The notion of argument in prepositional phrase attachment

Computational Linguistics

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 341-377

  Merlo, Paola ^a   Ferrer, Eva Esteve ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GENEVA   (Switzerland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SEMANTICS;

CLASSIFICATION TASKS; LEXICAL SEMANTICS; PREPOSITIONAL PHRASE; SUPERVISED CLASSIFICATION; TWO-STEP PROCESS;

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION);

EID: 33748663090     PISSN: 08912017     EISSN: 15309312     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/coli.2006.32.3.341     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aldezabal, Izaskun, Maxux Aranzabe, Koldo Gojenola, Kepa Sarasola, and Aitziber Atutxa. 2002. Learning argument/adjunct distinction for Basque. In Proceedings of the Workshop of the ACL Special Interest Group on the Lexicon on Unsupervised Lexical Acquisition, pages 42-50, Philadelphia, PA.
2. Argaman, Vered and Neal Pearlmutter. 2002. Lexical semantics as a basis for argument structure frequency bias. In Paola Merlo and Suzanne Stevenson, editors, The Lexical Basis of Sentence Processing: Formal, Computational and Experimental Issues. John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pages 303-324.
3. Baker, Collin F., Charles J. Fillmore, and John B. Lowe. 1998. The Berkeley FrameNet project. In Proceedings of the Thirty-sixth Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and Seventeenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics (ACL-COLING'98), pages 86-90, Montreal, Canada.
4. Bies, Ann, Mark Ferguson, Karen Katz, and Robert MacIntyre. 1995. Bracketing guidelines for Treebank II style, Penn Treebank Project. Technical report, University of Pennsylvania, Philadephia.
5. Buchholz, Sabine. 1999. Distinguishing complements from adjuncts using memory-based learning. ILK, Computational Linguistics, Tilburg University.
6. Chang, Chih-Chung and Chih-Jen Lin. 2001. LIBSVM: A Library for Support Vector Machines. Software available at http://www.csie.ntu.edu.tw/~cjlin/libsvm.
7. Collins, Michael and James Brooks. 1995. Prepositional phrase attachment through a backed-off model. In Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Very Large Corpora, pages 27-38, Cambridge, MA.
8. CoNNL. 2004. Eighth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL-2004). Boston, MA.
9. CoNLL. 2005. Ninth Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL-2005). Ann Arbor, MI.
10. Dorr, Bonnie. 1997. Large-scale dictionary construction for foreign language tutoring and interlingual machine translation. Machine Translation, 12(4):1-55.
11. Fabre, Cécile and Didier Bourigault. 2001. Linguistic clues for corpus-based acquisition of lexical dependencies. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics Conference, pages 176-184, Lancaster, UK.
12. Gildea, Daniel and Daniel Jurafsky. 2002. Automatic labeling of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics, 28(3):245-288.
13. Grimshaw, Jane. 1990. Argument Structure. MIT Press.
14. Hindle, Donald and Mats Rooth. 1993. Structural ambiguity and lexical relations. Computational Linguistics, 19(1):103-120.
15. Jackendoff, Ray. 1977. X′ Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
16. Korhonen, Anna. 2002a. Semantically motivated subcategorization acquisition. In Proceedings of the Workshop of the ACL Special Interest Group on the Lexicon on Unsupervised Lexical Acquisition, pages 51-58, Philadelphia, PA, July.
17. Korhonen, Anna. 2002b. Subcategorisation Acquisition. Ph.D. thesis, University of Cambridge.
18. Levin, Beth. 1993. English Verb Classes and Alternations. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, IL.
19. Manning, Christopher. 2003. Probabilistic syntax. In Rens Bod, Jennifer Hay, and Stephanie Jannedy, editors, Probabilistic Linguistics. MIT Press, pages 289-314.
20. Marantz, Alex. 1984. On the Nature of Grammatical Relations. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
21. Marcus, M., G. Kim, A. Marcinkiewicz, R. Macintyre, A. Bies, M. Ferguson, K. Katz, and B. Schasberger. 1994. The Penn Treebank: Annotating predicate argument structure. In Proceedings of the ARPA Workshop on Human Language Technology, pages 114-119, Plainsboro, NJ.
22. Marcus, Mitch, Beatrice Santorini, and Mary Ann Marcinkiewicz. 1993. Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19:313-330.
23. Merlo, Paola. 2003. Generalised PP-attachment disambiguation using corpus-based linguistic diagnostics.In Proceedings of the Tenth Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL'03), pages 251-258, Budapest, Hungary.
24. Merlo, Paola, Matt Crocker, and Cathy Berthouzoz. 1997. Attaching multiple prepositional phrases: Generalized backed-off estimation. In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 145-154, Providence, RI.
25. Merlo, Paola and Matthias Leybold. 2001. Automatic distinction of arguments and modifiers: The case of prepositional phrases. In Proceedings of the Fifth Computational Natural Language Learning Workshop (CoNLL-2001), pages 121-128, Toulouse, France.
26. Merlo, Paola and Suzanne Stevenson. 2001. Automatic verb classification based on statistical distributions of argument structure. Computational Linguistics, 27(3):373-108.
27. Miller, George, Richard Beckwith, Christiane Fellbaum, Derek Gross, and Katherine Miller. 1990. Five papers on Wordnet. Technical report, Cognitive Science Laboratory, Princeton University.
28. Nielsen, Rodney and Sameer Pradhan. 2004. Mixing weak learners in semantic parsing. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-2004), pages 80-87, Barcelona, Spain, July.
29. Palmer, Martha, Daniel Gildea, and Paul Kingsbury. 2005. The Proposition Bank: An annotated corpus of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics, 31:71-105.
30. Phillips, William and Ellen Riloff. 2002. Exploiting strong syntactic heuristics and co-training to learn semantic lexicons. In Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP 2002), pages 125-132, Philadelphia, PA.
31. Pollard, Carl and Ivan Sag. 1987. An Information-based Syntax and Semantics, volume 13. CSLI Lecture Notes, Stanford University.
32. Quinlan, J. Ross. 1993. C4.5 : Programs for Machine Learning. Series in Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, CA.
33. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech, and Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. Longman, London.
34. Ratnaparkhi, Adwait. 1997. A linear observed time statistical parser based on maximum entropy models. In Proceedings of the Second Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 1-10, Providence, RI.
35. Ratnaparkhi, Adwait, Jeffrey Reynar, and Salim Roukos. 1994. A maximum entropy model for prepositional phrase attachment. In Proceedings of the ARPA Workshop on Human Language Technology, pages 250-255, Plainsboro, NJ.
36. Riloff, Ellen and Mark Schmelzenbach. 1998. An empirical approach to conceptual case frame acquisition. In Proceedings of the Sixth Workshop on Very Large Corpora, pages 49-56, Montreal.
37. Schütze, Carson T. 1995. PP Attachment and Argumenthood. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 26:95-151.
38. SENSEVAL-3.2004. Third International Workshop on the Evaluation of Systems for the Semantic Analysis of Text (SENSEVAL-3). Barcelona, Spain.
39. Srinivas, Bangalore and Aravind K. Joshi. 1999. Supertagging: An approach to almost parsing. Computational Linguistics, 25(2):237-265.
40. Stede, Manfred. 1998. A generative perspective on verb alternations. Computational Linguistics, 24(3):401-430.
41. Stetina, Jiri and Makoto Nagao. 1997. Corpus based PP attachment ambiguity resolution with a semantic dictionary. In Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Very Large Corpora, pages 66-80, Beijing/Hong Kong.
42. Swier, Robert and Suzanne Stevenson. 2005. Exploiting a verb lexicon in automatic semantic role labelling. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-05), pages 883-890, Vancouver, Canada.
43. Vapnik, V. 1995. The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory. Springer.
44. Villavicencio, Aline. 2002. Learning to distinguish PP arguments from adjuncts. In Proceedings of the 6th Conference on Natural Language Learning (CoNLL-2002), pages 84-90, Taipei, Taiwan.
45. Xue, Nianwen. 2004. Handling dislocated and discontinuous constituents in Chinese semantic role labelling. In Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Asian Language Resources (ALR04), pages 19-26, Hainan Island, China.
46. Xue, Nianwen and Martha Palmer. 2004. Calibrating features for semantic role labeling. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP-2004), pages 88-94, Barcelona, Spain.
47. Yeh, Alexander. 2000. More accurate tests for the statistical significance of result differences. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference in ComputationalLinguistics (COLING 2000), pages 947-953, Saarbruecken, Germany.
48. Zhao, Shaojun and Dekang Lin. 2004. A nearest-neighbor method for resolving PP-attachment ambiguities. In The First International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing (IJCNLP-04), pages 545-554, Hainan Island, China.