Lexical analysis

Handbook of Natural Language Processing, Second Edition

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 31-58

  Hippisley, Andrew ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABSTRACTING; COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; SEMANTICS; SYNTACTICS;

FINITE STATE TRANSDUCERS; LEXICAL SEMANTICS; LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS; MACHINE TRANSLATIONS; MORPHOLOGICAL VARIANTS; NATURAL LANGUAGE TEXT; SYNTACTIC ANALYSIS; SYNTACTIC INFORMATION;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 84908593662     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (64)

1. Armstrong, S. 1996. Multext: Multilingual text tools and corpora. In: Feldweg, H. and Hinrichs, W. (eds).Lexikon und Text. Tübingen, Germany: Niemeyer.
2. Aronoff, M. and Fudeman, K. 2005. What is Morphology? Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
3. Arpe, A. et al. (eds). 2005. Inquiries into Words, Constraints and Contexts (Festschrift in Honour of Kimmo Koskenniemi on his 60th Birthday). Saarijärvi, Finland: Gummerus.
4. Baerman, M., Brown, D., and Corbett, G.G. 2005. The Syntax-Morphology Interface: AStudy of Syncretism. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
5. Beesley, K. and Karttunen, L. 2003. Finite State Morphology. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
6. Bonami, O. and Boyé, G. 2006. Deriving inflectional irregularity. In: Müller, S. (ed). Proceedings of the HPSG06 Conference. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
7. Booij, G. 2007. The Grammar of Words. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
8. Brown, D. and Hippisley, A. Under review. Default Morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9. Brown, D. 1998. Defining ‘subgender’: Virile and devirilized nouns in Polish. Lingua 104 (3-4). 187-233.
10. Cahill, L. 2007. A syllable-based account of Arabic morphology. In: Soudi, A. (eds). pp. 45-66.
11. Cahill, L. and Gazdar, G. 1999. German noun inflection. Journal of Linguistics 35 (1). 1-42.
12. Carlson, L. 2005. Inducing a morphological transducer from inflectional paradigms. In: Arpe et al. (eds). pp. 18-24.
13. Chomsky, N. and Halle, M. 1968. The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.
14. Church, K.W. 2005. The DDI approach to morphology. In Arpe et al. (eds). pp. 25-34.
15. Corbett, G.G. 2009. Canonical inflection classes. In: Montermini, F., Boyé, G. and Tseng, J. (eds).Selected Proceedings of the Sixth Decembrettes: Morphology in Bordeaux, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project. www.lingref.com, document #2231, pp. 1-11.
16. Corbett, G.G. and Fraser, N.M. 2003. Network morphology: A DATR account of Russian inflectional morphology. In: Katamba, F.X. (ed). pp. 364-396.
17. Dale, R., Moisl, H., and Somers, H. (eds). 2000. Handbook of Natural Language Processing. New York: Marcel Dekker.
18. Evans, N., Brown, D., and Corbett, G.G. 2000. Dalabon pronominal prefixes and the typology of syncretism: A network morphology analysis. In: Booij, G. and van Marle, J. (eds). Yearbook of Morphology 2000. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer. pp. 187-231.
19. Evans, N., Brown, D., and Corbett, G.G. 2002. The semantics of gender in Mayali: Partially parallel systems and formal implementation. Language 78 (1). 111-155.
20. Evans, R. and Gazdar, G. 1996. DATR: A language for lexical knowledge representation. Computational Linguistics 22. 167-216.
21. Finkel, R. and Stump, G. 2007. A default inheritance hierarchy for computing Hebrew verb morphology. Literary and Linguistics Computing 22 (2). 117-136.
22. Fraser, N. and Corbett, G.G. 1997. Defaults in Arapesh. Lingua 103 (1). 25-57.
23. Gazdar, G. 1985. Review article: Finite State Morphology. Linguistics 23. 597-607.
24. Gazdar, G. 1992. Paradigm-function morphology in DATR. In: Cahill, L. and Coates, R. (eds). Sussex Papers in General and Computational Linguistics. Brighton: University of Sussex, CSRP 239. pp. 43-53.
25. Gibbon, D. 1987. Finite state processing of tone systems. Proceedings of the Third Conference, European ACL, Morristown, NJ: ACL. pp. 291-297.
26. Gibbon, D. 1989. ‘tones.dtr’. Located at ftp://ftp.informatics.sussex.ac.uk/pub/nlp/DATR/dtrfiles/tones.dtr
27. Gildea, D. and Jurafsky, D. 1995. Automatic induction of finite state transducers for single phonological rules. ACL 33. 95-102.
28. Gildea, D. and Jurafsky, D. 1996. Learning bias and phonological rule induction. Computational Linguistics 22 (4). 497-530.
29. Goldsmith, J. 2001. Unsupervised acquisition of the morphology of a natural language. Computational Linguistics 27 (2). 153-198.
30. Haspelmath, M. 2002. Understanding Morphology. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
31. Hockett, C. 1958. Two models of grammatical description. In: Joos, M. (ed). Readings in Linguistics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
32. Jurafsky, D. and Martin, J.H. 2007. Speech and Language Processing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.
33. Kaplan, R.M. and Kay, M. 1994. Regular models of phonological rule systems. Computational Linguistics 20. 331-378.
34. Karttunen, L. 2003. Computing with realizational morphology. In: Gelbukh, A. (ed). CICLing 2003 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2588. Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag. pp. 205-216.
35. Karttunen, L. 2007. Word play. Computational Linguistics 33 (4). 443-467.
36. Katamba, F.X. (ed). 2003. Morphology: Critical Concepts in Linguistics, VI: Morphology: Its Place in the Wider Context. London, U.K.: Routledge.
37. Kay, M. 2004. Introduction to Mitkov (ed.). xvii-xx.
38. Kiraz, G.A. 2000. Multitiered nonlinear morphology using multitape finite automata. Computational Linguistics 26 (1). 77-105.
39. Kiraz, G. 2008. Book review of Arabic Computational Morphology: Knowledge-Based and Empirical Methods. Computational Linguistics 34 (3). 459-462.
40. Koskenniemi, K. 1983. Two-Level Morphology: A General Computational Model for Word-Form Recognition and Production. Publication 11, Department of General Linguistics, Helsinki, Finland: University of Helsinki.
41. Krieger, H.U. and Nerbonne, J. 1992. Feature-based inheritance networks for computational lexicons. In: Briscoe, E., de Paiva, V., and Copestake, A. (eds). Inheritance, Defaults and the Lexicon. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. pp. 90-136.
42. Kilbury, J. 2001. German noun inflection revisited. Journal of Linguistics 37 (2). 339-353.
43. Langer, H. 1994. Reverse queries in DATR. COLING-94. Morristown, NJ: ACL. pp. 1089-1095.
44. Mel’čuk. I. 2006. Aspects of the Theory of Morphology. Trends in Linguistics 146. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
45. Mitkov, R. (ed). 2004. The Oxford Handbook of Computational Linguistics. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
46. Moreno-Sandoval, A. and Goñi-Menoyo, J.M. 2002. Spanish inflectional morphology in DATR. Journal of Logic, Language and Information. 11 (1). 79-105.
47. Oncina, J., Garcia, P., and Vidal, P. 1993. Learning subsequential transducers for pattern recognition tasks. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 15. 448-458.
48. Pollard, C. and Sag, I.A. 1994. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
49. Pretorius, L. and Bosch, S.E. 2003. Finite-sate morphology: An analyzer for Zulu. Machine Translation 18 (3). 195-216.
50. Roark, B. and Sproat, R. 2007. Computational Approaches to Syntax. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
51. Sag, I., Wasow, T., and Bender, E.M. (eds). 2003. Syntactic Theory: A Formal Introduction. Stanford, CA: CSLI.
52. Soudi, A. et al. (eds). 2007. Arabic Computational Morphology: Knowledge-Based and Empirical Methods. Dordrecht: Springer.
53. Sproat, R. 1997. Multilingual Text to Speech Synthesis: The Bell Labs Approach. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
54. Sproat, R. 2000. Lexical analysis. In Dale, R. et al. (eds). pp. 37-58.
55. Sproat, R. 2007. Preface. In: Soudi, A. et al (eds). Arabic Computational Morphology: Knowledge-Based and Empirical Methods. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Springer. pp. vii-viii.
56. Stewart, T. and Stump, G. 2007. Paradigm function morphology and the morphology-syntax interface. In: Ramchand, G. and Reiss, C. (eds). Linguistic Interfaces. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press. pp. 383-421.
57. Stump, G. 2001. Inflectional Morphology. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
58. Stump, G. 1993. On rules of referral. Language 69. 449-79.
59. Stump, G. 2006. Heteroclisis and paradigm linkage. Language 82, 279-322.
60. Timberlake, A.A. 2004. A Reference Grammar of Russian. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
61. Tzoukermann, E., Klavans, J., and Strzalkowski, T. 2003. Information retrieval. In: Mitkov (ed.) 529-544.
62. Ui Dhonnchadha, E., Nic Phaidin, C., and van Genabith, J. 2003. Design, implementation and evaluation of an inflectional morphology finite-state transducer for Irish. Machine Translation 18 (3). 173-193.
63. Yarowski, D. and Wicentowski, R. 2001. Minimally supervised morphological analysis by multimodal alignment. Proceedings of the 38th ACL. Morristown, NJ: ACL. pp. 207-216.
64. Yona, S. and Wintner, S. 2007. A finite-state morphological grammar of Hebrew. Natural Language Engineering 14. 173-190.