A Treebank-based Investigation of IPP-triggering Verbs in Dutch

More documents

Recommendations

Info

(1) unhone kaha ki aaj aisa koi bhi vyakti nahin hai, jiske paas esa koi He said that today such any EMP person not is, who near such any jawaab ho, jo sabke liye vaiddha ho answer has, which all for valid is ‘He said that today there is no such person, who has any such answer which is valid for all.’ unhone kaha ki aaj aisa koi_bhi vyakti nahin_hai, jiske_paas esa_koi_ jawaab ho, jo sabke_liye vaiddha ho Languages Properties Gap Degree Edge Degree gd0 gd1 gd2 gd3 ed0 ed1 ed2 ed3 ed4 Non-proj Non-planar Ill-nested Non-proj & Planar Non-proj Edges Total Sentences Hindi 85.14 14.56 0.28 0.02 85.14 14.24 0.45 0.11 0.03 14.85 13.62 0.19 1.24 1.65 20497 Urdu 77.85 20.58 1.31 0.12 77.85 19.20 1.97 0.56 0.22 22.12 20.11 1.66 2.00 2.59 3192 Bangla 94.45 5.47 0.0 0.0 94.45 5.24 0.16 0.08 0.0 5.47 3.91 0.16 1.25 0.97 1279 Telugu 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1606 Table 2: Non-projectivity measures of Dependency Structures in IL Treebanks Construction Type Phenomenon Topicalisation Extraposition NP Extraction Quantifier Float Scrambling Inherent Hindi Urdu Bangla Hindi Urdu Bangla Hindi Urdu Bangla Hindi Urdu Bangla Hindi Urdu Bangla Hindi Urdu Bangla Genitive Constructions - - - - 1 - 327 232 23 - - - - - - - - - Relative Clauses - - - 999 240 15 - - - - - - - - - - - - Conditionals - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 496 252 13 Clausal Complements - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1555 361 23 Control Constructions 12 - - - - - - - - - - - 39 - - - - - Co-ordination - - - - - - - - - - - - 10 - - - - - Quantified Expressions - - - - - - - - - 12 4 - - - - - - - Other Finite Clauses 88 54 13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Others - - - - - - - - - - - - 2 1 5 - - - Table 3: Categorization of Construction Types and Phenomena behind Non-projectivity in IL treebanks. 5 Analysis and Categorization In this section we discuss different types of constructions that allow non-projectivity and the linguistic phenomena that induce non-projectivity in them. Our study of IL treebanks revealed a number of construction types with non-projectivity namely Genitive Constructions, Relative clause constructions, Conditionals, Clausal complements, Control Constructions, Co-ordinated constructions, Quantified expressions and, Other Finite Clauses. Some of these formatives are inherently discontinuous like conditionals, however a majority of them, with canonical order projective, can be rendered non-projective under appropriate pragmatic conditions via movement. A number of movement phenomena observed behind non-projectivity in IL treebanks are: a) Topicalisation, b) Extraposition, c) Quantifier floating, d) NP Extraction, e) Scramblingany movement other than ‘a − d’. Below we discuss a few of the above mentioned construction types and the reasons behind the non-projectivity in them. The examples discussed are from Hindi and Urdu Treebanks. 5.1 Relative Clause Constructions In Hindi, Urdu and Bangla relative clauses have three different orders, they can be left adjoined-placed immediately before their head noun; embedded-placed immediately after the head noun and extraposed-placed post-verbally away from the head noun. Since extraposed relative clauses are separated from the head noun, this dislocation generates discontinuity in the structure. In example (2), the nominal expression mojuda swaroop ‘current f orm’ in the main clause is modified by the extraposed relative clause. The projection of the head noun mojuda swaroop ‘current f orm’ is interrupted by its parent hai ‘is’. Although it is mainly an 28
extra-posed relative clause that generates discontinuity, there are instances in the IL treebanks where even Left-adjoined relative clauses can be separated from their head noun by some verbal argument. (2) iskaa mojuda Its current swaroop theory form theory aadharit hai jisko based is which practical practical aadhirit banaaya jaayega based made will be ‘Its current form is theory based which will be made practical based.’ iskaa mojuda_swaroop theory_aadharit hai jisko practical_aadhirit banaaya_jaayega 5.2 Clausal Complements Clausal complements, introduced by a complementizer (ki in Hindi/Urdu, je in Bangla), are placed post-verbally in Hindi-Urdu and Bangla. If the head predicate licensing the clausal complement is other than the verb, the canonical order is such that the head is positioned preverbally and its complement is extraposed. In such order the structure has inherent discontinuity. Example (3) shows an extraposed complement clause of an expletive yaha ‘it’. The head element and the complement clause are at a distance from each other, the verb likha hai ‘is written’ in the main clause interferes in the projection of yaha ‘it’ making the structure discontinuous. Extraposed complement clauses are the major source of non-projective structures in IL treebanks. In Hindi treebank around 42% non-projective structures are due to extraposed clausal complements of a non-verbal predicate. (3) jisme In which yaha this bhi also likha written hai ki is that Togadiya Togadiya jordaar powerful dhmaake mein maare blast in killed jaayenge will be ‘In which this is also written that Togadiya will be killed in powerful blast.’ jisme yaha_bhi likha_hai ki Togadiya jordaar_dhmaake_mein maare_jaayenge 5.3 Genitive Constructions In genitive constructions, the genitive marked nominal is easily dislocated from the head noun. The study of IL treebanks show a varied number of movements from genitive constructions. Genitive marked noun can either be extraposed or be extracted towards the left. However, the extraction towards left is wide spread with good number of instances in all the treebanks except Telugu treebank. In example (5), genitive marked pronoun jiski ‘whose’ has been extracted from its base position to the sentence initial position crossing the subject of the sentence. (4) jiski raashtra ko bhaari keemat adaa karni padi for which country ACC heavy cost pay had to ‘For which country had to pay a heavy cost’ jiski raashtra_ko bhaari_keemat adaa karni_padi_thi 5.4 Control Constructions In ILs under study, verbs can select non-finite complements and adverbial clauses marked with infinitive or participle inflections (-kar and -na in Hindi-Urdu). In such bi-clausal combinations non-finite clauses have a null subject controlled by a syntactic argument of the main verb. In IL treebanks such arguments, which thematically belong to both the verbs but are syntactically governed only by the main verb, are annotated as the child of the main verb only in view of the singleheadedness constraint of dependency trees. Interestingly, in these control constructions, individual arguments of non-finite verb can move around and cross the shared argument, child of the main verb, generating discontinuity in non-finite clause. There are varied occurrences of such discontinuous non-finite clauses in 29
Page 1 and 2: A Treebank-based Investigation of I
Page 3 and 4: participle and a (te-)infinitival c
Page 5 and 6: Some verbs occur twice, since they
Page 7 and 8: Profiling Feature Selection for Nam
Page 9 and 10: prepositional objects (FOPP, OPP).
Page 11 and 12: the limited size of annotated data
Page 13 and 14: with high precision typically have
Page 15 and 16: ‘This was “not significantly”
Page 17 and 18: The preposition durch typically has
Page 19 and 20: Non-Projective Structures in Indian
Page 21: the sequential order of nodes in a
Page 25 and 26: Experiments on Dependency Parsing o
Page 27 and 28: for mitigating the effects of spars
Page 29 and 30: obtained with MALTParser is 76.61%
Page 31 and 32: as a standardised serialisation for
Page 33 and 34: constituency and dependency, possib
Page 35 and 36: SynAF and/or in . However, they sha
Page 37 and 38: shows how some elements that are no
Page 39 and 40: Example
Page 41 and 42: ‏ Example 8: represent
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46: Chinese) as the direct object NP.
Page 47 and 48: Example 15: Tokens and Word Forms
Page 49 and 50: In a second experiment, a dataset w
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54: [3] Leech G. N., Barnett, R. & Kahr
Page 55 and 56: Effectively long-distance dependenc
Page 57 and 58: In French, another case of eLDD is
Page 59 and 60: elativization, it-clefts or questio
Page 61 and 62: 4.2.3 Annotation methodology Becaus
Page 63 and 64: Number of occurrences in FTB +SEQTB
Page 65 and 66: producing treebank based LFG approx
Page 67 and 68: Logical Form Representation for Lin
Page 69 and 70: gerundives for a total amount of so
Page 71 and 72: object+indirect object/object one.
Page 73 and 74:
(VP (VB patch) ) ) ) (VP (VBZ is) (
Page 75 and 76:
Types Adverb. Adject. Verbs Nouns T
Page 77 and 78:
Eventually we may comment that ther
Page 79 and 80:
DeepBank: A Dynamically Annotated T
Page 81 and 82:
from another already existing one,
Page 83 and 84:
to parse now does. The extra manual
Page 85 and 86:
In the derivation show in Figure 1,
Page 87 and 88:
4 Patching Coverage Gaps with An Ap
Page 89 and 90:
will enable further improvements in
Page 91 and 92:
ParDeepBank: Multiple Parallel Deep
Page 93 and 94:
2 The ParDeepBank The PTB has emerg
Page 95 and 96:
undergone extensive scientific scru
Page 97 and 98:
the second combines the structures
Page 99 and 100:
Sofia University). Each sentence wa
Page 101 and 102:
data, and improvements in the infra
Page 103 and 104:
The Effect of Treebank Annotation G
Page 105 and 106:
ut without feature structures. This
Page 107 and 108:
only the lexicon is fine-grained to
Page 109 and 110:
Automatic Coreference Annotation in
Page 111 and 112:
manually annotated Czech sentences.
Page 113 and 114:
citizens of Bilbao] are very involv
Page 115 and 116:
4.1.3 Coreference Selector Module T
Page 117 and 118:
Nominal P R F1 MUC 75.33% 81.33% 78
Page 119 and 120:
[9] G. Doddington, A. Mitchell, M.
Page 121 and 122:
Analyzing the Most Common Errors in
Page 123 and 124:
Graph 1 shows results of subsequent
Page 125 and 126:
in the semantic type). This situati
Page 127 and 128:
Will a Parser Overtake Achilles? Fi
Page 129 and 130:
annotation is also based on a depen
Page 131 and 132:
Set Name Sentences Tokens % Train/T
Page 133 and 134:
dency relations (PRED, OBJ, SBJ, AD
Page 135 and 136:
ton and Stacklazy), we trained a mo
Page 137 and 138:
Feature Function Column Name Addres
Page 139 and 140:
Using Parallel Treebanks for Machin
Page 141 and 142:
phrases are generated by a shallow
Page 143 and 144:
Figure 2: A Kybot p
Page 145 and 146:
SUJ NP SENT MOD PP NP PP PP NP NP P
Page 147 and 148:
Checkpoint Instances Google PT Our
Page 149 and 150:
6 Conclusions In this paper we have
Page 151 and 152:
An integrated web-based treebank an
Page 153 and 154:
16] and we have earlier reported fr
Page 155 and 156:
Figure 2: Screenshot of the interfa
Page 157 and 158:
ple subcategorization frames may be
Page 159 and 160:
4 Integrated interface for annotati
Page 161 and 162:
of the 5th International Conference
Page 163 and 164:
Translational divergences and their
Page 165 and 166:
posed so far, Cyrus’ work did not
Page 167 and 168:
allowed an appropriate coverage of
Page 169 and 170:
damentales [...] 10 (the universal
Page 171 and 172:
for all lex_pair(s,t) do if head an
Page 173 and 174:
the treatment of typical translatio
Page 175 and 176:
Building a treebank of noisy user-g
Page 177 and 178:
Phenomenon Attested example Std. co
Page 179 and 180:
Figure 1: French Social Media Bank
Page 181 and 182:
Impact of treebank characteristics
Page 183 and 184:
Det Adj N (a) Danish Det Adj N (b)
Page 185 and 186:
sv: Bestämmelserna i detta avtal f
Page 187 and 188:
100 90 80 Unlabelled attachment 70
Page 189 and 190:
vidner , tilhørere og tiltalte wit
Page 191 and 192:
mance is not inconsiderable, as was
Page 193 and 194:
Genitives in Hindi Treebank: An Att
Page 195 and 196:
A genitive can occur with complex p
Page 197 and 198:
quite high. This motivates us towar
show all

A Treebank-based Investigation of IPP-triggering Verbs in Dutch

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?