Advertisement

OntoLingAnnot’s Ontologies: Facilitating Interoperable Linguistic Annotations (Up to the Pragmatic Level)

  • Antonio Pareja-Lora

Abstract

This paper presents the OntoLingAnnot annotation framework, already developed for the annotation of morphological, syntactic, semantic and discourse phenomena, and its extension to cover the annotation of pragmatic phenomena. This extension was considered the ideal test bed for the interoperability of the linguistic annotations performed by means of the platform, since (i) pragmatics itself deals with a real mix of different linguistic topics, such as speech acts, pragmatic coherence relations, deixis, presuppositions and implicatures; and (ii) it clearly interacts with the rest of levels, since (potentially) every linguistic unit at any level can have a pragmatic projection. In particular, it introduces the different pragmatic units that can be used to annotate texts and dialogues using the framework. These pragmatic units are included in the set of ontologies associated to OntoLingAnnot, whose design requirements and development process are also described here. Besides, this paper shows as well the main principles and properties of the OntoLingAnnot annotation framework that help its different annotations interoperate.

Keywords

Annotation Scheme Linguistic Unit Linguistic Attribute Coherence Relation Annotation Framework 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asher N, Lascarides A (2003) Logics of conversation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK Google Scholar
  2. Borst WN (1997) Construction of engineering ontologies. PhD thesis, University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands Google Scholar
  3. Aguado de Cea G, Gómez-Pérez A, Álvarez de Mon I, Pareja-Lora A, Plaza-Arteche R (2002) OntoTag: A semantic web page linguistic annotation model. In: Semantic Web Meets Language Resources. AAAI Technical Report WS-02-16, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, California, USA, pp 20–29 Google Scholar
  4. Aguado de Cea G, Gómez-Pérez A, Álvarez de Mon I, Pareja-Lora A (2004) OntoTag’s linguistic ontologies: Improving semantic web annotations for a better language understanding in machines. In: ITCC ’04: Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing (ITCC’04), Volume 2. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA, pp 124–128 Google Scholar
  5. Chiarcos C (this vol.) Interoperability of corpora and annotations. pp 161–179 Google Scholar
  6. Dijk (editor) T (1997) Discourse Studies (2 vols.). Sage, London, UK Google Scholar
  7. Gruber TR (1993) A translation approach to portable ontologies. Knowledge Acquisition 5(2):199–220 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hovy E, Maier E (1995) Parsimonious or Profligate: How Many and Which Discourse Structure Relations? Tech. rep., Information Sciences Institute, University of Southern California, URL http://www.isi.edu/natural-language/people/hovy/papers/93discproc.pdf
  9. ISO/TC37/SC 4 – Language resource management (2008) Morpho-syntactic annotation framework (MAF). International Standard Draft: ISO/DIS 24611, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  10. ISO/TC37/SC 4 – Language resource management (2009a) Linguistic annotation framework (LAF). International Standard Draft: ISO/DIS 24612, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  11. ISO/TC37/SC 4 – Language resource management (2009b) Semantic annotation framework (SemAF) – Part 1: Time & events. International Standard Draft: ISO/DIS 24617-1, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  12. ISO/TC37/SC 4 – Language resource management (2009c) Syntactic annotation framework (SynAF). International Standard Draft: ISO/DIS 24615, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  13. ISO/TC37/SC 4 – Language resource management (2010a) Persistent identification and sustainable access (PISA). International Standard, Final Draft: ISO/FDIS 24619, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  14. ISO/TC37/SC 4 – Language resource management (2010b) Semantic annotation framework (SemAF) – Discourse structures. New Working Item: ISO/PWI 24617-5, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  15. ISO/TC37/SC 4 – Language resource management (2010c) Semantic annotation framework (SemAF) – Part 2: Dialogue acts. International Standard Draft: ISO/DIS 24617-2, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  16. ISO/TC37/SC 4 – Language resource management (2010d) Semantic annotation framework (SemAF) – Static spatial information. New Working Item: ISO/PWI 24617-6, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  17. ISO/TC37/SC3 – Terminology and other language and content resources (2008) Specification of data categories and management of a Data Category Registry for language resources. International Standard Draft: ISO/DIS 12620.2, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Google Scholar
  18. Leech G, Barnett R, Kahrel P, Halteren Hv, Langé JM, Montemagni S, Voutilainen A (1996) Recommendations for the Syntactic Annotation of Corpora. European Project Deliverable: EAGLES Document EAG–TCWG–SASG/1.8, EAGLES Consortium, URL http://www.ilc.cnr.it/EAGLES96/segsasg1/segsasg1.html
  19. Levinson SC (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, reprinted as Vol. A of Computers & Typesetting , 1986 Google Scholar
  20. Pareja-Lora A (in press) The pragmatic level of OntoLingAnnot’s ontologies and their use in pragmatic annotation for language teaching. In: Bárcena E, Read T, Arús J (eds) Technological innovation in the teaching and processing of LSPS, Springer, Madrid, Spain, pp 547–574, to appear 2012 Google Scholar
  21. Pareja-Lora A, Aguado de Cea G (2010) Modelling discourse-related terminology in OntoLingAnnot’s ontologies. In: Bhreathnach U, Barra-Cusack F (eds) Presenting terminology and knowledge engineering resources online: Models and challenges (TKE 2010), Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland, pp 547–574 Google Scholar
  22. Romera M (2004) Discourse Functional Units: the Expression of Coherence Relations in Spoken Spanish. LINCOM, Munich, Germany Google Scholar
  23. Searle J (1979) Expression and meaning: Studies in the theory of speech acts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, (reprinted 1999) Google Scholar
  24. Windhouwer M, Wright SE (this vol.) Linking to linguistic data categories in ISOcat. pp 99–107 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Facultad de Informática (UCM)ILSA-UCM / ATLAS-UNEDMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations