XLE

xle@mailman.uni-konstanz.de

42 discussions

Fwd: Re: ParGram sentences
by Sebastian Sulger 26 Jan '15

26 Jan '15

Hi, At the upcoming ParGram Meeting in Warsaw, we would like to experiment with a new way to do our usual structure comparison: We would like to use INESS (http://iness.uib.no/) and ParGramBank directly. There are a couple of advantages to this. One obvious advantage is that ParGramBank will grow. But we can also easily switch between languages/sentences, and there is no need to create a humongous PDF file with structures in it (last year, our structure handout had 234 pages). Paul Meurer (www.uib.no/persons/Paul.Meurer) has kindly implemented a couple of new features in INESS. I attach an email from Paul below. Please follow his instructions when adding to ParGramBank. To be able to upload structures to INESS (in Prolog format), you need to have an account there. Please follow the instructions on the INESS homepage to create your account. Once the account is created, Paul can give you the necessary user rights to upload files. Lastly, I attach the sentences in a text file to this email. As Paul says in his email, please use a consistent naming scheme for the structures; you should use something like urd-051-fs (i.e., ISO 639-3 language code - sentence number - fs). Start the sentence number at 51 (there are already 50 sentences in ParGramBank). If you have more questions, please don't hesitate to send email to Paul, or myself. Also, Agnieszka/Paul and others, if I forgot anything, feel free to jump in. Best, Jani -------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht -------- Betreff: Re: ParGram sentences Datum: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 11:48:57 +0100 Von: Paul Meurer <paul.meurer(a)uni.no> An: Agnieszka Patejuk <agnieszka.patejuk(a)googlemail.com> Kopie (CC): Sebastian Sulger <sebastian.sulger(a)uni-konstanz.de>, Adam Przepiórkowski <adamp(a)ipipan.waw.pl>, Miriam Butt <Miriam.Butt(a)uni-konstanz.de>, Victoria Rosén <victoria(a)uib.no> Hi, > BTW: I went through previous correspondence related to the meeting and > have gathered the following points to cover: > > PARGRAM MEETING (3 days) > • structure comparison: > – how: traditional or using INESS? I think now everything needed to make INESS suitable for structure comparison is in place. Here is what is new: * I have implemented uploading of prolog files (one by one, or as a gzipped archive) * Once the sentences (not structures) are aligned, it is easy to switch between treebanks/languages. It is enough for the sentences to be aligned to a pivot language (e.g., Urdu). You can test this in the ParGram treebanks. What people should do: * Parse their sentences in XLE * Use a consistent naming scheme for the sentences (e.g., deu-050-fs), where the number corresponds to the running sentence number. We should not start with 1, but continue where we stopped last time. I think new sentences should start at 50. Alternative translations could be called deu-050a-fs etc. * Upload the sentences using the _upload files_ link on the Treebank overview page (either one-by-one, or as a gzipped archive, no other archiving program will work). * Disambiguate the sentences in INESS. * Add glosses, as described in the documentation. * Align the sentences, with English as a minimum, using the Alignment tool. This, Jani or I could do for them. Alternatively, for languages whose grammar is in INESS, the sentences could be parsed in INESS directly. Does this sound feasible? I think the sentences should be ready quite soon, for people to be able to do all this before Pargram. — Best wishes, Paul -- Sebastian Sulger FB Sprachwissenschaft Universität Konstanz http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/sulger

4 7

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

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

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

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

Problem with print-feature-forest?
by Katarzyna Krasnowska 03 Mar '14

03 Mar '14

Dear All, I have a question concerning the print-feature-forest command of XLE and would appreciate any help from someone who has some experience using this command. I am working on training a probabilistic variant of the Polish LFG grammar using XLE's functionalities. When preparing the feature forests for cometc using the print-feature-forest command, I came across a problem: it seems that print-feature-forest sometimes gets the feature counts wrong. I ran the print-feature-forest command on the obj-ex.pl file attached to this e-mail, with a features file containing only one line, "fs_attrs OBJ" (so the only feature counted here is the number of OBJ's in the f-structure). obj-ex.pl is a packed parse representation produced by the Polish LFG grammar, with some attributes non-relevant to the problem, such as morphosyntactic ones, removed. The sentence translates as "Look ahead of you and read in the beard". It contains 2 verbs and 2 adjunct prepositional phrases and has 3 possible parses; in two parses, each verb has one of the PP's attached to it; in one parse, the second PP is shared between the verbs. Since a PP which is an adjunct is represented as an f-structure headed by the preposition whose OBJ is the noun's f-structure, it seems that the first two parses contain 2 OBJ's and the third one contains 3 of them since the shared PP appears twice in the f-structure. However, the output feature-forest is: (7 1:2 {1 (1 {2 (3 ) (4 1:2 ) } ) (2 ) } ) which corresponds to two parses with 2 OBJ's and one with 4 of them. Knowing from my previous experience that subsumption can be tricky in XLE, I replaced the two subsume statements in obj-ex.pl with equalities (in the case of this sentence, there actually is an equality), and the feature forest produced for the modified f-structure seems correct: (7 1:1 {1 (1 {2 (3 1:1 ) (4 1:2 ) } ) (2 1:1 ) } ) Perhaps someone knows why it works like this? Am I wrong in expecting what the feature forest should look like? Or maybe it is an known issue with print-feature-forest? I would be very grateful for any advice, since data preparation for my experiments relies heavily on the print-feature-forestcommand . Many thanks in advance, Katarzyna Krasnowska

1 0

ParGram Sentences Reminder
by Sebastian Sulger 19 Feb '14

19 Feb '14

Hi, We would like to remind all of you to consider parsing the new set of ParGram sentences. Even if you cannot come to the Spring ParGram meeting, it would still be great if you could continue to support ParGram and ParGramBank by submitting your parses. The submission procedure is easy: - translate the sentences to your language; - gloss them and put them in a LaTeX file (use the attached Debrecen handout as a guideline; use the Leipzig Glossing Rules); - parse them; - (opt. disambiguate them); - save the c- and f-structures to eps files; - send the eps files as well as the LaTeX file to me. The plan is to add the sentences to ParGramBank (accessible on INESS: http://iness.uib.no/iness/main-page) after the meeting, i.e. after we have ensured parallelism. Miriam also provided the following notes on the sentences: ---------------------------------- "Also note that the sentences cover three things: 1) Negation -- this was decided on at the last meeting in Debrecen and Gyuri has kindly provided the sentences. 2) Possession --- this is something Jani is interested in and he provided the sentences. 3) The first four sentences of "The Gruffalo". A must read for anybody above 2 years of age. For categories 1 and 2 -- let us know if you have trouble translating them into your language. One of the issues with ParGramBank is that we need to have sentences that are comparable and there are some tough issues about what it means to be comparable (also discussed at the last meeting in Debrecen). We presumably cannot always ensure full comparability, but we can try to make sure that we aren't introducing silly extras that make things non-parallel and that could have been avoided." ---------------------------------- I'm sure that ParGramBank has the potential to grow and provide enough potential for a lot of further research into cross-linguistic treebanking (see, for example, the email by Lori Levin the other day). Best, Jani -- Sebastian Sulger FB Sprachwissenschaft Universität Konstanz http://ling.uni-konstanz.de/pages/home/sulger

1 1

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

XLE