skip to main content
10.5555/1608829.1608838dlproceedingsArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescorpusannoConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Free Access

A parallel Proposition Bank II for Chinese and English

Published:29 June 2005Publication History

ABSTRACT

The Proposition Bank (PropBank) project is aimed at creating a corpus of text annotated with information about semantic propositions. The second phase of the project, PropBank II adds additional levels of semantic annotation which include eventuality variables, co-reference, coarse-grained sense tags, and discourse connectives. This paper presents the results of the parallel PropBank II project, which adds these richer layers of semantic annotation to the first 100K of the Chinese Treebank and its English translation. Our preliminary analysis supports the hypothesis that this additional annotation reconciles many of the surface differences between the two languages.

References

  1. Olga Babko-Malaya and Martha Palmer. 2005. Proposition Bank II: Delving Deeper. In Frontiers in Corpus Annotation, Workshop in conjunction with HLT/NAACL 2004, Boston, Massachusetts.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Olga Babko-Malaya, Martha Palmer, Nianwen Xue, Aravind Joshi, and Seth Kulick. 2004. Exploiting Interactions between Different Types of Semantic Annotation. In Proceeding of ICWS-6, Tilburg, The Netherlands.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. C. Baker, C. Fillmore, and J. Lowe. 1998. The berkeley framenet project. In Proceedings of COLING-ACL, Singapore. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. E. Charniak. 2001. Immediate-head Parsing for Language Models. In ACL-01. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Michael Collins. 1999. Head-driven Statistical Models for Natural Language Parsing. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. M. Ellsworth, K. Erk, P. Kingsbury, and S. Pado. 2004. PropBank, SALSA and FrameNet: How design determines product. In Proceedings of the LREC 2004 Workshop on Building Lexical Resources from Semantically Annotated Corpora, Lisbon, Portugal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Charles J. Fillmore and B. T. Atkins. 1998. FrameNet and lexical relevantce. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Granada, Spain.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Eva Hajicova and Iyona Kucerova. 2002. Argument/Valency Structure in PropBank, LCS Database and Prague Dependency Treebank: A Comparative Pilot Study. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 846--851.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Christopher R. Johnson, Charles J. Fillmore, Miriam R. L. Petruck, Collin Baker, Michael Ellsworth, Josef Ruppenhofer, and Esther J. Wood. 2002. FrameNet: Theory and Practice, Version 1.0, www.icsi.berkeley.edu/framenet.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Marcus, B. Santorini, and M. A. Marcinkiewicz. 1993. Building a Large Annotated Corpus of English: the Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Mitchell Marcus, Grace Kim, Mary Ann Marcinkiewicz, et al. 1994. The Penn Treebank: Annotating Predicate Argument Structure. In Proc of ARPA speech and Natural language workshop.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. E. Miltsakaki, R. Prasad, A. Joshi, and B. Webber. 2004. The Penn Discourse Treebank. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Lisbon, Portugal.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Martha Palmer, Olga Babko-Malaya, and Hoa Dang. 2004. Different Sense Granularities for Different Applications. In Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Scalable Natural Language Understanding Systems, Boston, Mass.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Martha Palmer, Dan Gildea, and Paul Kingsbury. 2005. The proposition bank: An annotated corpus of semantic roles. Computational Linguistics, 31(1). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Martha Palmer, Hoa Trang Dang, and Christiane Fell-baum. to appear. Making fine-grained and coarsegrained sense distinctions, both manually and automatically. Journal of Natural Language Engineering.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Nianwen Xue and Martha Palmer. 2003. Annotating the Propositions in the Penn Chinese Treebank. In The Proceedings of the 2nd SIGHAN Workshop on Chinese Language Processing, Sapporo, Japan. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Nianwen Xue, Fei Xia, Fu dong Chiou, and Martha Palmer. To appear. The Penn Chinese Treebank: Phrase Structure Annotation of a Large Corpus. Natural Language Engineering. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Nianwen Xue. To appear. Annotating the Discourse Connectives in the Chinese Treebank. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Frontiers in Corpus Annotation, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  1. A parallel Proposition Bank II for Chinese and English

        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
        • Published in

          cover image DL Hosted proceedings
          CorpusAnno '05: Proceedings of the Workshop on Frontiers in Corpus Annotations II: Pie in the Sky
          June 2005
          99 pages

          Publisher

          Association for Computational Linguistics

          United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 29 June 2005

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader