acl acl2013 acl2013-28 acl2013-28-reference knowledge-graph by maker-knowledge-mining
Source: pdf
Author: Reut Tsarfaty
Abstract: Stanford Dependencies (SD) provide a functional characterization of the grammatical relations in syntactic parse-trees. The SD representation is useful for parser evaluation, for downstream applications, and, ultimately, for natural language understanding, however, the design of SD focuses on structurally-marked relations and under-represents morphosyntactic realization patterns observed in Morphologically Rich Languages (MRLs). We present a novel extension of SD, called Unified-SD (U-SD), which unifies the annotation of structurally- and morphologically-marked relations via an inheritance hierarchy. We create a new resource composed of U-SDannotated constituency and dependency treebanks for the MRL Modern Hebrew, and present two systems that can automatically predict U-SD annotations, for gold segmented input as well as raw texts, with high baseline accuracy.
Meni Adler and Michael Elhadad. 2006. An unsupervised morpheme-based HMM for Hebrew morphological disambiguation. In Proceedings of COLING-ACL. Stephen R. Anderson. 1992. A-Morphous Morphology. Cambridge University Press. Barry J. Blake. 1994. Press, Cambridge. Case. Cambridge University Sabine Brants, Stefanie Dipper, Silvia Hansen, Wolfgang Lezius, and George Smith. 2002. The TIGER treebank. In Proceedings of TLT. Joan Bresnan. Blackwell. 2000. Lexical-Functional Syntax. Daniel Cer, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Daniel Jurafsky, and Christopher D. Manning. 2010. Parsing to stanford dependencies: Trade-offs between speed and accuracy. In Proceedings of LREC. Wanxiang Che, Valentin I. Spitkovsky, and Ting Liu. 2012. A comparison of chinese parsers for stanford dependencies. In Proceedings of ACL, pages 11–16. Greville G. Corbett. 2006. Agreement. Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge University Press. Ido Dagan, Oren Glickman, and Bernardo Magnini. 2006. The PASCAL recognising textual entailment challenge. In MLCW 2005, LNAI Volume. Marie-Catherine de Marneffe and Christopher D. Manning. 2008a. Stanford dependencies manual. Technical Report. Marie-Catherine de Marneffe and Christopher D. Manning. 2008b. The stanford typed dependencies representation. In Proceedings of the workshop on Cross-Framework and Cross-Domain Parser Evaluation. Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Bill MacCartney, and Christopher D. Manning. 2006. Generating typed dependency parses from phrase structure parses. In Proceedings of LREC, pages 449–454. Robert Kuffner Fundel, Katrin and Ralf Zimmer. 2007. RelEx relation extraction using dependency parse trees. Bioinformatics, (23). Lewis Glinert. 1989. The Grammar of Modern Hebrew. Cambridge University Press. Yoav Goldberg and Michael Elhadad. 2010. Easy-first dependency parsing ofModern Hebrew. In Proceedings of NAACL/HLT workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically Rich Languages. Yoav Goldberg and Michael Elhadad. 2011. Joint Hebrew segmentation and parsing using a PCFGLA lattice parser. In Proceedings of ACL. Yoav Goldberg. 2011. Automatic syntactic processing of Modern Hebrew. Ph.D. thesis, Ben Gurion University of the Negev. Katri Haverinen, Filip Ginter, Samuel Kohonen, Timo Viljanen, Jenna Nyblom, and Tapio Salakoski. 2011. A dependency-based analysis of treebank annotation errors. In Proceedings of DepLing. Tracy H. King, Richard Crouch, Stefan Riezler, Mary Dalrymple, and Ronald Kaplan. 2003. The PARC 700 dependency bank. In The 4th International Workshop on Linguistically Interpreted Corpora. Ryan McDonald, Joakim Nivre, Yvonne QuirmbachBrundage, Yoav Goldberg, Dipanjan Das, Kuzman Ganchev, Keith Hall, Slav Petrov, car T¨ ackstr o¨m, Claudia Bedini, Castell o´, and Jungmee Lee. 2013. dency annotation for multilingual ceedings of ACL. Hao Zhang, OsN u´ria Bertomeu Universal depenparsing. In Pro- Joakim Nivre, Jens Nilsson, Johan Hall, Atanas Chanev, G ¨ulsen Eryigit, Sandra K ¨ubler, Svetoslav Marinov, and Erwin Marsi. 2007. Maltparser: A language-independent system for data-driven dependency parsing. Natural Language Engineering, 13(1): 1–41. Joakim Nivre, Laura Rimell, Ryan McDonald, and Carlos G ´omez-Rodr ı´guez. 2010. Evaluation of dependency parsers on unbounded dependencies. In Proceedings of COLING, pages 813–821. Slav Petrov, Leon Barrett, Romain Thibaux, and Dan Klein. 2006. Learning accurate, compact, and interpretable tree annotation. In Proceedings of ACL. Paul M. Postal and David M. Perlmutter. 1977. Toward a universal characterization of passivization. In BLS 3. Owen Rambow. 2010. The Simple Truth about Dependency and Phrase Structure Representations: An Opinion Piece. In Proceedings of HLT-ACL. Khalil Sima’an, Alon Itai, Yoad Winter, Alon Altman, and Noa Nativ. 2001. Building a Tree-Bank for Modern Hebrew Text. In Traitement Automatique des Langues. Reut Tsarfaty and Khalil Sima’an. 2008. Relationalrealizational parsing. In Proceedings of CoLing. Reut Tsarfaty, Djame Seddah, Yoav Goldberg, Sandra Kuebler, Marie Candito, Jennifer Foster, Yannick Versley, Ines Rehbein, and Lamia Tounsi. 2010. Statistical parsing for morphologically rich language (SPMRL): What, how and whither. In Proceedings of the first workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically Rich Languages (SPMRL) at NA-ACL. Reut Tsarfaty, Joakim Nivre, and Evelina Andersson. 2012a. Cross-framework evaluation for statistical parsing. In Proceeding of EACL. 583 Reut Tsarfaty, Joakim Nivre, and Evelina Andersson. 2012b. Joint evaluation for segmentation and parsing. In Proceedings of ACL. Reut Tsarfaty. 2010. Relational-Realizational Parsing. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam. 584