1991:1 - Universitetet i Bergen

a slrict linguistic glass box pint of view it may have some inadequacies,
since certain phenomena are not described in an orthodox linguistic
way. Bul most of its rules are based on standard descriptions of Finnish
morphology and thus it can be seen as a very concrete level imple-
menintion of Finnish noun stem synthesis.
CONCLUSION
Compulational linguistic programs are often considered difficult. time
consuming and laborious to make. It seems that this is only panially
true, and there exist ceriain areas which can be iackled reasonably well
with basic knowledge of programming and normal linguistic analysis.
It has been a leaming process to work with Stemma and my experiences
are very encouraging, since they show that any linguist who has a
working knowledge of a good high level programming language such
as Icon, can make a useful program of considerable coverage and
complexity in just a few months. Virtuosity in programming is not
always necessary in order to create something useful.
REFERENCES
Eeg-Olofson. Mats 1987. Software Systems for Compurational Morpho-
logy - An Overview. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 10: 1-34.
Gnswold, Ralph E. & Griswold, Madge T. 1990. The Icon Programming
Language. Second edition. F'rentice Hall. New Jersey.
Holman, Eugene 1988. Finnmorf: a Coinpurerired Reference To01 for
Srudents of Finnish Morphology. Computers and the Humanities 22:
165-72.
Jappinen, Harri & Ylilammi. Matti 1986. Associarive Model of Morp-
hological Analysis: an Empirical Inquiry. Computational Linguistics
12: 257-72.
Koskenniemi, Kimmo 1983. Two-Level Morphology: A General Comp-
utational Model for Word-Form Recognition and production. Publi-
cations of the Department of General Linguistics, University of
Helsinki.
Palmer, Martha & Finin, Tim 1990. Workshop on rhe Evaluarion of
Natural Language Processing Systems. Computational Linguistics 16:
175- 81.