[developers] smallish native DMRS grammar
Michael Wayne Goodman
goodmami at u.washington.edu
Wed Jan 6 00:23:40 CET 2016
Thanks. I'm looking forward to the treatment of ICONS so I can update my
own MRS-to-DMRS converter.
As for non-ERG grammar suggestions: if you're looking for non-trivial
grammars with ICONS support, check out the Zhong grammars (namely Mandarin:
https://github.com/delph-in/zhong/tree/master/cmn); otherwise, Jacy is my
usual source of semantic surprises. Emily may have some suggestions of
interesting specimens from her Matrix Grammarium.
On Tue, Jan 5, 2016 at 2:58 PM Ann Copestake <aac10 at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> I'm thinking about ICONS and DMRS since we anyway need that with the
> MRS->DMRS conversion. The coindexed dropped arguments seems to me fixable
> along the lines you suggest, but again, it's something we need to look at
> for the MRS->DMRS conversion. The comment about making sure we could
> express everything we needed to was more directed at the need to find out
> whether there's anything problematic when one is constructing DMRSs
> directly. So it would be great if someone would suggest a suitable grammar
> to experiment with, before I just decide to use the ERG ...
> All best,
> On 05/01/2016 21:25, Michael Wayne Goodman wrote:
> Hi Ann,
> Thanks for sharing. I couldn't find the grammar at first because I was
> looking in the LOGON tree instead of the separate LKB repository. If others
> are searching, it's here:
> I find DMRS more intuitive and more manageable than other *MRS
> representations, so it's exciting to imagine a world where that is the
> primary representation output by our grammars. I'm curious to see how this
> works out with some larger grammars, but I can think of a couple of
> challenges (based on my discussion in Singapore:
> 1. We don't yet have a way to represent ICONS in DMRS
> 2. DMRS currently can't express coindexed dropped arguments (where in MRS
> the 'i' variable of two arguments is the same; perhaps this can be
> represented using ICONS instead, or by (re)introducing zero-pronouns)
> These are both difficulties with the resulting representation. I'm not
> sure if there are other issues when implemented in the grammar. Sometime
> soon it would be good to iron out these representational wrinkles.
> Considering ICONS, I don't think we can just put a post-post-slash label on
> a link (e.g. ARG1/NEQ/topic) because I don't think ICONS follow normal
> dependency relations (Sanghoun could confirm).
> On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 9:46 AM Ann Copestake <aac10 at cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
>> I have just checked in to the LKB svn repo a small grammar - dmrscomp -
>> and some code that extracts simple DMRSs directly from the feature
>> structures produced by that grammar rather than going via MRS and RMRS.
>> This is based on the mrscomp grammar (though with some clean up and
>> minor extension) - there's a fairly detailed README file. There are a
>> fair number of items on the TO-DO list - possibly the most
>> time-consuming one would be to make the generator code work with this
>> grammar, not because there's any big problem (that I can think of) but
>> because the generator is quite complicated. There is also a promise of
>> more detailed notes, which I will supply relatively soon, I hope - this
>> was an interesting exercise in thinking through semantic composition.
>> If someone would like to collaborate on trying a similar exercise with a
>> larger grammar, I'd be very interested. It would help if it were a
>> grammar which already had the characteristic variable property, in which
>> case I think the main part of the conversion should be fairly easy.
>> There are a number of potential advantages in constructing DMRS
>> directly, including the ability to construct a DMRS forest directly from
>> a parse forest. I would argue that it also enforces some notions of
>> semantic well-formedness more directly than is possible with MRS -
>> obviously including the (equivalent of) characteristic variable
>> property. The semantic `fingerprint' of constructions can be expressed
>> more simply, because DMRS removes much of the redundancy of MRS. But,
>> of course, this is only interesting if we really can express everything
>> we want to with DMRS.
>> All best,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the developers