Linguistik-Klassifikation: Grammatikforschung / Grammar research
4 search hits
-
Principles of information packaging in Baatonum (Gur)
(2009)
-
Anne Schwarz
- This talk presents a study on information structure in the under-documented Gur language Baatonum (Bénin and Nigeria, language code bba).
-
O discurso indireto no alemão : um estudo quantitativo do uso dos modos
(2009)
-
Andressa Costa
- Este artigo apresenta um estudo quantitativo do uso dos modos Konjunktiv e Indikativ no discurso indireto no alemão. Através da análise de um corpus de 400 textos online do gênero notícia de jornal, descrevem-se fatores que influenciam a escolha do modo do discurso indireto. Para a realização deste estudo partiu-se das seguintes hipóteses: a escolha do modo do discurso indireto pode ser influenciada pelo tipo de verbo do discurso citante (sagen/dizer, erklären/explicar), pela posição deste (antes ou depois do discurso citado), pelo tempo verbal do verbo finito do discurso citante, tipo de verbo do discurso citado (regular, irregular, auxiliar), se a oração subordinada é introduzida ou não por conjunção, grau de inserção da oração subordinada e distância entre discurso citante e discurso citado.
-
How many focus markers are there in Konkomba?
(2009)
-
Anne Schwarz
- This article discusses the divergent status of the two particles lé and lá in the grammar of Konkomba, a Gur language (Niger-Congo) of the Gurma subgroup. While previous studies claim that both particles are focus markers, this author argues that only the particle lá should be analyzed as a pure pragmatic device. Distributional studies suggest that the use of particle lé, on the other hand, is only required under specific focus conditions, and primarily represents a syntactic device.
-
A Testsuite for Testing Parser Performance onComplex German Grammatical Constructions
(2009)
-
Sandra Kübler
Ines Rehbein
Josef van Genabith
- 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.
