scholarly journals A Part-of-Speech Tagset for Morphosyntactic Tagging of Amharic

Aethiopica ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Magdalena Krzyżanowska

The aim of the article is to propose a tagset for the morposyntactic tagging of Amharic and to discuss those issues which may seem problematic. The tagset contains forty-seven tags grouped into twelve parts of speech. It is hoped that it provides a starting point for more exhaustive guidelines for prospective annotators.

Author(s):  
Yabing Zhang

This article is devoted to the problem of using Russian time-prepositions by foreigners, especially by the Chinese. An analysis of modern literature allows the author to identify the main areas of the work aimed at foreign students’ development of the skills and abilities to correctly build the prepositional combinations and continuously improve the communication skills by means of the Russian language. In this paper, the time-prepositions in the Russian language have been analyzed in detail; some examples of polysemantic use of prepositions, their semantic and stylistic shades alongside with possible errors made by foreign students are presented. The results of the study are to help in developing a system of teaching Russian time-prepositions to a foreign language audience, taking into account their native language, on the basis of the systemic and functional, communicative and activity-centred basis. The role of Russian time-prepositions in constructing word combinations has been identified; the need for foreign students’ close attention to this secondary part of speech has been specified. It has been stated that prepositions are the most dynamic and open type of secondary language units within the quantitative and qualitative composition of which regular changes take place. The research substantiates the need that students should be aware of the function of time-preposition in speech; they are to get acquainted with the main time-prepositions and their meanings, to distinguish prepositions and other homonymous parts of speech as well as to learn stylistic shades of time-prepositions. Some recommendations related to the means of mastering time-prepositions have been given: to target speakers to assimilate modern literary norms and, therefore, to teach them how to choose and use them correctly by means of linguistic keys that are intended to fill the word with true meaning, to give it an organic structure, an inherent form and an easy combinability in the texts and oral speech.


enadakultura ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamar Makharoblidze

The question of derivates has been repeatedly raised in the teaching processes of language grammar and general linguistics. This circumstance became the basis for creating this short article. It is well known that a word-form can be changeable or unchangeable, and this fact is determined by the parts of speech. Form-changing words can undergo two types of change: inflectional and derivative. During the inflectional change, the form of the word changes, but the lexical and semantic aspects of the word do not change, i.e. its semantic and content data do not change. A classic example of this type of change is flexion of nouns.Derivation is the formation of a word from another word by the addition of non-inflectional affixes. Derivation can be of two types. The first is lexical derivation, in which the derivative affix produces a word with a different lexical content. A word-form can be another part of speech or the same part of speech but with a different lexical content. The second type of derivation is, first of all, grammatical derivation, when grammatical categories are produced. The grammatical category in general (and a word-form in general as well) includes the unity of morphological and semantical aspects. There is no separate semantics without morphology. Any semantic category and/or content must be conveyed in a specific form, so only a specific form has a specific morphosemantics, which can be produced by the grammatical derivatives. The main difference between the two types of derivation mentioned above (and therefore between the two types of derivatives) is the levels of the language hierarchy. The first type of affixes works at the lexical level of the language, while the second type derivatives produce forms at the morphological and semantic levels. The second type derivatives are inter-level affixes, because they act on two hierarchical levels. Any grammatical category includes specific morphosemantic oppositional forms. Thus, unlike inflectional affixes, the rest of the morphological affixes are all other types of inter-level derivatives. It should be noted that the preverb in Kartvelian languages ​​is the only linguistic unit with all possible functions of affix. DOWNLOADS


1996 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-136 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANDREI MIKHEEV

Words unknown to the lexicon present a substantial problem to part-of-speech tagging. In this paper we present a technique for fully unsupervised acquisition of rules which guess possible parts of speech for unknown words. This technique does not require specially prepared training data, and uses instead the lexicon supplied with a tagger and word frequencies collected from a raw corpus. Three complimentary sets of word-guessing rules are statistically induced: prefix morphological rules, suffix morphological rules and ending guessing rules. The acquisition process is strongly associated with guessing-rule evaluation methodology which is solely dedicated to the performance of part-of-speech guessers. Using the proposed technique a guessing-rule induction experiment was performed on the Brown Corpus data and rule-sets, with a highly competitive performance, were produced and compared with the state-of-the-art. To evaluate the impact of the word-guessing component on the overall tagging performance, it was integrated into a stochastic and a rule-based tagger and applied to texts with unknown words.


Author(s):  
Natalya Vasilievna Artamonova ◽  

Communion as part of speech occupies a special place in the structure of the Russian language, since it represents a problematic aspect of grammar. Already when determining the grammatical status of participle, the first difficulties appear, which is associated with hybrid features of participle, since it combines the features of two independent parts of speech - the adjective and the verb. The works of linguists describe different approaches to determining the status of communion. At present, it is possible to state the existence in Russian grammar of several points of view on the definition of the nature of communion.


Author(s):  
Dany Amiot ◽  
Edwige Dugas

Word-formation encompasses a wide range of processes, among which we find derivation and compounding, two processes yielding productive patterns which enable the speaker to understand and to coin new lexemes. This article draws a distinction between two types of constituents (suffixes, combining forms, splinters, affixoids, etc.) on the one hand and word-formation processes (derivation, compounding, blending, etc.) on the other hand but also shows that a given constituent can appear in different word-formation processes. First, it describes prototypical derivation and compounding in terms of word-formation processes and of their constituents: Prototypical derivation involves a base lexeme, that is, a free lexical elements belonging to a major part-of-speech category (noun, verb, or adjective) and, very often, an affix (e.g., Fr. laverV ‘to wash’ > lavableA ‘washable’), while prototypical compounding involves two lexemes (e.g., Eng. rainN + fallV > rainfallN). The description of these prototypical phenomena provides a starting point for the description of other types of constituents and word-formation processes. There are indeed at least two phenomena which do not meet this description, namely, combining forms (henceforth CFs) and affixoids, and which therefore pose an interesting challenge to linguistic description, be it synchronic or diachronic. The distinction between combining forms and affixoids is not easy to establish and the definitions are often confusing, but productivity is a good criterion to distinguish them from each other, even if it does not answer all the questions raised by bound forms. In the literature, the notions of CF and affixoid are not unanimously agreed upon, especially that of affixoid. Yet this article stresses that they enable us to highlight, and even conceptualize, the gradual nature of linguistic phenomena, whether from a synchronic or a diachronic point of view.


Litera ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 203-209
Author(s):  
Zera Asanova

The subject of this article is the examination theoretical approaches towards studying adjective as a part of speech, since the description of this lexical and grammatical group in the Crimean Tatar linguistics is incomplete. The aim goal consists in tracing the origins of theoretical comprehension of adjective as an independent part of speech. This linguistic research is based on the descriptive method. Methodological framework is comprised of the fundamental writing of prominent scholars: O. Jespersen, A. Potebnja, V. V. Vinogradov, A. M. Shcherbak, D. N. Shmelyov, and others. As a result, it was determined that the the word is attributed to a particular part of speech is in accordance with the scripted rules introduced by the linguists in the past. Languages and methods of their research have undergone significant changes. Accentuation of adjective among the parts of speech was related to the logical separation of the characteristic of thing from itself, on the level of understanding self-sufficiency of the characteristic as an empirical phenomenon, and the existence of special adjective words as names of quality. The acquired results and materials can be applied in basic and specialized educational courses on theoretical and practical grammar of the modern Crimean Tatar language in the section of “Morphology”.


Author(s):  
Lucian Nicolae Vintan ◽  
Daniel Ionel Morariu ◽  
Radu George Cretulescu ◽  
Maria Vintan

In this paper we will present a new approach regarding the documents representation in order to be used in classification and/or clustering algorithms. In our new representation we will start from the classical "bag-of-words" representation but we will augment each word with its correspondent part-of-speech. Thus we will introduce a new concept called hyper-vectors where each document is represented in a hyper-space where each dimension is a different part-of-speech component. For each dimension the document is represented using the Vector Space Model (VSM). In this work we will use only five different parts of speech: noun, verb, adverb, adjective and others. In the hyper-space each dimension has a different weight. To compute the similarity between two documents we have developed a new hyper-cosine formula. Some interesting classification experiments are presented as validation cases.


Author(s):  
Victor Shigurov

The problem of stepwise transposition of verbs into the category of parenthetical-modal units is considered in the paper. The research relevance is stipulated by insufficient knowledge of stepwise mechanisms of words and word forms transposition into other parts of speech and categories. The main purpose of the research is to calculate the stages and the limit of modulation for different groups of verbal units. General scientific, general linguistic and special methods (comparison, generalization; descriptive method, opposition, distribution and transformation analysis; linguistic experiment) were used as tools. The study of verb modulation stages has enables revealing the dynamics of corresponding fragments of the language system; use in the process of linguistic evolution of different ways of enhancing part of speech models, primarily due to their own, internal resources – "splitting" words and formation of new language units on the basis of a complex or individual word forms by means of interjectivation, partitioning, conjunctionalization, modulation, etc. It is established that the verbs belonging to different lexical groups are exposed to unequal modulation degree; finite verbs go through two to five stages of transposition until they are included into the category of parenthetical-modal units. The facts of a purely functional modulation of word forms occurring within the source verb lexemes, as well as their functional-and-semantic transposition into modal utterance components associated with the formation of lexical-and-grammatical homonyms are revealed. The results of the work can be used to create a transpositional grammar of the Russian language.


Author(s):  
Jaklin Kornfilt

The term “part of speech” is a traditional one that has been in use since grammars of Classical Greek (e.g., Dionysius Thrax) and Latin were compiled; for all practical purposes, it is synonymous with the term “word class.” The term refers to a system of word classes, whereby class membership depends on similar syntactic distribution and morphological similarity (as well as, in a limited fashion, on similarity in meaning—a point to which we shall return). By “morphological similarity,” reference is made to functional morphemes that are part of words belonging to the same word class. Some examples for both criteria follow: The fact that in English, nouns can be preceded by a determiner such as an article (e.g., a book, the apple) illustrates syntactic distribution. Morphological similarity among members of a given word class can be illustrated by the many adverbs in English that are derived by attaching the suffix –ly, that is, a functional morpheme, to an adjective (quick, quick-ly). A morphological test for nouns in English and many other languages is whether they can bear plural morphemes. Verbs can bear morphology for tense, aspect, and mood, as well as voice morphemes such as passive, causative, or reflexive, that is, morphemes that alter the argument structure of the verbal root. Adjectives typically co-occur with either bound or free morphemes that function as comparative and superlative markers. Syntactically, they modify nouns, while adverbs modify word classes that are not nouns—for example, verbs and adjectives. Most traditional and descriptive approaches to parts of speech draw a distinction between major and minor word classes. The four parts of speech just mentioned—nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adverbs—constitute the major word classes, while a number of others, for example, adpositions, pronouns, conjunctions, determiners, and interjections, make up the minor word classes. Under some approaches, pronouns are included in the class of nouns, as a subclass. While the minor classes are probably not universal, (most of) the major classes are. It is largely assumed that nouns, verbs, and probably also adjectives are universal parts of speech. Adverbs might not constitute a universal word class. There are technical terms that are equivalents to the terms of major versus minor word class, such as content versus function words, lexical versus functional categories, and open versus closed classes, respectively. However, these correspondences might not always be one-to-one. More recent approaches to word classes don’t recognize adverbs as belonging to the major classes; instead, adpositions are candidates for this status under some of these accounts, for example, as in Jackendoff (1977). Under some other theoretical accounts, such as Chomsky (1981) and Baker (2003), only the three word classes noun, verb, and adjective are major or lexical categories. All of the accounts just mentioned are based on binary distinctive features; however, the features used differ from each other. While Chomsky uses the two category features [N] and [V], Jackendoff uses the features [Subj] and [Obj], among others, focusing on the ability of nouns, verbs, adjectives, and adpositions to take (directly, without the help of other elements) subjects (thus characterizing verbs and nouns) or objects (thus characterizing verbs and adpositions). Baker (2003), too, uses the property of taking subjects, but attributes it only to verbs. In his approach, the distinctive feature of bearing a referential index characterizes nouns, and only those. Adjectives are characterized by the absence of both of these distinctive features. Another important issue addressed by theoretical studies on lexical categories is whether those categories are formed pre-syntactically, in a morphological component of the lexicon, or whether they are constructed in the syntax or post-syntactically. Jackendoff (1977) is an example of a lexicalist approach to lexical categories, while Marantz (1997), and Borer (2003, 2005a, 2005b, 2013) represent an account where the roots of words are category-neutral, and where their membership to a particular lexical category is determined by their local syntactic context. Baker (2003) offers an account that combines properties of both approaches: words are built in the syntax and not pre-syntactically; however, roots do have category features that are inherent to them. There are empirical phenomena, such as phrasal affixation, phrasal compounding, and suspended affixation, that strongly suggest that a post-syntactic morphological component should be allowed, whereby “syntax feeds morphology.”


Author(s):  
Frank Van Eynde

Following a common practice in generative grammar, HPSG treats the determiners as members of a separate functional part of speech (Det). The status of the functional parts of speech is a matter of debate and controversy. The auxiliaries, for instance, are commonly treated as members of a separate functional category (Aux or Infl) in many variants of generative grammar, including GB, MP and LFG, but in GPSG and HPSG, it is a matter of equally common practice to treat them as members of V and to reject the postulation of a separate functional category, see Pullum & Wilson (1977) and Gazdar, Pullum & Sag (1982). This text makes a similar case for the determiners; more specifically, it argues that the determiners are categorially heterogeneous, in the sense that some are members of A, whereas others are members of N. The argumentation is mainly based on inflectional morphology and morpho-syntactic agreement data. The consequences of the categorial heterogeneity are hard to reconcile with the specifier treatment of the determiners in Pollard & Sag (1994) and with the Det-as-head treatment in Netter (1994), but it can smoothly be integrated in the functor treatment of the prenominals in Allegranza (1998) and Van Eynde (2002).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document