skip to main content
short-paper

SentiFars: A Persian Polarity Lexicon for Sentiment Analysis

Published:17 September 2019Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

There is no doubt about the usefulness of public opinion toward different issues in social media and the World Wide Web. Extracting the feelings of people about an issue from text is not straightforward. Polarity lexicons that assign polarity tags or scores to words and phrases play an important role in sentiment analysis systems. As English is the richest language in this area, getting benefits from existing English resources in order to build new ones has attracted the interest of many researchers in recent years. In this article, we propose a new translation-based approach for building polarity resources in resource-lean languages such as Persian. The results of empirical evaluation of the proposed approach prove its effectiveness. The generated resource is the largest publicly available polarity lexicon for Persian.

References

  1. Gilbert Badaro, Ramy Baly, Hazem Hajj, Nizar Habash, and Wassim El-Hajj. 2014. A large scale Arabic sentiment lexicon for Arabic opinion mining. In Proceedings of the EMNLP 2014 Workshop on Arabic Natural Language Processing (ANLP’14). 165--173.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Cristina Bosco, Viviana Patti, and Andrea Bolioli. 2013. Developing corpora for sentiment analysis: The case of irony and Senti-tut. IEEE Intelligent Systems 2 (2013), 55--63. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Erik Cambria, Daniel Olsher, and Dheeraj Rajagopal. 2014. SenticNet 3: A common and common-sense knowledge base for cognition-driven sentiment analysis. In 28th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'14). 1515--1521. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Erik Cambria, Bjorn Schuller, Yunqing Xia, and Catherine Havasi. 2013. New avenues in opinion mining and sentiment analysis. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28, 2 (2013), 15--21. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Simon Clematide and Manfred Klenner. 2010. Evaluation and extension of a polarity lexicon for German. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Computational Approaches to Subjectivity and Sentiment Analysis (WASSA'10). 7--13.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Amitava Das and Sivaji Bandyopadhyay. 2010. SentiWordNet for Indian languages. In Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Asian Language Resources (WALR'10). 56--63.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Kia Dashtipour, Amir Hussain, Qiang Zhou, Alexander Gelbukh, Ahmad Y.A. Hawalah, and Erik Cambria. 2016. PerSent: A freely available Persian sentiment lexicon. In International Conference on Brain Inspired Cognitive Systems (BICS'16). Springer, 310--320.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Iman Dehdarbehbahani, Azadeh Shakery, and Heshaam Faili. 2014. Semi-supervised word polarity identification in resource-lean languages. Neural Networks 58 (2014), 50--59. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Rahim Dehkharghani, Yucel Saygin, Berrin Yanikoglu, and Kemal Oflazer. 2016. SentiTurkNet: A Turkish polarity lexicon for sentiment analysis. Language Resources and Evaluation 50, 3 (2016), 667--685. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Lingjia Deng and Janyce Wiebe. 2015. MPQA 3.0: An entity/event-level sentiment corpus. In The 2015 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies (NAACL HLT’15). 1323--1328. Retrieved from http://aclweb.org/anthology/N/N15/N15-1146.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Andrea Esuli and Fabrizio Sebastiani. 2006. SentiWordNet: A publicly available lexical resource for opinion mining. In Proceedings of International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'06), Vol. 6. 417--422.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Joseph L. Fleiss. 1971. Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychological Bulletin 76, 5 (1971), 378.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Catherine Havasi, Robert Speer, and Jason Alonso. 2007. ConceptNet 3: A flexible, multilingual semantic network for common sense knowledge. In Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing. 27--29.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Geoffrey Holmes, Andrew Donkin, and Ian H. Witten. 1994. Weka: A machine learning workbench. In Proceedings of the 1994 2nd Australian and New Zealand Conference on Intelligent Information Systems (ANZIIS'94). IEEE, 357--361.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. David W. Hosmer Jr. and Stanley Lemeshow. 2004. Applied Logistic Regression. John Wiley 8 Sons.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Pedram Hosseini, Ali Ahmadian Ramaki, Hassan Maleki, Mansoureh Anvari, and Seyed Abolghasem Mirroshandel. 2018. SentiPers: A sentiment analysis corpus for Persian. Arxiv Preprint Arxiv:1801.07737 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Minqing Hu and Bing Liu. 2004. Mining and summarizing customer reviews. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining (KDD'04). ACM, 168--177. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Chihli Hung and Hao-Kai Lin. 2013. Using objective words in SentiWordNet to improve word-of-mouth sentiment classification. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28, 2 (2013), 47--54. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Bing Liu. 2012. Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining. Morgan and Claypool Publishers.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Xinfan Meng, Furu Wei, Ge Xu, Longkai Zhang, Xiaohua Liu, Ming Zhou, and Houfeng Wang. 2012. Lost in translations? Building sentiment lexicons using context based machine translation. In Proceeding of the 24th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING'12). Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, 829--838.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. George A. Miller. 1995. WordNet: A lexical database for English. Communications of the ACM 38, 11 (1995), 39--41. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Saif M. Mohammad and Peter D. Turney. 2013. Crowdsourcing a word-emotion association lexicon. Computational Intelligence 29, 3 (2013), 436--465.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Soujanya Poria, Alexander Gelbukh, Amir Hussain, Newton Howard, Dipankar Das, and Sivaji Bandyopadhyay. 2013. Enhanced SenticNet with affective labels for concept-based opinion mining. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28, 2 (2013), 31--38. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Verónica Pérez-rosas, Carmen Banea, and Rada Mihalcea. 2012. Learning sentiment lexicons in spanish. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’12). 3077--3081.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Behnam Sabeti, Pedram Hosseini, Gholamreza Ghassem-Sani, and Seyed Abolghasem Mirroshandel. 2016. LexiPers: An ontology based sentiment lexicon for Persian. In Proceedings of the 2nd Global Conference on Artificial Intelligence (GCAI'16). 329--339.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Carlo Strapparava and Alessandro Valitutti. 2004. WordNet affect: An affective extension of Wordnet. In LREC, Vol. 4. 1083--1086.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Angela Charng-Rurng Tsai, Chi-En Wu, Richard Tzong-Han Tsai, and Jane Yung-jen Hsu. 2013. Building a concept-level sentiment dictionary based on commonsense knowledge. IEEE Intelligent Systems 28, 2 (2013), 22--30. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. SentiFars: A Persian Polarity Lexicon for Sentiment Analysis

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing
      ACM Transactions on Asian and Low-Resource Language Information Processing  Volume 19, Issue 2
      March 2020
      301 pages
      ISSN:2375-4699
      EISSN:2375-4702
      DOI:10.1145/3358605
      Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 17 September 2019
      • Accepted: 1 July 2019
      • Received: 1 April 2019
      Published in tallip Volume 19, Issue 2

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • short-paper
      • Research
      • Refereed

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format .

    View HTML Format