twofold: (1) to provide a short, though comprehensive, overview of such treebanks - based on available literature - along with their main features and a comparative analysis of their annotation criteria, and (2) to propose a set of tentative UD-based annotation guidelines, to promote consistent treatment of the particular phenomena found in these types of texts. The main goal of this paper is to provide a common framework for those teams interested in developing similar resources in UD, thus enabling cross-linguistic consistency, which is a principle that has always been in the spirit of UD.
I’ve got a construction looks funny – representing and recovering non-standard constructions in UD
(2020)
The UD framework defines guidelines for a crosslingual syntactic analysis in the framework of dependency grammar, with the aim of providing a consistent treatment across languages that not only supports multilingual NLP applications but also facilitates typological studies. Until now, the UD framework has mostly focussed on bilexical grammatical relations. In the paper, we propose to add a constructional perspective and discuss several examples of spoken-language constructions that occur in multiple languages and challenge the current use of basic and enhanced UD relations. The examples include cases where the surface relations are deceptive, and syntactic amalgams that either involve unconnected subtrees or structures with multiply-headed dependents. We argue that a unified treatment of constructions across languages will increase the consistency of the UD annotations and thus the quality of the treebanks for linguistic analysis.
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.
We address the detection of abusive words. The task is to identify such words among a set of negative polar expressions. We propose novel features employing information from both corpora and lexical resources. These features are calibrated on a small manually annotated base lexicon which we use to produce a large lexicon. We show that the word-level information we learn cannot be equally derived from a large dataset of annotated microposts. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our (domain-independent) lexicon in the crossdomain detection of abusive microposts.
We report on the two systems we built for Task 1 of the German Sentiment Analysis Shared Task, the task on Source, Subjective Expression and Target Extraction from Political Speeches (STEPS). The first system is a rule-based system relying on a predicate lexicon specifying extraction rules for verbs, nouns and adjectives, while the second is a translation-based system that has been obtained with the help of the (English) MPQA corpus.
Opinion holder extraction is one of the most important tasks in sentiment analysis. We will briefly outline the importance of predicates for this task and categorize them according to part of speech and according to which semantic role they select for the opinion holder. For many languages there do not exist semantic resources from which such predicates can be easily extracted. Therefore, we present alternative corpus-based methods to gain such predicates automatically, including the usage of prototypical opinion holders, i.e. common nouns, denoting for example experts or analysts, which describe particular groups of people whose profession or occupation is to form and express opinions towards specific items.