Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- user:zeman:treebanks:tr [2012/03/22 21:11]
zeman Link to the ACL Anthology.
+++ user:zeman:treebanks:tr [2013/06/18 14:51]
zeman Uploaded ttbankkl.pdf.
@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
     * Nart B. Atalay, Kemal Oflazer, Bilge Say: [[http://aclweb.org/anthology-new/W/W03/W03-2405.pdf|The Annotation Process in the Turkish Treebank]]. In: Proceedings of the EACL Workshop on Linguistically Interpreted Corpora – LINC. Budapest, Hungary, 2003.
   * Documentation
-    * Three PDF files are attached to the CoNLL version in the ''doc'' folder: ttbankkl.pdf (the chapter from Anne Abeillé, contains list of morphological tags), turkishtreebank.pdf (the paper from the EACL workshop) and user_guide.pdf (annotation manual for dependencies, in Turkish).
+    * Three PDF files are attached to the CoNLL version in the ''doc'' folder: {{:user:zeman:treebanks:ttbankkl.pdf|ttbankkl.pdf}} (the chapter from Anne Abeillé, contains list of morphological tags), turkishtreebank.pdf (the paper from the EACL workshop) and user_guide.pdf (annotation manual for dependencies, in Turkish).
 ==== Domain ====
@@ Line 47: / Line 47: @@
 Morphological annotation includes lemmas. Morphosyntactic tags were probably disambiguated manually.
-There are special derivational nodes. Derived words have been split into several tokens (see also the sample below).
+There are special derivational nodes. Derived words have been split into several tokens (see also the sample below). Typical pattern (maybe the only pattern but I have not confirmed that) is as follows: There are two nodes connected with a dependency link. The head node corresponds to the surface word. It has the word form, part of speech and morphological features but it has no lemma (lemma is '_'). The surface word is a result of a derivational morphological process. It has been derived from another word, often a different part of speech (e.g. a noun was derived from a verb). The dependent node represents the source of the derivation. It has no word form but it has a lemma. Its part-of-speech tag describes the source word and thus it can differ from the part-of-speech tag of the head node. The FEAT column says just 'Pos'. The dependent node need not be a leave. Other nodes may depend on it, instead of depending on the parent node. If we have a noun derived from a verb, i.e. we have a verbal node depending on the nominal node, and there is a dependent filling a verbal valency slot of the derived noun, we can expect the dependent to be attached to the verbal node.
+Occasionally there are derivational chains longer than two nodes. An example is in the sentence No. 82 of the test data:
+lemma azal / Verb -> _ / Verb / Caus -> _ / Verb / Pass|Pos -> azaltılması / Noun / NInf / A3sg|P3sg|Nom
+According to Google Translate, //azal// means “to decrease” and //azaltılması// means “reduced”. TRmorph gives the following four analyses:
+<code>
+analyze> azaltılması
+azal<v><caus><pass><vn_ma><p3s>
+azal<v><caus><pass><vn_ma><p3s><3s>
+azal<v><caus><pass><vn_ma><p3s><3p>
+azal<v><caus><pass><cv_ma><p3s>
+</code>
 ==== Sample ====
@@ Line 78: / Line 89: @@
 ==== Parsing ====
-SzTB is a mildly nonprojective treebank. 4032 of the 139,143 tokens of the CoNLL 2007 version are attached nonprojectively (2.9%).
+Nonprojectivity rate in METU-Sabanci is relatively high. 3716 of the 69695 tokens of the CoNLL 2007 version are attached nonprojectively (5.33%).
-The results of the CoNLL 2007 shared task are [[http://nextens.uvt.nl/depparse-wiki/AllScores|available online]]. They have been published in [[http://aclweb.org/anthology-new/D/D07/D07-1096.pdf|(Nivre et al., 2007)]]. The evaluation procedure was changed to include punctuation tokens. These are the best results for Hungarian:
+The results of the CoNLL 2007 shared task are [[http://nextens.uvt.nl/depparse-wiki/AllScores|available online]]. They have been published in [[http://aclweb.org/anthology-new/D/D07/D07-1096.pdf|(Nivre et al., 2007)]]. The evaluation procedure was changed to include punctuation tokens. These are the best results for Turkish:
 ^ Parser (Authors) ^ LAS ^ UAS ^
-| Malt (Nilsson et al.) | 80.27 | 83.55 |
+| Titov et al. | 79.81 | 86.22 |
-| Sagae | 79.53 | 83.51 |
+| Malt (Nilsson et al.) | 79.79 | 85.77 |
-| Nakagawa | 76.74 | 82.49 |
+| Nakagawa | 78.22 | 85.77 |
-| Titov et al. | 77.94 | 82.18 |
+| Keith Hall | 77.42 | 85.18 |
+| Malt (Johan Hall) | 79.24 | 85.04 |
 The two Malt parser results of 2007 (single malt and blended) are described in [[http://aclweb.org/anthology-new/D/D07/D07-1097.pdf|(Hall et al., 2007)]] and the details about the parser configuration are described [[http://w3.msi.vxu.se/users/jha/conll07/|here]].

[ Back to the navigation ] [ Back to the content ]

Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics Wiki

Differences