What Do Graded Decisions Tell Us about Verb Uses

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00216208%3A11320%2F16%3A10335454" target="_blank" >RIV/00216208:11320/16:10335454 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216224:14330/16:00090691

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://euralex2016.tsu.ge/proceedings-p10.pdf" target="_blank" >http://euralex2016.tsu.ge/proceedings-p10.pdf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

—

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

What Do Graded Decisions Tell Us about Verb Uses

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

We work with 1450 concordances of 29 English verbs (50 concordances per lemma) and their corresponding entries in the Pattern Dictionary of English Verbs (PDEV). Three human annotators working independently but in parallel judged how well each lexical unit of the corresponding PDEV entry illustrates the given concordance. Thereafter they selected one best-fitting lexical unit for each concordance - while the former setup allowed for ties (equally good matches), the latter did not. We measure the interannotator agreement/correlation in both setups and show that our results are not worse (in fact, slightly better) than in an already published graded-decision annotation performed on a traditional dictionary. We also manually examine the cases where several PDEV lexical units were classified as good matches and how this fact affected the interannotator agreement in the bestfit setup. The main causes of overlap between lexical units include semantic coercion and regular polysemy, as well as occasionally in

Název v anglickém jazyce

What Do Graded Decisions Tell Us about Verb Uses

Popis výsledku anglicky

We work with 1450 concordances of 29 English verbs (50 concordances per lemma) and their corresponding entries in the Pattern Dictionary of English Verbs (PDEV). Three human annotators working independently but in parallel judged how well each lexical unit of the corresponding PDEV entry illustrates the given concordance. Thereafter they selected one best-fitting lexical unit for each concordance - while the former setup allowed for ties (equally good matches), the latter did not. We measure the interannotator agreement/correlation in both setups and show that our results are not worse (in fact, slightly better) than in an already published graded-decision annotation performed on a traditional dictionary. We also manually examine the cases where several PDEV lexical units were classified as good matches and how this fact affected the interannotator agreement in the bestfit setup. The main causes of overlap between lexical units include semantic coercion and regular polysemy, as well as occasionally in

Druh

D - Stať ve sborníku

CEP obor

IN - Informatika

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

Výsledek vznikl pri realizaci vícero projektů. Více informací v záložce Projekty.

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název statě ve sborníku

Proceedings of the XVII EURALEX International Congress: Lexicography and Linguistic Diversity

ISBN

978-9941-13-542-2

ISSN

—

e-ISSN

—

Počet stran výsledku

11

Strana od-do

318-328

Název nakladatele

Tbilisi University Press

Místo vydání

Tbilisi, Georgia

Místo konání akce

Tbilisi, Georgia

Datum konání akce

6. 9. 2016

Typ akce podle státní příslušnosti

WRD - Celosvětová akce

Kód UT WoS článku

—