Dependency grammar: Classification and exploration

Cognitive Technologies

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 365-388

  Debusmann, Ralph ^a   Kuhlmann, Marco ^b  

^a SAARLAND UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^b UPPSALA UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); COMPUTER AIDED LANGUAGE TRANSLATION; SEMANTICS;

ARGUMENT STRUCTURES; COMPUTATIONAL TASK; DEPENDENCY ANALYSIS; DEPENDENCY GRAMMAR; MACHINE TRANSLATIONS; PRAGUE DEPENDENCY TREEBANK; SEMANTIC REPRESENTATION; SYNTACTIC REPRESENTATION;

SYNTACTICS;

EID: 77952739655     PISSN: 16112482     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-540-89408-7_16     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (56)

1. 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (2007).
2. Bader, R., Foeldesi, C., Pfeiffer, U., Steigner, J. Modellierung grammatischer Phänomene der deutschen Sprache mit Topologischer Dependenzgrammatik. Germany: Softwareprojekt, Saarland University (2004).
3. Becker, T., Rambow, O., Niv, M. The derivational generative power, or, scrambling is beyond LCFRS. Tech. Rep., University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (1992).
4. Bodirsky, M., Kuhlmann, M., Möhl, M. Well-nested drawings as models of syntactic structure. In: Tenth Conference on Formal Grammar and Ninth Meeting on Mathematics of Language. Edinburgh, UK (2005).
5. Culotta, A., Sorensen, J. Dependency tree kernels for relation extraction. In: 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (pp. 423-429). Barcelona, Spain (2004). DOI 10.3115/1218955.1219009
6. Debusmann, R. A declarative grammar formalism for dependency grammar. Diploma thesis, Saarland University (2001). Http://www.ps.uni-sb.de/Papers/ abstracts/da.html
7. Debusmann, R. Multiword expressions as dependency subgraphs. In: Proceedings of the ACL 2004 Workshop on Multiword Expressions: Integrating Processing. Barcelona/ES (2004).
8. Debusmann, R. Extensible dependency grammar: A modular grammar formalism based on multigraph description. Ph.D. thesis, Universität des Saarlandes (2006).
9. Debusmann, R. The complexity of First-Order Extensible Dependency Grammar. Tech. Rep., Saarland University (2007).
10. Debusmann, R. Scrambling as the intersection of relaxed context-free grammars in a modeltheoretic grammar formalism. In: ESSLLI 2007 Workshop Model Theoretic Syntax at 10. Dublin/IE (2007).
11. Debusmann, R., Duchier, D., Koller, A., Kuhlmann, M., Smolka, G., Thater, S. A relational syntax-semantics interface based on dependency grammar. In: Proceedings of COLING 2004. Geneva/CH (2004).
12. Debusmann, R., Duchier, D., Kuhlmann, M., Thater, S. TAG as dependency grammar. In: Proceedings of TAG+7. Vancouver/CA (2004).
13. Debusmann, R., Duchier, D., Niehren, J. The XDG grammar development kit. In: Proceedings of the MOZ04 Conference, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (vol. 3389, pp. 190-201). Springer, Charleroi/BE (2004).
14. Dienes, P., Koller, A., Kuhlmann, M. Statistical A* dependency parsing. In: Prospects and Advances in the Syntax/Semantics Interface. Nancy/FR (2003).
15. Duchier, D., Debusmann, R. Topological dependency trees: A constraint-based account of linear precedence. In: Proceedings of ACL 2001. Toulouse/FR (2001).
16. Egg, M., Koller, A., Niehren, J. The constraint language for lambda structures. Journal of Logic, Language, and Information (2001).
17. Eisner, J., Satta, G. Efficient parsing for bilexical context-free grammars and Head Automaton Grammars. In: 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (pp. 457-464). College Park, MD, USA (1999). DOI 10.3115/1034678.1034748
18. Gaifman, H. Dependency systems and phrase-structure systems. Information and Control, 8:304-337 (1965).
19. Hajič, J., Panevová, J., Hajičová, E., Sgall, P., Pajas, P., Štěpánek, J., Havelka, J., Mikulová, M. Prague Dependency Treebank 2.0. Linguistic Data Consortium, 2006T01 (2006).
20. Havelka, J. Beyond projectivity: Multilingual evaluation of constraints and measures on nonprojective structures. In: 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) [1] (pp. 608-615) (2007). URL http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P/P07/P07-1077.pdf
21. Hays, D.G. Dependency theory: A formalism and some observations. Language, 40(4):511-525 (1964). DOI 10.2307/411934
22. Holan, T., Kuboň, V., Oliva, K., Plátek, M. Two useful measures of word order complexity. In:Workshop on Processing of Dependency-Based Grammars (pp. 21-29). Montréal, Canada (1998).
23. Hotz, G., Pitsch, G. On parsing coupled-context-free languages. Theoretical Computer Science, 161(1-2):205-233 (1996). DOI 10.1016/0304-3975(95) 00114-X
24. Hudson, R.A. English Word Grammar. Oxford/UK: B. Blackwell (1990).
25. Huybregts, R. The weak inadequacy of context-free phrase structure grammars. In G. de Haan, M. Trommelen, W. Zonneveld (Eds.), Van periferie naar kern (pp. 81-99). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris (1984).
26. Joshi, A.K. Tree adjoining grammars: How much context-sensitivity is required to provide reasonable structural descriptions? In: Natural Language Parsing (pp. 206-250). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1985).
27. Joshi, A.K., Schabes, Y. Tree-Adjoining Grammars. In G. Rozenberg, A. Salomaa (Eds.), Handbook of Formal Languages (vol. 3, pp. 69-123). New York: Springer (1997).
28. Koller, A., Striegnitz, K. Generation as dependency parsing. In: Proceedings of ACL 2002. Philadelphia/US (2002).
29. Kruijff, G.J.M. Dependency grammar. In: Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd edn., pp. 444-450). Amsterdam: Elsevier (2005).
30. Kuhlmann, M. Dependency structures and lexicalized grammars. Doctoral dissertation, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany (2007).
31. Kuhlmann, M., Möhl, M. Mildly context-sensitive dependency languages. In: 45th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) [1] (pp. 160-167). URL http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P07- 1021
32. Kuhlmann, M., Möhl, M. The string-generative capacity of regular dependency languages. In: Twelfth Conference on Formal Grammar. Dublin, Ireland (2007).
33. Kuhlmann, M., Nivre, J. Mildly non-projective 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 (pp. 507-514). Sydney, Australia (2006). URL http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/P06-2000
34. Marcus, S. Algebraic Linguistics: Analytical Models, Mathematics in Science and Engineering (vol. 29). New York, USA: Academic Press (1967).
35. McDonald, R., Satta, G. On the complexity of non-projective data-driven dependency parsing. In: Tenth International Conference on Parsing Technologies (IWPT)(pp. 121-132). Prague, Czech Republic (2007). URL http://www.aclweb.org/ anthology/W/W07/W07-2216
36. Mel'čuk, I. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice. Albany/US: State University Press of New York (1988).
37. Mezei, J.E., Wright, J.B. Algebraic automata and context-free sets. Information and Control, 11(1-2):3-29 (1967). DOI 10.1016/S0019-9958(67)90353-1
38. Mozart Consortium. The Mozart-Oz website (2007). Http://www.mozart-oz. org/
39. Narendranath, R. Evaluation of the Stochastic Extension of a Constraint-Based Dependency Parser. Bàchelorarbeit, Saarland University, Germany (2004).
40. Neuhaus, P., Bröker, N. The complexity of recognition of linguistically adequate dependency grammars. In: 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (pp. 337-343). Madrid, Spain (1997). DOI 10.3115/979617.979660
41. Nivre, J. Constraints on non-projective dependency parsing. In: Eleventh Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL) (pp. 73-80). Trento, Italy (2006).
42. Nivre, J., Hall, J., Kübler, S., McDonald, R., Nilsson, J., Riedel, S., Yuret, D. The CoNLL 2007 shared task on dependency parsing. In: Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning (EMNLP-CoNLL) (pp. 915-932). Prague, Czech Republic (2007). URL http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/D/ D07/D07-1096
43. Quirk, C., Menezes, A., Cherry, C. Dependency treelet translation: Syntactically informed phrasal SMT. In: 43rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (pp. 271-279). Ann Arbor, USA (2005). DOI 10.3115/1219840.1219874
44. Sarkar, A. Combining supertagging with lexicalized tree-adjoining grammar parsing. Complexity of Lexical Descriptions and its Relevance to Natural Language Processing: A Supertagging Approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (2007).
45. Schulte, C. Programming Constraint Services, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (vol. 2302). Berlin: Springer-Verlag (2002).
46. Schulte, C., Lagerkvist, M., Tack, G. GECODE - Generic Constraint Development Environment (2007). Http://www.gecode.org/
47. Setz, J. A principle compiler for Extensible Dependency Grammar. Tech. Rep., Bachelorarbeit, Saarland University, Germany (2007).
48. Sgall, P., Hajicova, E., Panevova, J. The Meaning of the Sentence in its Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects. Dordrecht/NL: D. Reidel (1986).
49. Shieber, S.M. Evidence against the context-freeness of natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 8(3):333-343 (1985). DOI 10.1007/BF00630917
50. Smolka, G. The Oz programming model. In: J. van Leeuwen (Ed.), Computer Science Today, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (vol. 1000, pp. 324-343). Berlin/DE: Springer-Verlag (1995).
51. Tesnière, L. Éléments de Syntaxe Structurale. Paris, France: Klinksieck (1959).
52. Veselá, K., Havelka, J., Hajičová, E. Condition of projectivity in the underlying dependency structures. In: 20th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING) (pp. 289-295). Geneva, Switzerland (2004). DOI 10.3115/1220355.1220397
53. Vijay-Shanker, K., Weir, D.J., Joshi, A.K. Characterizing structural descriptions produced by various grammatical formalisms. In: 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) (pp. 104-111). Stanford, CA, USA (1987). DOI 10.3115/ 981175.981190
54. Weir, D.J. Characterizing mildly context-sensitive grammar formalisms. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA (1988). URL http://wwwlib.umi.com/ dissertations/fullcit/8908403
55. XTAG Research Group. A Lexicalized Tree Adjoining Grammar for English. Tech. Rep. IRCS-01-03, IRCS, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (2001).
56. Yli-Jyrä, A. Multiplanarity - a model for dependency structures in treebanks. In: Second Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories (TLT) (pp. 189-200). Växjö, Sweden (2003).