Adapting existing grammars

Kaplan, Ronald M.; King, Tracy Holloway; Maxwell, John T.

doi:10.3115/1118783.1118789

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Attribute values unify if both are atomic and identical or, in the case of complex values, both recursively unify. We work with LFG [3] and the Xerox Linguistic Environment (XLE) grammar engineering tool [4]. In addition to the standard unification principle, LFG requires feature structures to be coherent (a governable function must have a governor) and complete (any governed function must be realized).…”

Section: Unification-based Grammarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Unification-Based Model for Attitude Prediction

Klenner

2017

Text, Speech, and Dialogue

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attitude prediction strives to determine whether an opinion holder is positive or negative towards a given target. We cast this problem as a lexicon engineering task in the context of deep linguistic grammar formalisms such as LFG or HPSG. Moreover, we demonstrate that attitude prediction can be accomplished solely through unification of lexical feature structures. It is thus possible to use our model without altering existing grammars, only the lexicon needs to be adapted. In this paper, we also show how our model can be combined with dependency parsers. This makes our model independent of the availability of deep grammars, only unification as a processing mean is needed.

show abstract

Section: Unification-based Grammarsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The corresponding definition holds for counterfactuality (see line [4][5][6]. In case that the sublclause is a verb without a polar viewpoint, @NOView applies (it just verifies that the verb has no polar view).…”

Section: Unification-based Attitude Prediction and Role Assignmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Unification-Based Model for Attitude Prediction

Klenner

2017

Text, Speech, and Dialogue

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Parallel grammar development is challenging for developers, since each phenomenon has to be examined carefully, and it has to be decided whether a cross-linguistic analysis is feasible at all, whether the phenomenon is idiosyncratic and language-specific, or whether the feature geometry has to be changed. The grammars are developed in the X(erox) L(inguistic) E(nvironment) system (Kaplan et al 2002;Butt et al 1999).…”

Section: Pargrammentioning

confidence: 99%

The CoreGram project: theoretical linguistics, theory development and verification

Müller

2015

JLM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper describes the CoreGram project, a multilingual grammar engineering project that develops HPSG grammars for several typologically diverse languages that share a common core. The paper provides a general motivation for doing theoretical linguistics the way it is done in the CoreGram project, and is therefore not exclusively targeted at computational linguists. I argue for a constraint-based approach to language rather than a generative-enumerative one and discuss issues of formalization. Recent advantages in language acquisition research are mentioned and conclusions on how theories should be constructed are drawn. The paper discusses some of the highlights in the implemented grammars, gives a brief overview of central theoretical concepts and their implementation in the TRALE system, and compares the CoreGram project with other multilingual grammar engineering projects. overview and motivationThe goal of the CoreGram project is to contribute to a better understanding of the constraints for specific human languages and of the constraints holding for human language in general or for certain language groups. To reach this goal we develop several large-scale computer-processable grammar fragments of several typologically diverse languages using a common core grammar. We believe that lin-

show abstract

“…B. Bresnan 2001, Butt et al 1999, die in Form des ParGram-Projekts (Butt et al 2002), aber auch durch die Grammatikentwicklungsumgebung XLE (Kaplan et al 2002) in der Computerlinguistik spürbar prä-sent ist. Die Strukturbeschreibung von Sätzen mittels funktionaler Information ist aber nicht Selbstzweck, sondern dient Ϫ in einem SyntaxFirst-Modell Ϫ als Vorstufe der semantischen Analyse (vgl.…”

Section: Einführungunclassified