mirror of
https://github.com/GrammaticalFramework/gf-core.git
synced 2026-04-19 01:39:32 -06:00
gslt sem presentation
This commit is contained in:
aarne
@@ -14,13 +14,19 @@ Last update: %%date(%c)
|
||||
|
||||
==Setting==
|
||||
|
||||
Funding
|
||||
- VR: Library-Based Grammar Engineering (2006-2008)
|
||||
Current funding
|
||||
- VR: Library-Based Grammar Engineering (2006-2008)
|
||||
- Lars Borin (Swedish)
|
||||
- Robin Cooper (Computational Linguistics)
|
||||
- Sibylle Schupp and Aarne Ranta (Computer Science)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Previous funding
|
||||
- VR: Record Types and Dialogue Semantics (2003-2005)
|
||||
- VINNOVA: Interactive Language Technology (2001-2004)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Applications
|
||||
Main applications
|
||||
- TALK: multilingual and multimodal dialogue systems
|
||||
- WebALT: multilingual generation of mathematical teaching material
|
||||
- KeY: multilingual authoring of software specifications
|
||||
@@ -30,16 +36,15 @@ Applications
|
||||
|
||||
==People==
|
||||
|
||||
Staff:
|
||||
Staff contributions to grammar libraries:
|
||||
- Björn Bringert
|
||||
- Markus Forsberg
|
||||
- Harald Hammarström
|
||||
- Janna Khegai
|
||||
- Peter Ljunglöf
|
||||
- Aarne Ranta
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Student projects:
|
||||
Student projects on libraries:
|
||||
- Inger Andersson & Therese Söderberg: Spanish morphology
|
||||
- Ludmilla Bogavac: Russian morphology
|
||||
- Ali El Dada: Arabic morphology and syntax
|
||||
@@ -47,6 +52,7 @@ Student projects:
|
||||
- Michael Pellauer: Estonian morphology
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
|
||||
==Software Libraries==
|
||||
@@ -97,8 +103,13 @@ Possible ways to do this:
|
||||
yesButton swedish = button "Ja"
|
||||
yesButton finnish = button "Kyllä"
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
+ Hire more programmers to perform localization in different languages
|
||||
+ Use a library ``GUIText`` such that you can write
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
|
||||
3. Use a library ``GUIText`` such that you can write
|
||||
```
|
||||
yesButton lang = button (render lang GUIText.Yes)
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -194,17 +205,18 @@ You may want to write
|
||||
For this purpose, you need a library with the following API
|
||||
(Application Programmer's Interface):
|
||||
```
|
||||
Have : NounPhrase -> NounPhrase -> Sentence
|
||||
Have : NounPhrase -> NounPhrase -> Sentence
|
||||
|
||||
PolYou, FamYou, I : NounPhrase
|
||||
|
||||
Num : Int -> Noun -> NounPhrase
|
||||
PolYou : NounPhrase
|
||||
FamYou : NounPhrase
|
||||
|
||||
Message, Jewel, Surprise : Noun
|
||||
Num : Int -> Noun -> NounPhrase
|
||||
|
||||
Message : Noun
|
||||
```
|
||||
You also need a top-level rendering function
|
||||
```
|
||||
render : Language -> Sentence -> String
|
||||
render : Language -> Sentence -> String
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -223,6 +235,9 @@ To this end, the API should provide the top-level function
|
||||
```
|
||||
The library that we will present actually has this as well!
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
|
||||
The only complication is that ``parse`` does not always return
|
||||
just one sentence. Those may be zero:
|
||||
```
|
||||
@@ -230,8 +245,8 @@ just one sentence. Those may be zero:
|
||||
```
|
||||
or many:
|
||||
```
|
||||
Have PolYou (Num n Message)
|
||||
Have FamYou (Num n Message)
|
||||
Have PolYou (Num n Message)
|
||||
Have FamYou (Num n Message)
|
||||
Have PlurYou (Num n Message)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -251,7 +266,7 @@ can have different realizations in different languages.
|
||||
Therefore we also need **realization functions**,
|
||||
```
|
||||
render : Language -> Sentence -> String
|
||||
parse : Language -> String -> [Sentence]
|
||||
parse : Language -> String -> [Sentence]
|
||||
```
|
||||
Both of them require major linguistic expertise to write - but,
|
||||
one this is done, they can be used with very little linguistic
|
||||
@@ -272,15 +287,19 @@ In GF,
|
||||
- realization functions = **concrete syntax**
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Example:
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
|
||||
Simplest possible example:
|
||||
```
|
||||
abstract GUIText = {
|
||||
cat Text ;
|
||||
fun Yes : Text ;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
concrete GUITextEng of GUIText = {
|
||||
lin Yes = ss "yes" ;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
concrete GUITextFin of GUIText = {
|
||||
lin Yes = ss "kyllä" ;
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -302,8 +321,8 @@ The GF formalism moreover has the property of **reversibility**:
|
||||
a set of linearization rules automatically generates a parser as
|
||||
well.
|
||||
|
||||
While reversibility has a minor importance for the applications
|
||||
shown above, it is crucial for other applications of GF grammars.
|
||||
%While reversibility has a minor importance for the applications
|
||||
%shown above, it is crucial for other applications of GF grammars.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
@@ -312,34 +331,24 @@ shown above, it is crucial for other applications of GF grammars.
|
||||
|
||||
**multilingual grammar** = abstract syntax + concrete syntaxes
|
||||
|
||||
Early instances of the idea (from 1998) - **application grammars**:
|
||||
Examples of the idea:
|
||||
- multilingual authoring
|
||||
- domain-specific translation
|
||||
- dialogue systems
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Later development (from 2001) - **resource grammars**:
|
||||
- grammar libraries with language-independent APIs
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Of course, one important use of resource grammars is
|
||||
to help writing application grammars in GF.
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to GF itself, GF grammars can be accessed in
|
||||
Haskell, Prolog, and Java programs.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
|
||||
==Domain, ontology, idiom==
|
||||
|
||||
An abstract syntax can represent
|
||||
An abstract syntax represents
|
||||
- a **semantic model**
|
||||
- an **ontology**
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The concrete syntax defines how the **concepts** of the ontology
|
||||
are represented in natural language (or in a formal language).
|
||||
The concrete syntax defines how the concepts of the ontology
|
||||
are represented in a language.
|
||||
|
||||
The following requirements are made:
|
||||
- linguistic correctness (inflection, agreement, word order,...)
|
||||
@@ -406,17 +415,17 @@ All these sentences are grammatically incorrect.
|
||||
|
||||
==Solving the difficulties==
|
||||
|
||||
GF has tools for expressing the linguistic rules that are needed to
|
||||
produce correct translations in different languages. (Expressive power
|
||||
between TAG and HPSG.)
|
||||
GF can express the linguistic rules that are needed to
|
||||
produce correct translations. (Expressive power
|
||||
between TAG and HPSG, but the language is more high-level.)
|
||||
|
||||
Instead of just strings, we need parameters**, **tables**,
|
||||
Instead of just strings, we need **parameters**, **tables**,
|
||||
and **record types**. For instance, French:
|
||||
```
|
||||
param Mod = Ind | Subj ;
|
||||
param Gen = Masc | Fem ;
|
||||
|
||||
lincat Nat = {s : Str ; g : Gen} ;
|
||||
lincat Nat = {s : Str ; g : Gen} ;
|
||||
lincat Prop = {s : Mod => Str} ;
|
||||
|
||||
lin Even x = {s =
|
||||
@@ -424,12 +433,29 @@ and **record types**. For instance, French:
|
||||
m => x.s ++
|
||||
case m of {Ind => "est" ; Subj => "soit"} ++
|
||||
case x.g of {Masc => "pair" ; Fem => "paire"}
|
||||
}
|
||||
} ;
|
||||
}
|
||||
} ;
|
||||
```
|
||||
Linguistic knowledge dominates in the size of this grammar.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
|
||||
==Application grammars vs. resource grammars==
|
||||
|
||||
Application grammar ("semantic grammar")
|
||||
- abstract syntax: domain semantics
|
||||
- concrete syntax: "controlled language"
|
||||
- author: domain expert
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Resource grammar ("syntactic grammar")
|
||||
- abstract syntax: linguistic structures
|
||||
- concrete syntax: (approximation of) entire language
|
||||
- author: linguist
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
|
||||
==Concrete syntax using library==
|
||||
@@ -457,7 +483,7 @@ Notice: choice of adjective is domain expert knowledge.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==Questions in grammar library design==
|
||||
==Design questions for grammar the library==
|
||||
|
||||
What should there be in the library?
|
||||
- morphology, lexicon, syntax, semantics,...
|
||||
@@ -468,7 +494,7 @@ How do we organize and present the library?
|
||||
- "school grammar" vs. sophisticated linguistic concepts
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Where do we get the data from?
|
||||
Where to get the data from?
|
||||
- automatic extraction or hand-writing?
|
||||
- reuse of existing resources?
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -478,14 +504,14 @@ hence cannot use existing proprietary resources.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==Answers to questions in grammar library design==
|
||||
==Design decisions==
|
||||
|
||||
The current GF resource grammar library has, for each language,
|
||||
- complete morphology
|
||||
- lexicon of the most important structural words
|
||||
- test lexicon of ca. 300 content words
|
||||
- representative fragment of syntax
|
||||
- very little semantics,
|
||||
- representative fragment of syntax (cf. CLE (Core Language Engine))
|
||||
- rather flat semantics (cf. Quasi-Logical Form of CLE)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Organization and presentation:
|
||||
@@ -497,7 +523,7 @@ Organization and presentation:
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==Answers to questions in grammar library design. cont'd==
|
||||
==Design decisions, cont'd==
|
||||
|
||||
Where do we get the data from?
|
||||
- morphology and syntax are hand-written
|
||||
@@ -506,6 +532,7 @@ Where do we get the data from?
|
||||
- tool for automatic lexicon extraction
|
||||
- we have not reused existing resources
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
The resource grammar library is entirely
|
||||
open-source free software (under GNU GPL license).
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -513,27 +540,12 @@ open-source free software (under GNU GPL license).
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==The scope of a resource grammar library for a language==
|
||||
|
||||
All morphological paradigms
|
||||
|
||||
Basic lexicon of structural, common, and irregular words
|
||||
|
||||
Basic syntactic structures (approx. those of CLE, Core Language Engine)
|
||||
|
||||
Currently,
|
||||
- //no// semantics,
|
||||
- //no// language-specific structures if not necessary for expressivity.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==Success criteria==
|
||||
|
||||
Grammatical correctness
|
||||
Grammatical correctness of everything generated.
|
||||
|
||||
Semantic coverage: you can express whatever you want.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -548,24 +560,18 @@ families, using the module system of GF.
|
||||
==These are not our success criteria==
|
||||
|
||||
Language coverage: to be able to parse all expressions.
|
||||
- Example: French //passé simple//, although covered by the
|
||||
morphology, is not available through the language-independent API.
|
||||
|
||||
Example:
|
||||
the French //passé simple// tense, although covered by the
|
||||
morphology, is not used in the language-independent API, but
|
||||
only the //passé composé// is. However, an application
|
||||
accessing the French-specific (or Romance-specific)
|
||||
modules can use the passé simple.
|
||||
|
||||
Semantic correctness: only to produce meaningful expressions.
|
||||
|
||||
Example: the following sentences can be generated
|
||||
- Example: the following sentences can be generated
|
||||
```
|
||||
colourless green ideas sleep furiously
|
||||
|
||||
the time is seventy past forty-two
|
||||
```
|
||||
However, an applicatio grammar can use a domain-specific
|
||||
semantics to guarantee semantic well-formedness.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
(Warning for linguists:) theoretical innovation in
|
||||
syntax is not among the goals
|
||||
@@ -576,6 +582,9 @@ syntax is not among the goals
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==So where is semantics?==
|
||||
|
||||
Application grammars typically use domain-specific
|
||||
semantics to guarantee semantic well-formedness.
|
||||
|
||||
GF incorporates a **Logical Framework** and is therefore
|
||||
capable of expressing logical semantics //à la// Montague
|
||||
or any other flavour, including anaphora and discourse.
|
||||
@@ -588,6 +597,29 @@ Instead, we expect semantics to be given in
|
||||
of different domains.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==Levels of representation==
|
||||
|
||||
No fixed set of levels; here some examples:
|
||||
```
|
||||
2 is even
|
||||
2 är jämnt
|
||||
```
|
||||
In ``Arithm``
|
||||
```
|
||||
Even 2
|
||||
```
|
||||
In ``Predication`` (high level resource API)
|
||||
```
|
||||
predA (IntNP 2) (regA "even")
|
||||
predA (IntNP 2) (regA "jämn")
|
||||
```
|
||||
In ``Lang`` (ground level resource API)
|
||||
```
|
||||
UseCl TPres ASimul PPos (PredVP (UsePN (IntPN 2)) (UseComp (CompAP (PositA (regA "even")))))
|
||||
UseCl TPres ASimul PPos (PredVP (UsePN (IntPN 2)) (UseComp (CompAP (PositA (regA "jämn")))))
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
@@ -729,17 +761,16 @@ Example heuristic, from [ParadigsSwe gfdoc/ParadigmsSwe.html]:
|
||||
==Some formats that can be generated from GF grammars==
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
-printer=lbnf BNF Converter, thereby C/Bison, Java/JavaCup
|
||||
-printer=fullform full-form lexicon, short format
|
||||
-printer=xml XML: DTD for the pg command, object for st
|
||||
-printer=gsl Nuance GSL speech recognition grammar
|
||||
-printer=jsgf Java Speech Grammar Format
|
||||
-printer=srgs_xml SRGS XML format
|
||||
-printer=srgs_xml_prob SRGS XML format, with weights
|
||||
-printer=slf a finite automaton in the HTK SLF format
|
||||
-printer=regular a regular grammar in a simple BNF
|
||||
-printer=gfc-prolog gfc in prolog format (also pg)
|
||||
|
||||
-printer=lbnf BNF Converter, thereby C/Bison, Java/JavaCup
|
||||
-printer=fullform full-form lexicon, short format
|
||||
-printer=xml XML: DTD for the pg command, object for st
|
||||
-printer=gsl Nuance GSL speech recognition grammar
|
||||
-printer=jsgf Java Speech Grammar Format
|
||||
-printer=srgs_xml SRGS XML format
|
||||
-printer=srgs_xml_prob SRGS XML format, with weights
|
||||
-printer=slf a finite automaton in the HTK SLF format
|
||||
-printer=regular a regular grammar in a simple BNF
|
||||
-printer=gfc-prolog gfc in prolog format (also pg)
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -749,15 +780,16 @@ Example heuristic, from [ParadigsSwe gfdoc/ParadigmsSwe.html]:
|
||||
The most general format is **multilingual treebank** generation:
|
||||
```
|
||||
> gr -tr | l -multi
|
||||
Freeze (All Fruit)
|
||||
UseCl TCond AAnter PPos (PredVP (DetCN (DetSg DefSg NoOrd)
|
||||
(AdjCN (PositA young_A) (UseN man_N))) (ComplV2 love_V2 (UsePron she_Pron)))
|
||||
|
||||
all fruits freeze
|
||||
kaikki hedelmät jäätyvät
|
||||
alla frukter fryser
|
||||
alle frukter fryser
|
||||
todas las frutas congelan
|
||||
tutte le frutte gelano
|
||||
tous les fruits gèlent
|
||||
den unga mannen skulle ha älskat henne
|
||||
|
||||
der junge Mann würde sie geliebt haben
|
||||
|
||||
le jeune homme l' aurait aimée
|
||||
|
||||
the young man would have loved her
|
||||
```
|
||||
A special case is corpus generation, either exhaustive or random with
|
||||
or without probability weights attached to constructors.
|
||||
@@ -765,6 +797,16 @@ or without probability weights attached to constructors.
|
||||
Cf. Rebecca Jonson this afternoon.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==Use as program components==
|
||||
|
||||
Haskell, Java, Prolog
|
||||
|
||||
Parsing, generation, translation
|
||||
|
||||
Push-button creation of spoken language translators (using Nuance)
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
#NEW
|
||||
==Related work==
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -772,7 +814,8 @@ CLE = Core Language Engine
|
||||
- the closest point of comparison as for coverage and purpose
|
||||
- resource API similar to "Quasi-Logical Form"
|
||||
- parametrized modules instead of grammar porting via macro packages
|
||||
- grammar specialization via partial evaluatio instead of explanation-based learning
|
||||
- grammar specialization via partial evaluation instead of explanation-based learning
|
||||
- therefore, transfer at compile time as often as possible
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Lingo Matrix project (HPSG)
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user