Sylvain Kahane
- Norbert Bröker and Peter Neuhaus. 1997. The complexity of recognition of linguistically adequate dependency grammars. In 35th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL'97), Madrid, Spain. ACL. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- M. Collins. 1997. Three generative, lexicalised models for statistical parsing. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Madrid, Spain, July. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jason M. Eisner. 1996. Three new probabilistic models for dependency parsing: An exploration. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING'96), Copenhagen. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Haim Gaifman. 1965. Dependency systems and phrase-structure systems. Information and Control, 8:304--337.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Richard Hudson. 1990. English Word Grammar. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, RU.Google Scholar
- Richard Hudson. unpublished. Discontinuity. e-preprint (ftp.phon.ucl.ac.uk).Google Scholar
- Aravind K. Joshi, Leon Levy, and M Takahashi. 1975. Tree adjunct grammars. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 10:136--163.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jürgen Kunze. 1968. The treatment of non-projective structures in the syntactic analysis and synthesis of english and german. Computational Linguistics, 7:67--77.Google Scholar
- Yves Lecerf. 1960. Programme des conflits, modèle des conflits. Bulletin bimestriel de I'ATALA, 4, 5.Google Scholar
- Vicenzo Lombardi. 1996. An Earley-style parser for dependency grammars. In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING'96), Copenhagen. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Solomon Marcus. 1965. Sur la notion de projectivité. Zeitschr. f. math. Logik und Grundlagen d. Math., 11:181--192.Google Scholar
- Igor A. Mel'čuk. 1988. Dependency Syntax: Theory and Practice. State University of New York Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Alexis Nasr. 1995. A formalism and a parser for lexicalised dependency grammars. In 4th International Workshop on Parsing Technologies, pages 186--195, Prague.Google Scholar
- Alexis Nasr. 1996. Un système de reformulation automatique de phrases fondé sur la Théorie Sens-Texte: application aux langues contrôlées. Ph.D. thesis, Université Paris 7.Google Scholar
- Michael Reape. 1990. Getting things in order. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Discontinuous Constituents, Tilburg, Holland.Google Scholar
- Jane J. Robinson. 1970. Dependency structures and transformational rules. Language, 46(2):259--285.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pseudo-projectivity: a polynomially parsable non-projective dependency grammar
Recommendations
Insights into non-projectivity in Hindi
ACLstudent '09: Proceedings of the ACL-IJCNLP 2009 Student Research WorkshopLarge scale efforts are underway to create dependency treebanks and parsers for Hindi and other Indian languages. Hindi, being a morphologically rich, flexible word order language, brings challenges such as handling non-projectivity in parsing. In this ...
Condition of projectivity in the underlying dependency structures
COLING '04: Proceedings of the 20th international conference on Computational LinguisticsThe claim made in this paper is that in a formal description of language, it is possible and useful to work with dependency-based underlying representations of sentences (tectogrammatical representations) meeting the condition of projectivity. The ...
Pseudo-projective dependency parsing
ACL '05: Proceedings of the 43rd Annual Meeting on Association for Computational LinguisticsIn order to realize the full potential of dependency-based syntactic parsing, it is desirable to allow non-projective dependency structures. We show how a data-driven deterministic dependency parser, in itself restricted to projective structures, can be ...
Comments