Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Preprint (82) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (82)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (82) (remove)
Keywords
- Deutsch (16)
- Multicomponent Tree Adjoining Grammar (9)
- Syntaktische Analyse (8)
- Syntax (8)
- Semantik (6)
- Kongress (5)
- Optimalitätstheorie (5)
- Range Concatenation Grammar (5)
- Aufsatzsammlung (4)
- German (4)
Institute
- Extern (82) (remove)
This paper argues for a particular architecture of OT syntax. This architecture hasthree core features: i) it is bidirectional, the usual production-oriented optimisation (called ‘first optimisation’ here) is accompanied by a second step that checks the recoverability of an underlying form; ii) this underlying form already contains a full-fledged syntactic specification; iii) especially the procedure checking for recoverability makes crucial use of semantic and pragmatic factors. The first section motivates the basic architecture. The second section shows with two examples, how contextual factors are integrated. The third section examines its implications for learning theory, and the fourth section concludes with a broader discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed model.
Weak function word shift
(2004)
The fact that object shift only affects weak pronouns in mainland Scandinavian is seen as an instance of a more general observation that can be made in all Germanic languages: weak function words tend to avoid the edges of larger prosodic domains. This generalisation has been formulated within Optimality Theory in terms of alignment constraints on prosodic structure by Selkirk (1996) in explaining thedistribution of prosodically strong and weak forms of English functionwords, especially modal verbs, prepositions and pronouns. But a purely phonological account fails to integrate the syntactic licensing conditions for object shift in an appropriate way. The standard semantico-syntactic accounts of object shift, onthe other hand, fail to explain why it is only weak pronouns that undergo object shift. This paper develops an Optimality theoretic model of the syntax-phonology interface which is based on the interaction of syntactic and prosodic factors. The account can successfully be applied to further related phenomena in English and German.
This paper is part of a research project on OT Syntax and the typology of the free relative (FR) construction. It concentrates on the details of an OT analysis and some of its consequences for OT syntax. I will not present a general discussion of the phenomenon and the many controversial issues it is famous for in generative syntax.
In der folgenden Darstellung geht es einerseits darum, an Beispielen aufzuzeigen, inwiefern die schweizerdeutschen Mundarten und die deutsche Standardsprache in Lautung, Formenbildung, Satzbau und Wortschatz auseinandergehen können, andererseits aber immer auch um das Aufweisen von Gemeinsamkeiten. Oft werden nämlich bestimmte Erscheinungen des dialektalen Sprachbaus vorschnell als Eigenarten der Mundart verstanden, obwohl dieselben Erscheinungen auch im gesprochenen Hochdeutschen anzutreffen sind. Somit liegen also häufig nicht Unterschiede zwischen Mundart und Standardsprache vor, sondern Unterschiede zwischen gesprochener Sprache und geschriebener Sprache. [vollständige Überarbeitung für eine zweite Auflage]
Die unten folgende Stellungnahme wurde dem Herausgeber der Zeitschrift für deutsches Altertum und deutsche Literatur angeboten, um eine Reihe von gravierenden Missverständnissen eines Rezensenten (Jürgen Schulz-Grobert) auszuräumen, die dieser in seiner Besprechung des zweiten Bandes der Sämtlichen Werke Johann Fischarts der Fachwelt gegenüber erkennen ließ. Der Herausgeber der Zeitschrift verweigerte sich einer Diskussion und lehnte den Abdruck unserer Entgegnung ab. Dies ist umso bedauerlicher, als uns der Rezensent den Vorwurf gemacht hat, unsere "Diskussionsbereitschaft [...] [sei] auch in anderen entscheidenden Fragen ausgesprochen begrenzt", was immer er damit meint.
This paper investigates the class of Tree-Tuple MCTAG with Shared Nodes, TT-MCTAG for short, an extension of Tree Adjoining Grammars that has been proposed for natural language processing, in particular for dealing with discontinuities and word order variation in languages such as German. It has been shown that the universal recognition problem for this formalism is NP-hard, but so far it was not known whether the class of languages generated by TT-MCTAG is included in PTIME. We provide a positive answer to this question, using a new characterization of TT-MCTAG.
We present a CYK and an Earley-style algorithm for parsing Range Concatenation Grammar (RCG), using the deductive parsing framework. The characteristic property of the Earley parser is that we use a technique of range boundary constraint propagation to compute the yields of non-terminals as late as possible. Experiments show that, compared to previous approaches, the constraint propagation helps to considerably decrease the number of items in the chart.
Multicomponent Tree Adjoining Grammars (MCTAGs) are a formalism that has been shown to be useful for many natural language applications. The definition of non-local MCTAG however is problematic since it refers to the process of the derivation itself: a simultaneity constraint must be respected concerning the way the members of the elementary tree sets are added. Looking only at the result of a derivation (i.e., the derived tree and the derivation tree), this simultaneity is no longer visible and therefore cannot be checked. I.e., this way of characterizing MCTAG does not allow to abstract away from the concrete order of derivation. In this paper, we propose an alternative definition of MCTAG that characterizes the trees in the tree language of an MCTAG via the properties of the derivation trees (in the underlying TAG) the MCTAG licences. We provide similar characterizations for various types of MCTAG. These characterizations give a better understanding of the formalisms, they allow a more systematic comparison of different types of MCTAG, and, furthermore, they can be exploited for parsing.
In this paper, we argue that difficulties in the definition of coreference itself contribute to lower inter-annotator agreement in certain cases. Data from a large referentially annotated corpus serves to corroborate this point, using a quantitative investigation to assess which effects or problems are likely to be the most prominent. Several examples where such problems occur are discussed in more detail, and we then propose a generalisation of Poesio, Reyle and Stevenson’s Justified Sloppiness Hypothesis to provide a unified model for these cases of disagreement and argue that a deeper understanding of the phenomena involved allows to tackle problematic cases in a more principled fashion than would be possible using only pre-theoretic intuitions.
Traditionally, parsers are evaluated against gold standard test data. This can cause problems if there is a mismatch between the data structures and representations used by the parser and the gold standard. A particular case in point is German, for which two treebanks (TiGer and TüBa-D/Z) are available with highly different annotation schemes for the acquisition of (e.g.) PCFG parsers. The differences between the TiGer and TüBa-D/Z annotation schemes make fair and unbiased parser evaluation difficult [7, 9, 12]. The resource (TEPACOC) presented in this paper takes a different approach to parser evaluation: instead of providing evaluation data in a single annotation scheme, TEPACOC uses comparable sentences and their annotations for 5 selected key grammatical phenomena (with 20 sentences each per phenomena) from both TiGer and TüBa-D/Z resources. This provides a 2 times 100 sentence comparable testsuite which allows us to evaluate TiGer-trained parsers against the TiGer part of TEPACOC, and TüBa-D/Z-trained parsers against the TüBa-D/Z part of TEPACOC for key phenomena, instead of comparing them against a single (and potentially biased) gold standard. To overcome the problem of inconsistency in human evaluation and to bridge the gap between the two different annotation schemes, we provide an extensive error classification, which enables us to compare parser output across the two different treebanks. In the remaining part of the paper we present the testsuite and describe the grammatical phenomena covered in the data. We discuss the different annotation strategies used in the two treebanks to encode these phenomena and present our error classification of potential parser errors.