A Universal Part-of-Speech Tagset

To facilitate future research in unsupervised induction of syntactic structure and to standardize best-practices, we propose a tagset that consists of twelve universal part-of-speech categories. In addition to the tagset, we develop a mapping from 25 different treebank tagsets to this universal set. As a result, when combined with the original treebank data, this universal tagset and mapping produce a dataset consisting of common parts-of-speech for 22 different languages. We highlight the use of this resource via two experiments, including one that reports competitive accuracies for unsupervised grammar induction without gold standard part-of-speech tags

Towards Universal Semantic Tagging

The paper proposes the task of universal semantic tagging---tagging word tokens with language-neutral, semantically informative tags. We argue that the task, with its independent nature, contributes to better semantic analysis for wide-coverage multilingual text. We present the initial version of the semantic tagset and show that (a) the tags provide semantically fine-grained information, and (b) they are suitable for cross-lingual semantic parsing. An application of the semantic tagging in the Parallel Meaning Bank supports both of these points as the tags contribute to formal lexical semantics and their cross-lingual projection. As a part of the application, we annotate a small corpus with the semantic tags and present new baseline result for universal semantic tagging.Comment: 9 pages, International Conference on Computational Semantics (IWCS

A Support Tool for Tagset Mapping

Many different tagsets are used in existing corpora; these tagsets vary according to the objectives of specific projects (which may be as far apart as robust parsing vs. spelling correction). In many situations, however, one would like to have uniform access to the linguistic information encoded in corpus annotations without having to know the classification schemes in detail. This paper describes a tool which maps unstructured morphosyntactic tags to a constraint-based, typed, configurable specification language, a ``standard tagset''. The mapping relies on a manually written set of mapping rules, which is automatically checked for consistency. In certain cases, unsharp mappings are unavoidable, and noise, i.e. groups of word forms {\sl not} conforming to the specification, will appear in the output of the mapping. The system automatically detects such noise and informs the user about it. The tool has been tested with rules for the UPenn tagset \cite{up} and the SUSANNE tagset \cite{garside}, in the framework of the EAGLES\footnote{LRE project EAGLES, cf. \cite{eagles}.} validation phase for standardised tagsets for European languages.Comment: EACL-Sigdat 95, contains 4 ps figures (minor graphic changes

External Lexical Information for Multilingual Part-of-Speech Tagging

Morphosyntactic lexicons and word vector representations have both proven useful for improving the accuracy of statistical part-of-speech taggers. Here we compare the performances of four systems on datasets covering 16 languages, two of these systems being feature-based (MEMMs and CRFs) and two of them being neural-based (bi-LSTMs). We show that, on average, all four approaches perform similarly and reach state-of-the-art results. Yet better performances are obtained with our feature-based models on lexically richer datasets (e.g. for morphologically rich languages), whereas neural-based results are higher on datasets with less lexical variability (e.g. for English). These conclusions hold in particular for the MEMM models relying on our system MElt, which benefited from newly designed features. This shows that, under certain conditions, feature-based approaches enriched with morphosyntactic lexicons are competitive with respect to neural methods

How do treebank annotation schemes influence parsing results? : or how not to compare apples and oranges

In the last decade, the Penn treebank has become the standard data set for evaluating parsers. The fact that most parsers are solely evaluated on this specific data set leaves the question unanswered how much these results depend on the annotation scheme of the treebank. In this paper, we will investigate the influence which different decisions in the annotation schemes of treebanks have on parsing. The investigation uses the comparison of similar treebanks of German, NEGRA and TüBa-D/Z, which are subsequently modified to allow a comparison of the differences. The results show that deleted unary nodes and a flat phrase structure have a negative influence on parsing quality while a flat clause structure has a positive influence

Mimicking Word Embeddings using Subword RNNs

Word embeddings improve generalization over lexical features by placing each word in a lower-dimensional space, using distributional information obtained from unlabeled data. However, the effectiveness of word embeddings for downstream NLP tasks is limited by out-of-vocabulary (OOV) words, for which embeddings do not exist. In this paper, we present MIMICK, an approach to generating OOV word embeddings compositionally, by learning a function from spellings to distributional embeddings. Unlike prior work, MIMICK does not require re-training on the original word embedding corpus; instead, learning is performed at the type level. Intrinsic and extrinsic evaluations demonstrate the power of this simple approach. On 23 languages, MIMICK improves performance over a word-based baseline for tagging part-of-speech and morphosyntactic attributes. It is competitive with (and complementary to) a supervised character-based model in low-resource settings.Comment: EMNLP 201

Marrying Universal Dependencies and Universal Morphology

The Universal Dependencies (UD) and Universal Morphology (UniMorph) projects each present schemata for annotating the morphosyntactic details of language. Each project also provides corpora of annotated text in many languages - UD at the token level and UniMorph at the type level. As each corpus is built by different annotators, language-specific decisions hinder the goal of universal schemata. With compatibility of tags, each project's annotations could be used to validate the other's. Additionally, the availability of both type- and token-level resources would be a boon to tasks such as parsing and homograph disambiguation. To ease this interoperability, we present a deterministic mapping from Universal Dependencies v2 features into the UniMorph schema. We validate our approach by lookup in the UniMorph corpora and find a macro-average of 64.13% recall. We also note incompatibilities due to paucity of data on either side. Finally, we present a critical evaluation of the foundations, strengths, and weaknesses of the two annotation projects.Comment: UDW1