A dependency treebank for english

Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2002

Volumn , Issue , 2002, Pages 857-863

  Rambow, Owen ^a   Creswell, Cassandre ^a   Szekely, Rachel ^b   Taber, Harriet ^b   Walker, Marilyn ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^c AT AND T LABS RESEARCH   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

MULTIPLE LEVELS; SYNTACTIC ANNOTATION; TREEBANKS;

SYNTACTICS;

EID: 84929911234     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (14)

1. Srinivas Bangalore and Aravind Joshi. 1999. Supertagging: An approach to almost parsing. Computational Linguistics, 25(2):237-266.
2. Srinivas Bangalore and Owen Rambow. 2000. Exploiting a probabilistic hierarchical model for generation. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING 2000), Saarbrücken, Germany.
3. Alena Böhmová, Jan Hajǐc, Eva Hajǐcová, and Barbora Hladḱa. 2001. The Prague Dependency Treebank: Three-Level Annotation Scenario. In Anne Abeilĺe, editor, Treebanks: Building and Using Syntactically Annotated Corpora. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
4. Michael Collins. 1997. Three generative, lexicalised models for statistical parsing. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Madrid, Spain, July.
5. Jan Hajic, Eva Hajicová, Martin Holub, Petr Pajas, Petr Sgall, Barbora Vidová-Hladḱa, and Veronika eznícková. 2001. The current status of the prague dependency treebank. In LNAI 2166, LNAI 2166, pages 11-20. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York.
6. Aravind K. Joshi and Yves Schabes. 1991. Tree-Adjoining grammars and lexicalized grammars. In Maurice Nivat and Andreas Podelski, editors, Definability and Recognizability of Sets of Trees. Elsevier.
7. Ronald M. Kaplan and Joan W. Bresnan. 1982. Lexicalfunctional grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. In J.W. Bresnan, editor, The Mental Representation of Grammatical Relations. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass., December.
8. David Magerman. 1995. Statistical decision-Tree models for parsing. In 33rd Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL'95).
9. Mitchell M. Marcus, Beatrice Santorini, and Mary Ann Marcinkiewicz. 1993. Building a Large Annotated Corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19.2:313-330, June.
10. M. Marcus, G. Kim, M. 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 Human Language Technology Workshop.
11. Igor A. Melčuk. 1988. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice. State University of New York Press, New York.
12. Carl Pollard and Ivan Sag. 1994. Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
13. P. Sgall, E. Hajicova, and J. Panevova. 1986. The meaning of the sentence and its semantic and pragmatic aspects. Reidel, Dordrecht.
14. Fei Xia and Martha Palmer. 2001. Converting dependency structure to phrase structures. In hlt2001, pages 61-65.