Mildly context-sensitive dependency languages

ACL 2007 - Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 160-167

  Kuhlmann, Marco ^a   Möhl, Mathias ^a  

^a SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONTEXT-SENSITIVE; DEPENDENCY STRUCTURES; LEXICAL INFORMATION; NATURAL LANGUAGES; STRUCTURAL FLEXIBILITIES;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS;

CONTEXT SENSITIVE LANGUAGES;

EID: 69049107453     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (17)

1. Manuel Bodirsky, Marco Kuhlmann, and Mathias Möhl. 2005. Well-nested drawings as models of syntactic structure. In Tenth Conference on Formal Grammar and Ninth Meeting on Mathematics of Language, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
2. Aron Culotta and Jeffrey Sorensen. 2004. Dependency tree kernels for relation extraction. In 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 423-429, Barcelona, Spain.
3. Jason Eisner and Giorgio Satta. 1999. Efficient parsing for bilexical context-free grammars and head automaton grammars. In 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 457-464, College Park, Maryland, USA.
4. Ferenc Gécseg and Magnus Steinby. 1997. Tree languages. In Grzegorz Rozenberg and Arto Salomaa, editors, Handbook of Formal Languages, volume 3, pages 1-68. Springer-Verlag, New York, USA.
5. Günter Hotz and Gisela Pitsch. 1996. On parsing coupledcontext-free languages. Theoretical Computer Science, 161:205-233.
6. Aravind K. Joshi. 1985. Tree adjoining grammars: How much context-sensitivity is required to provide reasonable structural descriptions? In David R. Dowty, Lauri Karttunen, and Arnold M. Zwicky, editors, Natural Language Parsing, pages 206-250. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
7. Laura Kallmeyer. 2006. Comparing lexicalized grammar formalisms in an empirically adequate way: The notion of generative attachment capacity. In International Conference on Linguistic Evidence, pages 154-156, Tübingen, Germany.
8. Marco Kuhlmann and Joakim Nivre. 2006. Mildly nonprojective dependency structures. In 21st International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 44th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (COLING-ACL) Main Conference Poster Sessions, pages 507-514, Sydney, Australia.
9. Ryan McDonald and Fernando Pereira. 2006. Online learning of approximate dependency parsing algorithms. In Eleventh Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL), pages 81-88, Trento, Italy.
10. Ryan McDonald, Fernando Pereira, Kiril Ribarov, and Jan Hajič. 2005. Non-projective dependency parsing using spanning tree algorithms. In Human Language Technology Conference (HLT) and Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP), pages 523-530, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
11. Peter Neuhaus and Norbert Bröker. 1997. The complexity of recognition of linguistically adequate dependency grammars. In 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 337-343, Madrid, Spain.
12. Joakim Nivre. 2006. Constraints on non-projective dependency parsing. In Eleventh Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL), pages 73-80, Trento, Italy.
13. Chris Quirk, Arul Menezes, and Colin Cherry. 2005. Dependency treelet translation: Syntactically informed phrasal smt. In 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 271-279, Ann Arbor, USA.
14. Owen Rambow and Aravind K. Joshi. 1997. A formal look at dependency grammars and phrase-structure grammars. In Leo Wanner, editor, Recent Trends in Meaning-Text Theory, volume 39 of Studies in Language, Companion Series, pages 167-190. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
15. Giorgio Satta. 1992. Recognition of linear context-free rewriting systems. In 30th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 89-95, Newark, Delaware, USA.
16. Katerina Veselá, Jiři Havelka, and Eva Hajičova. 2004. Condition of projectivity in the underlying dependency structures. In 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING), pages 289-295, Geneva, Switzerland.
17. K. Vijay-Shanker, David J. Weir, and Aravind K. Joshi. 1987. Characterizing structural descriptions produced by various grammatical formalisms. In 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pages 104-111, Stanford, California, USA.