Analyzing and identifying multiword expressions in spoken language

Strik, Helmer; Hulsbosch, M. A. M.; Cucchiarini, Catia

doi:10.1007/s10579-009-9095-y

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 31 publications

(36 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cappelle, Shtyrov, & Pulvermüller, 2010). The proposal that fast-processing leads to changes in pronunciation (for a review, see Lin, 2010) has also led to explorations of ways to extract formulaic sequences automatically from spoken corpora (e.g., Strik, Hulsbosch, & Cucchiarini, 2010).…”

Section: How Are Formulaic Sequences Processed?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do We (Think We) Know About Formulaic Language? An Evaluation of the Current State of Play

Wray¹

2012

Ann Rev Appl Linguist

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article briefly summarizes key developments in formulaic language research over the past 5 years, before exploring certain assumptions typically made, regarding the coherence of formulaicity as a phenomenon, the significance of frequency as a property, and the location of subtypes of formulaic language along various continua. It is argued that we do not yet have the full measure of how different features associated with formulaicity fit together. The challenge lies in reconciling the range of evidence types within an explanation that is rooted not only in usage itself, but in the underlying motivations that determine usage.

show abstract

Section: How Are Formulaic Sequences Processed?mentioning

confidence: 99%

What Do We (Think We) Know About Formulaic Language? An Evaluation of the Current State of Play

Wray¹

2012

Ann Rev Appl Linguist

137

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A popular type-independent alternative to MWE identification is to use statistical AMs (Evert and Krenn, 2005;Zhang et al, 2006;Villavicencio et al, 2007). Concerned MWE identification and extraction from monolingual corpora, proposed a method for automatically identifying English verb particle constructions (VPCs), Pecina (2009) reported an evaluation of a set of lexical association measures based on the Prague Dependency Treebank and the Czech National Corpus, Strik et al (2010) investigated the possible ways of automatically identifying Dutch MWEs in speech corpora. Related to lexical representation of MWEs in a lexicon and a syntactic treebank, Gregoire (2010) discusses the design and implementation of a Dutch Electronic Lexicon of Multiword Expressions (DuELME), which contains over 5,000 Dutch multiword expressions.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Disentangling the Thoughts: Latest News in Computational Argumentation

Gurevych¹

2018

Proceedings of the Fifth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics CLiC-it 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On behalf of the Program Committee, a very warm welcome to the Fifth Italian Conference on Computational Linguistics (CLiC-it 2018). This edition of the conference is held in Torino. The conference is locally organised by the University of Torino and hosted into its prestigious main lecture hall "Cavallerizza Reale". The CLiC-it conference series is an initiative of the Italian Association for Computational Linguistics (AILC) which, after five years of activity, has clearly established itself as the premier national forum for research and development in the fields of Computational Linguistics and Natural Language Processing, where leading researchers and practitioners from academia and industry meet to share their research results, experiences, and challenges.This year CLiC-it received 70 submissions against 64 submissions in 2015, 69 in 2016 and 72 in 2017. The Programme Committee worked very hard to ensure that every paper received at least two careful and fair reviews. This process finally led to the acceptance of 18 papers for oral presentation and 45 papers for poster presentation, with a global acceptance rate of 90% motivated by the inclusive spirit of the conference. The conference is also receiving considerable attention from the international community, with 16 (23%) submissions showing at least one author affiliated to a foreign institution. Regardless of the format of presentation, all accepted papers are allocated 5 pages plus 2 pages for references in the proceedings, available as open access publication. In line with previous editions, the conference is organised around thematic areas managed by one or two area chairs per area.In addition to the technical programme, this year we are honoured to have as invited speakers internationally recognised researchers as Johan Bos (University of Groningen) and Iryna Gurevych (Technische Universität Darmstadt). We are very grateful to Johan and Iryna for agreeing to share with the Italian community their knowledge and expertise on key topics in Computational Linguistics.Traditionally, around one half of the participants at CLiC-it are young postdocs, PhD students, and even undergraduate students. As in the previous edition of the conference, we organised a special track called "Research Communications", encouraging authors of articles published in 2018 at outstanding international conferences in our field to submit short abstracts of their work. Research communications are not published in the proceedings, but are orally presented within a dedicated session at the conference, in order to enforce dissemination of excellence in research.Moreover, during the conference we award the prize for the best Master Thesis (Laurea Magistrale) in Computational Linguistics, submitted at an Italian University between August 1st 2017 and July 31st 2018. This special prize is also endorsed by AILC. We have received 6 candidate theses, which have been evaluated by a special jury. The prize will be awarded at the conference, by a member of the jury.

show abstract

Reduction

Warner¹

2011

The Blackwell Companion to Phonology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

[ ɹʌʒləḬ] is a four‐word phrase of American English (Figure 79.1). What might it be? How could a listener map this phonotactically improbable string back to the speaker's intended four‐word phrase? Why would a native speaker produce this realization? The intended phrase was but I was like , using the quotative like in the utterance but I was like, “why wouldn't you just go home?” . The speaker was a young female native speaker holding a casual telephone conversation with a friend. The fact that /bʌt a i wʌz la i k/ can be produced as [ ɹʌʒləḬ] is surprising, but perhaps even more surprising is that when a native listener hears the utterance, it sounds like a normal pronunciation of the phrase. While one might not expect this realization, when one examines spontaneous conversation, such surprising reductions are rather common. The fact that a surface realization can depart so drastically and in variable ways from the underlying representation poses problems for phonological theory. The fact that listeners find it unproblematic brings up further questions regarding what a phonological underlying representation is, and how speakers and listeners use it. There are three directions from which one might approach the topic of reduction: what sounds the speaker produces (acoustics of reduction), how the speaker produces them (reductions and changes in articulations), and how the speech is perceived.

show abstract

Analyzing and identifying multiword expressions in spoken language

Cited by 6 publications

References 31 publications

What Do We (Think We) Know About Formulaic Language? An Evaluation of the Current State of Play

What Do We (Think We) Know About Formulaic Language? An Evaluation of the Current State of Play

Disentangling the Thoughts: Latest News in Computational Argumentation

Reduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About