ParGram

pargram@mailman.uni-konstanz.de

113 discussions

PARGRAM/INESS Spring 2015 Meeting in Warsaw – the (probably) final programme
by Adam Przepiorkowski 26 Jan '15

26 Jan '15

Below – and at http://pargram.b.uib.no/meetings/spring-2015-meeting-in-warsaw/ – you'll find a modified (and probably final) version of the programme of the PARGRAM/INESS meeting in Warsaw (2–6 February 2015). The changes wrt. to the previous version: 1) one more talk: Dorothee Beermann, XLFG and the TypeCraft Database of Interlinear Glossed Text, 2) a couple of talks shuffled. See you in Warsaw! All best, Adam P. ====================================================================== Monday, 2 February 2015 – INESS Day 1: • 10:00–11:30 Introduction to INESS • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–13:30 Parsing, disambiguation and search • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 Comments, issue tracking and administration • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 Parallel treebanks Import and export • INESS-SPONSORED DINNER Tuesday, 3 February 2015 – PARGRAM Day 1: • 10:00–10:45 Lionel Clément: XLFG • 10:45–11:30 Dorothee Beermann: XLFG and the TypeCraft Database of Interlinear Glossed Text • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–12:45 Panagiotis Minos: A New LFG Parser • 12:45–13:30 Sebastian Sulger: State of the XLE at Konstanz • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 1 • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 2 Wednesday, 4 February 2015 – PARGRAM Day 2: • 10:00–10:45 Tibor Laczkó: Negation in Hungarian • 10:45–11:30 Stella Markantonatou: The Development of the Modern Greek Grammar • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–12:45 Sebastian Sulger: NV Complex Predicates in the Urdu Grammar • 12:45–13:30 Agnieszka Patejuk: Converting a Polish Valence Dictionary to XLE • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 3 • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 4 Thursday, 5 February 2015 – PARGRAM Day 3: • 10:00–10:45 Alina Wróblewska: Dealing with FRAGMENTS of Polish • 10:45–11:30 Mark-Matthias Zymla: XLE/XFR for Common Ground Modeling • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–12:45 Wojciech Jaworski, Adam Przepiórkowski: Towards Semantic Parsing with XLE • 12:45–13:30 Anna Kibort: Passive Morphology and the Lexicon • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 5 • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 6 • DINNER Friday, 6 February 2015 – INESS Day 2: • 10:00–11:30 Advanced search • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–13:30 Phrase alignment in parallel treebanks • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 Annotator sets and interannotator agreement Prune parsing • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 Questions and discussion ====================================================================== -- Adam Przepiórkowski ˈadam ˌpʃɛpjurˈkɔfskʲi http://clip.ipipan.waw.pl/ ____ Computational Linguistics in Poland http://jlm.ipipan.waw.pl/ ___________ Journal of Language Modelling http://zil.ipipan.waw.pl/ ____________ Linguistic Engineering Group http://nkjp.pl/ _________________________ National Corpus of Polish

1 0

Spring 2015 PARGRAM meeting and INESS workshop, Warsaw, 2–6 February 2015
by Adam Przepiorkowski 23 Jan '15

23 Jan '15

Dear All, Please find enclosed below the programme of the 3-day PARGRAM meeting combined with the 2-day INESS workshop. More information is available at: https://pargram.b.uib.no/meetings/spring-2015-meeting-in-warsaw/ We still have a slot or two available, so let me and Miriam Butt know if you'd like to present. Also, let me know if you'd like to take part in the meeting and are not listed at that web page (to estimate the room size and the amount of coffee needed). All best, Adam P. ====================================================================== Monday, 2 February 2015 – INESS Day 1: • 10:00–11:30 Introduction to INESS • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–13:30 Parsing, disambiguation and search • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 Comments, issue tracking and administration • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 Parallel treebanks Import and export • INESS-SPONSORED DINNER Tuesday, 3 February 2015 – PARGRAM Day 1: • 10:00–10:45 Lionel Clément: XLFG • 10:45–11:30 Panagiotis Minos: A New LFG Parser • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–12:45 Sebastian Sulger: State of the XLE at Konstanz • 12:45–13:30 Alina Wróblewska: Dealing with FRAGMENTS of Polish • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 1 • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 2 Wednesday, 4 February 2015 – PARGRAM Day 2: • 10:00–10:45 Tibor Laczkó: Negation in Hungarian • 10:45–11:30 Stella Markantonatou: The Development of the Modern Greek Grammar • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–12:45 Sebastian Sulger: NV Complex Predicates in the Urdu Grammar • 12:45–13:30 Agnieszka Patejuk: Converting a Polish Valence Dictionary to XLE • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 3 • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 4 Thursday, 5 February 2015 – PARGRAM Day 3: • 10:00–10:45 Mark-Matthias Zymla: XLE/XFR for Common Ground Modeling • 10:45–11:30 Wojciech Jaworski, Adam Przepiórkowski: Towards Semantic Parsing with XLE • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–12:45 Anna Kibort: Passive morphology and the lexicon • 12:45–13:30 TBA • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 5 • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 ParGramBank / comparison of PARGRAM structures 6 • DINNER Friday, 6 February 2015 – INESS Day 2: • 10:00–11:30 Advanced search • COFFEE BREAK • 12:00–13:30 Phrase alignment in parallel treebanks • LUNCH BREAK • 14:30–16:00 Annotator sets and interannotator agreement Prune parsing • COFFEE BREAK • 16:30–18:00 Questions and discussion ====================================================================== -- Adam Przepiórkowski ˈadam ˌpʃɛpjurˈkɔfskʲi http://clip.ipipan.waw.pl/ ____ Computational Linguistics in Poland http://jlm.ipipan.waw.pl/ ___________ Journal of Language Modelling http://zil.ipipan.waw.pl/ ____________ Linguistic Engineering Group http://nkjp.pl/ _________________________ National Corpus of Polish

1 0

Evidentials
by Sebastian Sulger 26 Nov '14

26 Nov '14

Dear ParGram list, We are wondering whether any of the ParGram languages have encountered and/or treated evidentiality at all. We are interested in all types of encoding evidentiality, be it by using special particles, a certain kind of verbal morphology, etc. If you have come across evidentiality in the language(s) you've been working on, or, even better, if you've already implemented (parts of) it in your grammar, please get back to us. Best, Sebastian -- Sebastian Sulger FB Sprachwissenschaft Universität Konstanz http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/sulger

1 0

Spring 2015 PARGRAM meeting – 2-4 February 2015 (INESS workshop 5-6 February), Warsaw
by Adam Przepiorkowski 06 Oct '14

06 Oct '14

Dear All, The next PARGRAM meeting will be hosted during the week of 2–6 February 2015 by the Linguistic Engineering Group at the Institute of Computer Science, Polish Academy of Sciences, at its location (ul. Jana Kazimierza 5, Warszawa, Poland). The programme will appear in due course at the following web page, which already contains some more information: http://pargram.b.uib.no/meetings/spring-2015-meeting-in-warsaw/ Please write to Miriam (miriam.butt(a)uni-konstanz.de) and myself (adamp(a)ipipan.waw.pl) with suggestions of topics to be discussed. Please write to me (adamp(a)ipipan.waw.pl) as soon as possible if you intend to take part in the meeting – this is not binding for you but will help us reserve an appropriate room. All best, Adam P. -- Adam Przepiórkowski ˈadam ˌpʃɛpjurˈkɔfskʲi http://clip.ipipan.waw.pl/ ____ Computational Linguistics in Poland http://jlm.ipipan.waw.pl/ ___________ Journal of Language Modelling http://zil.ipipan.waw.pl/ ____________ Linguistic Engineering Group http://nkjp.pl/ _________________________ National Corpus of Polish

1 0

[XLE] Scope of operators
by Sebastian Sulger 05 Sep '14

05 Sep '14

Hi, I have a question about the scope of two specific operators in XLE: shuffle and Kleene closure. Say I have an expression like the following: XP --> X* , Y. Depending on how the scope of the operators is interpreted, my guess is that there are different types of possible behavior: 1) XLE interprets the expression as [X,Y]*. XLE will accept strings of the following type: XY YX XYXY XYYX 2) XLE interprets the expression as [X]*,Y. XLE will accept strings of the following type: XY XXY YX YXXX (Only a single Y in each string.) The XLE documentation states that if two operators (* + # ~ - \ / , < >) occur next to each other, it disambiguates possible ambiguities by giving the left-hand operator wider scope than the right-hand operator (if I am not mistaken, this is behavior 1). My questions are these: - Is there scope ambiguity in my expression? - If there is scope ambiguity in my expression, how do you suggest it be resolved towards behavior 2 (which is the behavior I want)? I have implemented my expression in XLE, and the behavior is the desired one, but I'd like to understand why. Thanks, Jani -- Sebastian Sulger FB Sprachwissenschaft Universität Konstanz http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/sulger

1 0

representation of MWEs in LFG?
by Agnieszka Patejuk 26 Aug '14

26 Aug '14

Hi, I would like to know if there are any works on representing multiword expressions in LFG, taking their internal structure into account? Example: United States of America One option would be to treat "United States of America" as one element whose PRED is 'United States of America' and which corresponds to one leaf at c-structure. The other option would be to say that "United States of America" has internal structure: States as PRED, United as ADJUNCT of States, of America also probably as an ADJUNCT of states. The problem is then how to represent the PRED for the entire unit (United States of America) – PRED-MWE? Maybe the third option (a variant of the second one above) would be to set the PRED of the head of the MWE to the PRED corresponding to the entire unit (United States of America) and then ensure, using appropriate constraints, that the remaining parts of the MWE are present? (^ ADJUNCT $ PRED FN)=c united (^ ADJUNCT $ PRED FN)= of (^ ADJUNCT $ OBJ)= America Are there other approaches? I would be grateful for any suggestions. Best, Agnieszka

3 2

Call for TLT paper contribution and other items
by Sebastian Sulger 05 Aug '14

05 Aug '14

Hi, First of all: I hope all of you are having a great summer! There are a couple of items I'd like to draw your attention to: 1) Towards the end of April, Miriam has sent around the meeting notes of the past Spring ParGram meeting at Nuance. Grammar writers, please take notice and adjust your grammars if necessary to ensure parallelism. 2) We decided that we should go ahead and bank some more structures to add to ParGramBank. We think that the "possession" sentences from last meeting's testsuite were particularly parallel throughout. I attach a "possession testsuite" to this email, in which I updated some of the lexical items. The numbering continues from the last testsuite (sentences2012.txt). Those of you who sent in structures for the Nuance meeting, you are encouraged to parse these sentences and send the Prolog output to Paul Meurer, who can then add them to ParGramBank. Again, please make sure you take a look at the meeting notes before you send them in. 3) There is a workshop deadline coming up which might be interesting given our treebanking efforts: "Treebanks & Linguistic Theories" is going to take place in Tübingen/Germany in December. http://tlt13.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/ They take submissions until September 22nd. I think we could do a follow-up to the ACL paper, where we explain a bit more what ParGramBank is about and what the main issues are. In particular, issues related to cross-linguistic testsuite creation could be discussed. Please let me know if you are interested in co-authoring a paper for TLT. Best, Jani -- Sebastian Sulger FB Sprachwissenschaft Universität Konstanz http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/sulger

1 0

meeting notes, Spring Meeting 2014
by Miriam Butt 29 Apr '14

29 Apr '14

ParGram Meeting Notes, Spring Meeting 2014 Nuance Monday 24.2.2014 ---- XLE STATUS John Maxwell was able to attend from PARC so we began the day with a discussion on the current status of XLE. The open source version is available, but it is not clear to many people how. Remedy: put a note on the XLE Wiki site about how to access the open source version. There have also been requests for accessing the precompiled version and the English grammar. Notes on how to do this also need to be added. The English grammar should be put on a separate repository for people to download. It would in fact be nice if this could be done via the INESS site. Jani to check with Paul on this. It would be good Konstanz got a cfsm license, then Konstanz could compile the FSM binaries for different platforms and distribute them with XLE. At the time of the discussion, Jani and John had together managed to get XLE compiled on Jani's computer. This is the first time XLE had been compiled successfully outside of PARC. However, the transfer system could still not be compiled. Subsequently, Jani managed to compile everything on his computer (on a late Sunday night). The problem lay with some of the Boost C++ libraries, which keep changing. After Jani downloaded the newest version, everything was fixed. We are currently working on getting the compilation complete with everything (tcl, etc.) and testing it at Konstanz. Suggestion for the ParGram Wiki: list of available grammars, maybe get them to be automatically downloadable from the INESS website (see above). At the last ParGram meeting, it was suggested to use a creative common licencse for the grammars like the Polish site does. Even if resources are freely available, people are often not sure if they can use them or under what conditions. So it would be good to make them officially available via a license. Other action items: Move XLE documentation to Konstanz, part of XLE redmine. Integrate Polish addition. Put note on starter grammars on ParGram Wiki in a prominent place. Also common features and common templates. ---- DEBUGGING AND DOCUMENTATION ISSUES Ron discussed debugging issues he is having with XLE. It was acknowledged that learning out to debug with XLE is an acquired skill and that some things could be more helpful. In particular, there is a concern with coming into a large grammar and understanding the history and design decisions that are embedded in it. They key to solving this appears to be ample documentation within an individual grammar, but also easy accessibility to the overall decisions taken within ParGram over the decades and a summary of the state of the discussion for certain phenomena. Everybody is again encouraged to contribute to the ParGram Wiki: http://typo.uni-konstanz.de/redmine/projects/pargram/wiki/ Some topics have already been put up. It would be great if the community could contribute to knowledge sharing by putting up brief entries for further topics. ------ PROSODY-SYNTAX AND MODULARITY DISCUSSION Tina presented issues she had been working on with respect to the prosody-syntax interface. In particular, there was a question about how modularity in LFG is to be understood. The upshot of the discussion was that given the projection architecture of LFG, the question arises with respect to how much information is being passed back and forth and how much of that is in a sense duplicative. John and Ron continue to advocate an FST approach as in the Boegel et al. (2010) paper. ----- F-STRUCTURE COMPARISON Testsuites: The f-structure comparison this year focused on the treatment of negation (suggested by Gyuri at the last ParGram meeting) and possessive (suggested by Jani). We also had the first few lines of "The Gruffalo". The intention is to add parts of this meetings Testsuite to the ParGramBank. For this, however, all the grammars will need to parallelize. While constructing the testsuites, we also tried to avoid introducing extraneous issues primarily caused by unwise choice of vocabulary. That is, we tried to use vocabulary that was likely to exist in all languages. I.e., "chicken" instead of "gopher". This turns out not to be an easy problem to solve. For example, with Wolof we ran into trouble with "girl" and "boy". These always introduce an extra relative clause as "girl" translates to "child who is a woman" and "boy" translates to "child who is a man". The problem of crosslinguistic testsuite construction is not trivial. We had discussed some issues at the Debrecen meeting and some further ones came up here. It seems that it would be worth writing a follow-up paper to the ParGramBank paper discussing these issues in some detail. ----- Negation In looking at the negation f-structures, we reviewed the ParGram Wiki entry and Gyuri's slides from 2013. These or a version of these need to be added to the ParGram Wiki (Miriam and Gyuri to do). to do). One issue was whether one could project an ADJUNCT from a negation that is expressed morphologically. This is technically possible, so there is no reason in principle to resort just to a NEG + feature just because you have morphological negation. Changes that need to be made to the grammars to ensure parallelism: Norwegian: ADV-TYPE neg --> ADJUNCT-TYPE neg STMT-TYPE --> CLAUSE-TYPE (see guidelines on this) VFORM into a check feature? Wolof: has NEG + feature --- should think about moving to an Adjunct type analysis (?) German: why only constituent negation on "Die Katzen sind/lachen nicht im Haus." Some examples in the negation testsuite included NPI items. Overall, NPI is not dealt with in any of the grammars. "The cat is not in the house either." Works okay in English, but not checking for NPI. The cat is in the house either. --- parses fine but shouldn't. Norwegian: Should "Katten er i huset heller" be good? I.e., is it doing the wrong parallel thing like English is? ADV-TYPE nexus? What is this? NPI issue does not arise with Urdu for this, since the "either" is done with focus clitic "also" plus negation. -- Neither is the cat in the house. Not good in English. "Nor is the cat in the housse" Recommendation: If have things like never/ever, have POL negative for the negative one. Urdu: change nah to not be an ADV-TYPE sadv German: Weder/Noch ist die Katz im Haus. ---> doesn't work "The girl did not buy any apples." No NPI -- "The girl bought any apples." works also Urdu: Why is there number information on "koi"? Check on whether this is necessary. Could also have QUANT-TYPE info. English doesn't but Norwegian does. (QUANT-TYPE existential). German has no QUANT-TYPE. For Urdu: could introduce a "QUANT-TYPE existential" German does not register the negative factor in "keine". That would be difficult for transfer. Wolof: QUANT-TYPE negative -- is calculated on the basis of the any/no item plus negation on the verb. Not really parallel with the rest, but may be the desirable thing to do for this language. Reason: also have existential quantifiers and they are different. In general, English grammar thought about checking on NPI items and thought it was too costly an operation. The reason is that one would have to involve (IO)-FU and constraints on paths, but those are difficult/complex to determine. Ron was extremely surprised by the fact that the grammar contained CASE obl. Nuance might look into changing CASE obl --> CASE acc for the English grammar. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Tuesday 25.2.2014 ---- DISCUSSION ON TREEBANKS/CONSTRUCTIONS INESS --- It would be great if the treebank listings on INESS could be reorganized so that there is a group of ParGram treebanks and under that there should be the parallel ParGramBank. For next time, should do some of the testsuites that are already in existence and parse them and add them to the ParGramBank. EAGLES testsuite -- who has it? Miriam asked Hans Uszkoreit and he said he is trying to find it as well, he will let Miriam know. One could also look into using some of DELPH-INs testsuites. ---- F-STRUCTURE COMPARISON CONTINUED Possessive f-strs: Norwegian: REF + needed? English: bright red tractor, wrong analysis bright red tractor: bright is not a good adjective to use, find a different one maybe try light instead of bright. Wolof: Adjunct type for "bright" in bright red tractor? Urdu: change numbers to not have the stem value as the PRED value, but the actual number. Check whether need NUM information in the Urdu numbers. Wolof: why is "four" NUM sg and why is it at the SPEC level??? Will probably be removed. The farmer has a fear of spiders -- different treatment of "of spiders" across grammars (Adjuncts in English/German, OBL in Norwegian), so not a good example for ParGramBank. Jani will try to come up with a sentence that doesn't involve a complement of the noun. Norwegian: why is the NUMBER f-str so complex? Can some of that go into CHECK features? ADJ-GEN in German? Look up in Steffi's dissertation? Urdu change: genitives to the right of N, also change to SPEC POSS rather than Adjunct analysis ---- Wednesday 26.2.14 Talks held at CSLI on lexical semantics and complex predicates -- see the slides. There was also a discussion led by Lori Levin on CL curriculum and on establishing standards for resources. The background is more and more standards are being set (i.e., by Google), but the linguistic standards needed are not necessarily included because there is too little understanding of the issues involved (i.e., too little linguistic and grammar engineering knowledge). Also, it is expensive to train people in the kind of grammar writing we do. However, once people are trained up, they are a rare commodity that are coveted by companies. The discussion revolved around how to fix this. One method is to populate the ParGram Wiki with more information on issues and fixes and why we decided to standardize things the way we did. PLEASE EVERYBODY HELP WITH THIS. One method is to provide courses, for example at the LSA institute or perhaps via on-line media (iTunes, etc.). Chris Brew, Lori Levin and Annie Zaenen said they would pursue this actively. Miriam is recording an on-line course on grammar development in the summer semester that will be freely available. ----- Thursday 27.2.14 Talks held on the Cognition Parser, on parser evaluation and disambiguation in the Wolof grammar and where Nuance is going with NL at the moment. See the slides. -- ************************************************************* Miriam Butt FB Sprachwissenschaft Universitaet Konstanz Fach 184 Tel: +49 7531 88 5109 78457 Konstanz Fax: +49 7531 88 4865 Germany +49 7531 88 5115 miriam.butt(a)uni-konstanz.de http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/butt "Xander, don't talk Latin in front of the books." Superstar, Buffy the Vampire Slayer *************************************************************

2 1

ParGram Report and Next Meeting
by Miriam Butt 18 Apr '14

18 Apr '14

Hi, in a subsequent message, I will send out the ParGram meeting notes from the spring meeting at Nuance. I apologize for only getting to this now, but there were things... (there always are things). Overall, the ParGram meeting in Nuance was lightly attended in terms of international groups. Urdu was heavily represented, Norwegian and Wolof were represented by Bamba, German by Christian Rohrer. Meladel Mistica was able to make the meetings, but due to the fact that she had just moved to the USA (job at Intel), she was not able to contribute f-structures for Indonesian. Nevertheless, we did some f-str comparison and the results are noted in the meeting notes. All grammar writers, please take heed. We also had an in-depth discussion about where we are with XLE and its open source status. Again, see the meeting notes. Damir Cavar (organizer of LFG14) has informed me that there have been inquiries about a ParGram meeting back-to-back with LFG. We have done this in the last couple of years because there were no spring/fall meetings planned (because the California home of XLE had turned uncertain). At the ParGram meeting in Debrecen in 2013, the decision was made that we would go back to having a spring and a fall meeting, with the spring meeting in California at Nuance and the fall meeting in Europe (as per the old tradition). Bergen has offered to host the fall meeting. As such, I had not anticipated having a ParGram meeting at LFG14. I personally also cannot stay much beyond the 20th and neither can Tracy (she can't stay at all beyond the 20th) At this point, we have several options: 1) No ParGram meeting at all with LFG14 (but those of us interested could get together for dinner and exachange notes and do some grammar debugging on the side). 2) A one-day or half-day ParGram meeting on the 21st. 3) A longer ParGram meeting as of the 21st (but this would be without me). For those of you planning to be in Ann Arbor in July, could you send your preferences to Sebastian (aka Jani) at: sebastian.sulger(a)uni-konstanz.de. Then we need to decide what to do about the planned fall meeting in Bergen. Could people please also write in to Jani stating whether they would attend a meeting in Bergen in the fall? Thanks, Miriam -- ************************************************************* Miriam Butt FB Sprachwissenschaft Universitaet Konstanz Fach 184 Tel: +49 7531 88 5109 78457 Konstanz Fax: +49 7531 88 4865 Germany +49 7531 88 5115 miriam.butt(a)uni-konstanz.de http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/butt "Xander, don't talk Latin in front of the books." Superstar, Buffy the Vampire Slayer *************************************************************

1 0

ParGram publications
by Sebastian Sulger 21 Mar '14

21 Mar '14

Hi, I am updating the ParGram website at http://pargram.b.uib.no. If you have any publications related to ParGram which are not listed there under "References", please let me know their details. Best, Jani -- Sebastian Sulger FB Sprachwissenschaft Universität Konstanz http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/sulger

1 0

← Newer
1
...
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Older →

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

ParGram