Semantics and Syntax Tagging in Russian Child Corpus

  • Polina Eismont
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 943)


The paper describes a new semantic and syntax tagging that is applied to annotate Russian child corpus “KONDUIT” – the corpus of oral unprepared elicited narratives produced by Russian monolinguals at the age of 2;7–7;6. This annotation allows uncovering some links between verb semantics and syntax that influence the steps of verb acquisition. A case study of verbs of speech and their comparison to the ones of mental activity shows that children acquire verb semantic and syntax structures on the base of verb semantic classes gradually progressing from one structure to the next one. On the other hand the results prove that syntax acquisition depends not only on verb semantics but also on such parameters as reference or part of speech. Along with the acquisition of narrative skills and the rules of referencing children widen their sets of possible syntactic structures.


Language acquisition Semantic tagging Syntax tagging Corpus annotation Spoken narrative 



The work is supported by the research grant number 16-04-50114-RFH from the Russian Foundation for Basic Research.


  1. 1.
    Tomasello, M.: First Verbs: A Case Study of Early Grammatical Development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gagarina, N.: The early verb development and demarcation of stages in three Russian-speaking children. In: Bittner, D., Dressler, W.U., Kilani-Schoch, M. (eds.) Development of Verb Inflection in First Language Acquisition: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective, pp. 131–169. de Cruyter, Berlin (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eliseeva, M.B.: The development of the individual language system of a child (in Russian). Iazyki slavianskoi kul’tury (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lepskaia, N.I.: Child language (development of verbal communication). (in Russian). Filologicheskii fakul’tet MGU im. M. V. Lomonosova (1997)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Baker, M.: Incorporation: A Theory of Grammatical Function Changing. Chicago University Press, Chicago (1988)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Falk, Y.N.: Lexical-Functional Grammar: An Introduction to Parallel Constraint-Based Syntax. CSLI, Stanford (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Van Valin Jr., R.D.: Exploring the Syntax-Semantics Interface. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goldberg, A.E.: Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fried, M., Boas, H.C. (eds.): Grammatical Constructions: Back to the Roots. John Benjamins, Amsterdam & Philadelphia (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baker, C.F., Fillmore, C., Cronin, B.: The structure of the framenet database. Int. J. Lexicogr. 16(3), 281–296 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jurafsky, D., Martin, J.H.: Speech and Language Processing, 2nd edn. Prentice-Hall Inc., Upper Saddle River (2009)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fillmore, C.: The case for case. In: Bach, E., Harms, R.T. (eds.) Universals in Linguistic Theory. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York (1968)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tesnière, L.: Éléments de Syntaxe Structurale. Librairie C. Klincksieck, Paris (1959)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mel’čuk, I.A., Zholkovsky, A.K., Apresjan, J.D., et al.: Explanatory Combinatorial Dictionary of Modern Russian: Semantico-Syntactic Studies of Russian Vocabulary. Wiener Slawistischer Almanach, Wien (1984)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Apresjan, J.D., Boguslavsky, I.M., Iomdin, B.L., et al.: Syntactically and semantically annotated Russian corpus: modernity and perspectives. In: Natsionalny korpus russkogo jazyka, 2003–2005, Moscow, Indrik, pp. 193–214 (2005). (in Russian)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kobricov, B.P., Lyashevsky, O.N., Toldova, S.J.: Verb sense disambiguation with the help of semantic models retrieved from electronic dictionaries (2007). (in Russian)
  17. 17.
    Haynes, S.: Semantic Tagging Using WordNet Examples. In: SENSEVAL@ACL, pp. 79–82 (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kawahara, D., Peterson, D.W., Popescu, O., Palmer. M.: Inducing example-based semantic frames from a massive amount of verb uses. In: Proceedings of the 14th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL 2014), pp. 58–67 (2014)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Corazzari, O., Calzolari, N., Zampolli, A.: An experiment of lexical-semantic tagging of an italian Corpus. In: LREC (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shibata, T., Kawahara, D., Kurohashi, S.: Neural network-based model for japanese predicate argument structure analysis. In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL 2016), pp. 1235–1244 (2016)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grimshaw, J.: Form, function, and the language acquisition device. In: Baker, C.L., McCarthy, J.J. (eds.) The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, pp. 165–182. MIT Press. Cambridge (1981)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Höhle, B.: Bootstrapping mechanisms in first language acquisition. Linguistics 47(2), 359–382 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Bowerman, M.: Linguistic typology and first language acquisition. In: The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Oxford University Press (2010)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Abend, O., Kwiatkowski, T., Smith, N., Goldwater, S., Steedman, M.: Bootstrapping language acquisition. Cognition 164, 116–143 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gauthier, J., Levy, R., Tenenbaum, J.B.: Word learning and the acquisition of syntactic-semantic overhypotheses. CoRR, abs/1805.04988 (2018)
  26. 26.
    Chang, F., Lieven, E., Tomasello, M.: Using child utterances to evaluate syntax acquisition algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, vol. 28, pp. 154–159 (2006).
  27. 27.
    Colletta, J.-M., Kunene, R.N., Venouil, A., Kaufmann, V., Simon, J.-P.: Multi-track annotation of child language and gestures. In: Kipp, M., Martin, J.-C., Paggio, P., Heylen, D. (eds.) MMCorp 2008. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 5509, pp. 54–72. Springer, Heidelberg (2009). Scholar
  28. 28.
    MacWhinney, B.: The CHILDES Project: Tools for Analyzing Talk. Erlbaum, Mahwah (2000)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lyakso, E.E., Frolova, O.V., Kurazhova, A.V., Gaikova, J.S.: Russian infants and children’s sounds and speech corpuses for language acquisition studies. In: Proceedings of International Conference INTERSPEECH, pp. 1878–1881 (2010)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Eismont, P.M.: “KONDUIT”: corpus of child oral narratives. In: Proceedings of the International Conference “Corpus Linguistics – 2017”, pp. 373–377. Saint-Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg (2017). (in Russian)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ambridge, B., Rowland, C.F.: Experimental methods in studying child language acquisition. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci. 4(2), 149–168 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Korobov, M.: Morphological analyzer and generator for Russian and Ukrainian languages. In: Khachay, M.Y., Konstantinova, N., Panchenko, A., Ignatov, D.I., Labunets, V.G. (eds.) AIST 2015. CCIS, vol. 542, pp. 320–332. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  33. 33.
    Michaelis, L.A.: Constructions License Verb Frames. In: Rudanko, J., Havu, J., Höglund, M., Rickman, P. (eds.) Perspectives on Complementation, pp. 7–33. Palgrave MacMillan, London (2015)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Saint Petersburg State University of Aerospace InstrumentationSt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations