Advertisement

Language Resources and Evaluation

, Volume 47, Issue 2, pp 371–397 | Cite as

The Spanish DELPH-IN grammar

  • Montserrat MarimonEmail author
Original Paper

Abstract

In this article we present a Spanish grammar implemented in the Linguistic Knowledge Builder system and grounded in the theoretical framework of Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar. The grammar is being developed in an international multilingual context, the DELPH-IN Initiative, contributing to an open-source repository of software and linguistic resources for various Natural Language Processing applications. We will show how we have refined and extended a core grammar, derived from the LinGO Grammar Matrix, to achieve a broad-coverage grammar. The Spanish DELPH-IN grammar is the most comprehensive grammar for Spanish deep processing, and it is being deployed in the construction of a treebank for Spanish of 60,000 sentences based in a technical corpus in the framework of the European project METANET4U (Enhancing the European Linguistic Infrastructure, GA 270893GA; http://www.meta-net.eu/projects/METANET4U/.) and a smaller treebank of about 15,000 sentences based in a corpus from the press.

Keywords

Spanish Grammar Deep processing HPSG LKB DELPH-IN 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by the Ramón y Cajal program of the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación. Part of this work was carried out during a three-month research visit at CSLI of the Stanford University funded by the Agència de Gestió d’Ajuts Universitaris i de Recerca under the programe Beques per a estades per a la recerca fora de Catalunya. The author is grateful to the anonymous reviewers for their constructive and helpful comments on the earlier version of the paper. The author also thanks all DELPH-IN members, special thanks to Dan Flickinger for fruitful discussions and Stephan Oepen for answers to numerous question about the LKB system.

References

  1. Bender, E. M., & Flickinger, D. (2005). Rapid prototyping of scalable grammars: Towards modularity in extensions to a language-independent core. In Proceedings of IJCNLP’05 (Posters / Demos) (pp. 203–208), Jeju Island, Korea.Google Scholar
  2. Bender, E. M., Drellishak, S., Fokkens, A., Poulson, L., & Saleem, S. (2010). Grammar customization. Research on Language and Computation, 8(1), 23–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bosque, I. (2010). Nueva gramática de la lengua española: Manual. Real Academia Española, Asociación de Academias de la lengua española, Espasa Calpe, Madrid.Google Scholar
  4. Branco, A., & Costa, F. (2008). A computational grammar for deep linguistic processing of Portuguese: LXGram, version A. 4.1. TR-2008-17. Tech. rep., Universidade de Lisboa, Faculdade de Ciências, Departamento de Informatica.Google Scholar
  5. Branco, A., Costa, F., Silva, J., Silveira, S., Castro, S., Avelãs, M., et al. (2010). Developing a deep linguistic databank supporting a collection of treebanks: The CINTIL DeepGramBank. In Proceedings of LREC-2010, La Valletta, Malta.Google Scholar
  6. Callmeier, U. (2000). PET a platform for experimentation with efficient HPSG processing. In D. Flickinger, S. Oepen, J.-I. Tsujii, & H. Uszkoreit (Eds.), Natural language engineering (6)1—Special Issue: Efficiency processing with HPSG: Methods, systems, evaluation (pp. 99–108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Copestake, A. (2002). Implementing typed feature structure grammars. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  8. Copestake, A., Flickinger, D., Pollard, C., & Sag, I. A. (2006). Minimal recursion semantics: An introduction. Research on Language and Computation, 3(4), 281–332.Google Scholar
  9. Crysmann, B. (2005). Syncretism in German: A unified approach to underspecification, indeterminacy, and likeness of Case. In Proceedings of HPSG’05, Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
  10. Fernández, S. O. (1999). El pronombre personal. Formas y distribuciones. Pronombre átonos y tónicos. In I. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (pp. 1209–1273). Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
  11. Flickinger, D. (2002). On building a more efficient grammar by exploiting types. In D. Flickinger, S. Oepen, J.-I. Tsujii, & H. Uszkoreit (Eds.), Natural language engineering (6)1—Special issue: Efficiency processing with HPSG: Methods, systems, evaluation (pp. 1–17). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hashimoto, C., Bond, F., & Siegel, M. (2007). Semi-automatic documentation of an implemented linguistic grammar augmented with a treebank. Language Resources and Evaluation (Special Issue on Asian Language Technology), 42(2), 117–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hellan, L., & Haugereid, P. (2004). NorSource—An excercise in the matrix grammar building design. In E. M. Bender, D. Flickinger, F. Fouvry, & M. Siegel (Eds.), A workshop on ideas and strategies for multilingual grammar engineering. Vienna: ESSLLI.Google Scholar
  14. Kim, J. B., & Yangs, J. (2003). Korean phrase structure grammar and its implementations into the LKB system, paper presented at the 17th Pacific Asia conference on language, information, and computation.Google Scholar
  15. Kordoni, V., & Neu, J. (2005). Deep analysis of modern Greek. In K.-Y. Su, J.-I. Tsujii, & J.-H. Lee (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science, Vol. 3248 (pp. 674–683). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  16. Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Marimon, M. (2010). The Spanish resource grammar. In Proceedings of LREC-2010, La Valletta, Malta.Google Scholar
  18. Mendikoetxea, A. (1999). Construcciones con se: Medias, pasivas e impersonales. In I. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (pp. 1631–1722). Madrid: Espasa.Google Scholar
  19. Miller, P. H., Sag, I. A. (1997). French clitic movement without clitics or movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5(3), 573–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Monachesi, P. (1998). Decomposing Italian clitics. In S. Balari, & L. Dini (Eds.), Romance in HPSG (pp. 305–357). Stanford: CSLI publications.Google Scholar
  21. Oepen, S., & Carroll, J. (2000). Performance profiling for parser engineering. In D. Flickinger, S. Oepen, J.-I. Tsujii, & H. Uszkoreit (Eds.), Natural language engineering (6)1—Special issue: Efficiency processing with HPSG: Methods, systems, evaluation (pp. 81–97). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Oepen, S., Flickinger, D., Toutanova, K., & Manning, C.D. (2002). LinGo Redwoods. A rich and dynamic treebank for HPSG. In Proceedings of TLT 2002, Sozopol, Bulgaria.Google Scholar
  23. Padró, L., Collado, M., Reese, S., Lloberes, M., & Castelón, I. (2010). FreeLing 2.1: Five years of open-source language processing tools. In Proceedings of LREC-2010, La Valletta, Malta.Google Scholar
  24. Pineda, L., & Meza, I. (2003). Una gramática básica del español en HPSG. Tech. rep., DCC-IIMAS, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
  25. Pineda, L., & Meza, I. (2005). The Spanish pronominal clitic system. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural, 34, 67–104.Google Scholar
  26. Pollard, C., & Sag, I. A. (1987). Information-based syntax and semantics. Volume I: Fundamentals. CSLI Lecture Notes, Stanford.Google Scholar
  27. Pollard, C., & Sag, I. A. (1994). Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press and CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  28. Siegel, M., & Bender, E. M. (2002). Efficient deep processing of Japanese. In 3rd Workshop on Asian language resources and international standardization, COLING-2002, Tapei, Taiwan.Google Scholar
  29. Toutanova, K., Manning, C. D., Flickinger, D., & Oepen, S. (2005). Stochastic HPSG parse disambiguation using the Redwoods corpus. Research on Language and Computation, 3(1), 83–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Tseng, J. (2004). LKB grammar implementation: French and beyond. In E. M. Bender, D. Flickinger, F. Fouvry, & M. Siegel (Eds.), A workshop on ideas and strategies for multilingual grammar engineering. Vienna: ESSLLI.Google Scholar
  31. Zwicky, A., & Pullum, G. (1983). Cliticization vs. inflection: English n’t. Language, 59(3), 502–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Universitat de BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations