This paper describes an interdisciplinary approach which brings together the fields of corpus linguistics and translation studies. It presents ongoing work on the creation of a corpus resource in which translation shifts are explicitly annotated. Translation shifts denote departures from formal correspondence between source and target text, i.e. deviations that have occurred during the translation process. A resource in which such shifts are annotated in a systematic way will make it possible to study those phenomena that need to be addressed if machine translation output is to resemble human translation. The resource described in this paper contains English source texts (parliamentary proceedings) and their German translations. The shift annotation is based on predicate-argument structures and proceeds in two steps: first, predicates and their arguments are annotated monolingually in a straightforward manner. Then, the corresponding English and German predicates and arguments are aligned with each other. Whenever a shift - mainly grammatical or semantic -has occurred, the alignment is tagged accordingly.
First of all, there are those projects that also deal with predicate-argument structures in some way, in particular FrameNet @cite_4 (which is mainly a lexicographical project but can, of course, be adopted for extensive corpus annotation, as is currently done in the project @cite_3 ), PropBank @cite_1 , and NomBank @cite_5 . In these projects, the predicate-argument annotation is the main objective, so they all try some kind of generalisation by organising their predicates in semantic frames (FrameNet) or by following the Levin classes (PropBank, and for nominalisations also NomBank). In FuSe, however, this type of annotation is not an end in itself -- predicates and their arguments simply constitute the transemes. Consequently, their annotation is kept deliberately simple and is entirely predicate-group specific without any attempt at generalisation.
@cite_1 @cite_5 @cite_4 @cite_3
2158847908 2403542349 1552061706 2167144759
We consider the task of identifying and labeling the semantic arguments of a predicate that evokes a FrameNet frame. This task is challenging because there are only a few thousand fully annotated sentences for supervised training. Our approach augments an existing model with features derived from FrameNet and PropBank and with partially annotated exemplars from FrameNet. We observe a 4 absolute increase in F1 versus the original model. We present a new method for semantic role labeling in which arguments and semantic roles are jointly embedded in a shared vector space for a given predicate. These embeddings belong to a neural network, whose output represents the potential functions of a graphical model designed for the SRL task. We consider both local and structured learning methods and obtain strong results on standard PropBank and FrameNet corpora with a straightforward product-of-experts model. We further show how the model can learn jointly from PropBank and FrameNet annotations to obtain additional improvements on the smaller FrameNet dataset. When complete, NomBank will provide annotation of noun arguments in Penn Treebank II (PTB). In PropBank, University of Pennsylvania annotators provide similar information for verbs. Given nominalization verb mappings, the combination of NomBank and PropBank allows for generalization of arguments across parts of speech. This paper describes our annotation task including factors which make assigning role labels to noun arguments a challenging task. Despite its substantial coverage, NomBank does not account for all within-sentence arguments and ignores extra-sentential arguments altogether. These arguments, which we call implicit, are important to semantic processing, and their recovery could potentially benefit many NLP applications. We present a study of implicit arguments for a select group of frequent nominal predicates. We show that implicit arguments are pervasive for these predicates, adding 65 to the coverage of NomBank. We demonstrate the feasibility of recovering implicit arguments with a supervised classification model. Our results and analyses provide a baseline for future work on this emerging task.