米国におけるテクニカル・ライティングの設計と実施における諸問題
三田村照子
カーネギーメロン大学教授
Language Technologies Institute
Carnegie Mellon University
Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

1Outline• Introduction• History of CL & Applications• Designing a Controlled Vocabulary andGrammar• Deployment Issues for CL• Evaluating the Use of Controlled Language

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

2

What is Controlled (or Simplified)
Language (CL)?
• A form of language usage restricted by grammarand vocabulary rules• No single “controlled language” for English• Controlled language can be used:– solely as a guideline for authoring– with a checking tool to verify conformance– in conjunction with machine translation

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

3

Types of Controlled Language• Human-oriented CL: to improve text
comprehension by humans(for technical writers and translators)• Machine-oriented CL: to improve “textcomprehension” by computers(for CL checkers or MT systems)

Carnegie MellonSchool of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

4

Examples of Writing Rules•
•••
••
•

Do not use sentences with more than 20 words
Do not use passive voice
Do not make noun clusters of more than 4 nouns
Write only one instruction per sentence
Make your instructions as specific as possible
Use a bulleted layout for long lists
Present new and complex information slowly and carefully

Q: Which rules can be checked automatically?

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

5

History of CL & Applications
Roots of CL• C.K. Ogden’s “Basic English” (1930’s)– 850 basic words– an “international language”, foundation forlearning standard English– never widely used

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

6

Roots of CL [2]• Caterpillar Fundamental English (CFE) 1970’s– Non-technical vocabulary and grammar– First version had only 850 terms– For non-native English speakers– Abandoned after ~10 years:• insufficient for complex writing• CFE difficult to train and enforce

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

7

Examples
Non CFE: “Enlarge the hole.”
CFE: “Use a drill to make the hole larger.”
Non CFE: “The brake components must be matchedduring installation.”
CFE: “The brake parts with same numbers on thelower ends of the brake shoes must be installed
together.”

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

8

History of CLs
Ogden’s
Basic
EnglishSmart’s Plain
EnglishProgram(PEP)•Clark•Rockwell International•Hyster
Caterpillar TechnicalEnglish (CTE)developed by CMU

Caterpillar
Fundamental
English (CFE)•AECMA (EuropeanWhite’s International
Language for Serving
and Maintenance (ILSAM)

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

Association of Aerospace
Manufacturers)•IBM (Easy English)•Ericsson Telecom•Boeing SE

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

9

CL Developments• CL for Technical Documentation– Caterpillar Technical English (CTE) by KANTOO (CMU)– AECMA’s Simplified English (SE)– Boeing Simplified English Checker (BSEC)– GM’s Controlled Automotive Service Language (CASL)– Easy English (IBM)• Simple English Wikipedia– http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page– Written in Basic English (Ogden)– For learners of English
Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

10

CL Checking• Aids an author in determining whether atext conforms to a particular CL– Verify all words & phrases are approved– Verify all writing rules are obeyed– May offer help to the author when words orsentences not in the CL are found

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

11

CL for Machine Translation• Technical Translation– Large segment of translation market– Documentation for complex products (e.g., consumer
electronics, computer hardware, heavy machinery,automobiles, etc.)– Involves large, specialized vocabulary– Writing style may be complicated• Controlled language reduces ambiguity andcomplexity while increasing source text quality

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

12

Designing a Controlled
Vocabulary and Grammar for
Machine Translation(CTE development by CMU)

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

13

Designing Controlled Vocabulary• Restrict vocabulary size and meaning• Most useful way to limit ambiguity of input
sentences• Key to improve the accuracy of translation

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

14

Encoding the Meanings ofVocabulary Items• Limit Meaning per Word/Part of Speech
Pair– Helps to reduce the amount of ambiguity• Encode Meanings Using Synonyms– Finding separate, synonymous terms– Encode them in the lexicon– Synonymous terms are marked in the lexicon– Used in support of on-line vocabulary checking

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

15

Encode Truly Ambiguous Terms• When a term must carry more than one
meaning in the domain• Encode in separate lexical entries• Resulting output structure will beambiguous• Lexical disambiguation by machine or byauthor
Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

16

Designing a Controlled Grammar• What is CL used for?
– Authoring without CL checker?
– Authoring with CL checker?
– Translating with MT?
– Translating without MT?

• What types of constraints are needed?
• Design focus: to reduce ambiguity

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

17

Problematic Structures(from CTE Specification by CMU)
• Use of participial forms(such as -ing and -ed)
– Used in a subordinate clause without asubject“When starting the engine…”– Reduced relative clauses“the pumps mounted to the pump drive”

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

18

Problematic Structures [2]• Verb Particles “turn on” “start”• Coordination of Verb Phrases“extend and retract the cylinders”• Conjoined Prepositional Phrases“pieces of glass and metal”• Quantifiers and Partitives“repeat these steps until none are left”Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

19

Problematic Structures [3]• Coordinate Conjunction of S
(conjuncts must be the same type)• Adjoined Elliptical Modifiers“if necessary”, “if possible”, “as shown”, etc.

• Punctuation - rules for consistency– use of comma, colon, semi-colon– quotation marks– parentheses
Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

20

Problematic Structures [4]• Relative Clauses - should be introduced byrelative pronouns• Subject gap relative clause“The service man can determine the parts
which are at fault”• Object gap relative clause“The parts which the service man orders”
Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

21

Deployment Issues for CL• CL cannot be too strict• Author usability and productivity areimportant for deployment• Expressiveness -- Balance vocabulary sizevs. complex grammatical expressions• Productivity of authoring vs. Post-editing

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

22

Deployment Issues for CL (2)• Controlled Target Language Definition forMT– Translated documents at the same stylistic
quality level as the source documents– Set appropriate expectations about translation
quality– Controlled language specification for TL– Produces more useful aligned corpora for
MT/TMCarnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

23

Deployment Issues for CL (3)• Controlled Language Maintenance– Need to update the terminology and grammar– Requires a well-defined process that includes
the customer / user:• Problem reporting• Initial screening of the problems• Process monitoring and quality control• Support rapid terminology and grammar updates forsource and target languages

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

24Success Criteria for CL Deployment• Highly-Trained Authors• Use of Controlled Language Checker• Technical Domain• Translation for Dissemination

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

25

Evaluating the Use ofControlled Language

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

26

Benefits of CL• Improved consistency of writing• Increased re-use of documents• Improved authoring quality– value of writing guidelines, term management– value of standardized authoring– improved quality / consistency of training

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

27

Benefits of CL• Useful for reducing ambiguity• Ambiguity Test:– Average # of syntactic analyses per sentence
dropped from 27.0 to 1.04
– 95.6% have a single meaning representation– Lexical constraints achieve the largest
reduction in ambiguity• Improve the quality of translation output

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

28

100%

Comparative Evaluationof 4 Machine Translation
Systems

90%
80%

Laser Printer User Guide

70%

English to Spanish

60%% Heavy Postediting
50%% Minimum Postediting

40%% Fully Acceptable% Identical to HumanTranslation

30%
20%
10%

*These systems were customized
with domain-specific terminology

0%KANT*X*Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer ScienceYZ

11-731 Machine Translation
第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

29

CL Challenges• Writing may become more time-consuming• An additional verification step is required• Developing a CL may be costly• For writers and translators, style is more satisfying
than productivity, consistency, simplicity, ...
• For end users, simplicity and clarity are a toppriority• CL use must be evaluated carefully
Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

30

CL in the Real World• Software performance(shouldn’t impact on author productivity)• Author commitment(writing well vs. “getting it to pass”)• Organizational commitment(publishing deadlines vs. CL compliance)

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

31

Specification vs. Coverage
Sentences in CL
Specification
False Negatives(proper CL, rejected by checker)

False Positives
Sentences Accepted (not CL, accepted by checker)

by Checker

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

32

CL is Justified When ...
• Benefits a large document volume• Documents are hierarchical, reusable• Checking well-integrated with document
production system• Controlled source reduces cost oftranslation to multiple target languages

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

33

Questions?

Carnegie Mellon
School of Computer Science

第4回産業日本語研究会・シンポジウム
Copyright © 20１３, Carnegie Mellon. All Rights Reserved.

34