Lower and higher estimates of the number of “true analogies” between sentences contained in a large multilingual corpus

COLING 2004 - Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages

  Lepage, Yves ^a  

^a ADVANCED TELECOMMUNICATIONS RESEARCH INSTITUTE INTERNATIONAL   (Japan)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847301011     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Lloyd ALLISON and Trevor I. DIX. 1986. A bit string longest common subsequence algorithm. Information Processing Letter, 23:305-310.
2. Leonard BLOOMFIELD. 1933. Language. Holt, New York.
3. Michael CARL. 1998. Meaning preservation in machine translation. In ESSLI'98, pages ?-?, Saarbrücken, March.
4. e éd. 1916].
5. Esa ITKONEN and Jussi HAUKIOJA, 1997. A rehabilitation of analogy in syntax (and elsewhere), pages 131-177. Peter Lang.
6. Esa ITKONEN. 1994. Iconicity, analogy, and universal grammar. Journal of Pragmatics, 22:37-53.
7. Julie Anne LEGATE and Charles D. YANG. 2002. Empirical re-assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 19:151-162.
8. Yves LEPAGE. 2001. Analogy and formal languages. In Proceedings of FG/MOL 2001, pages 373-378, Helsinki, August.
9. Georges MOUNIN. 1968. Clefs pour la linguistique. Bibliothèques 10/18, Seghers, Paris.
10. e éd. 1880].
11. Geoffrey K. PULLUM and Barbara C. SCHOLTZ. 2002. Empirical assessment of stimulus poverty arguments. The Linguistic Review, 19:9-50.
12. Geoffrey K. PULLUM, 1999. Generative grammar, pages 340-343. The MIT Press, Cambridge.