Linguistik-Klassifikation
Refine
Document Type
- Preprint (4) (remove)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Chatten <Kommunikation> (1)
- Deutsches Sprachgebiet (1)
- Neologismus (1)
- Sprachliche Universalien (1)
- Standardsprache (1)
- Substandardsprache (1)
- Zeitung (1)
Institute
- Extern (2)
Language universals are statements that are true of all languages, for example: “all languages have stop consonants”. But beneath this simple definition lurks deep ambiguity, and this triggers misunderstanding in both interdisciplinary discourse and within linguistics itself. A core dimension of the ambiguity is captured by the opposition “absolute vs. statistical universal”, although the literature uses these terms in varied ways. Many textbooks draw the boundary between absolute and statistical according to whether a sample of languages contains exceptions to a universal. But the notion of an exception-free sample is not very revealing even if the sample contained all known languages: there is always a chance that an as yet undescribed language, or an unknown language from the past or future, will provide an exception.
Die Driften der Wörter in öffentlichen Räumen sind vielfältig. Neue Wortentwicklungen belegen unterschiedliche Interessen, "chillen" und "dissen" andere als das in der konservativen Züricher Zeitung zuerst erschienene "share-holder-value". Im Folgenden soll eine sinnbezoge Verallgemeinerung unternommen werden, die die Handlungen der Akteure mit der strukturellen Ebene verbindet. Die Veränderungen in den Verwendungen sollen zu strukturellen sozialen und sprachlichen Rahmenbedingungen in Bezug gesetzt werden. Wie werden Neuerungen und Änderungen der Anwendungsbedingungen von Wörtern vor dem Hintergrund des Wissens um die traditionelle Standardsprache und deren soziale Funktion wahrgenommen? Welche Funktionen haben Neologismen in Abgrenzung zu diesem Standard?
In this paper, we investigate the usefulness of a wide range of features for their usefulness in the resolution of nominal coreference, both as hard constraints (i.e. completely removing elements from the list of possible candidates) as well as soft constraints (where a cumulation of violations of soft constraints will make it less likely that a candidate is chosen as the antecedent). We present a state of the art system based on such constraints and weights estimated with a maximum entropy model, using lexical information to resolve cases of coreferent bridging.
We adopt Markert and Nissim (2005)’s approach of using the World Wide Web to resolve cases of coreferent bridging for German and discuss the strength and weaknesses of this approach. As the general approach of using surface patterns to get information on ontological relations between lexical items has only been tried on English, it is also interesting to see whether the approach works for German as well as it does for English and what differences between these languages need to be accounted for. We also present a novel approach for combining several patterns that yields an ensemble that outperforms the best-performing single patterns in terms of both precision and recall.