@@ -889,6 +979,7 @@ Cf. "matrix" in BLARK, LinGo
+
Current funding @@ -46,6 +101,7 @@ Main applications
+
Staff contributions to grammar libraries: @@ -81,11 +137,11 @@ Technology, also:
-Various grammar library contributions from the multilingual Chalmers comminity: +Various grammar library contributions from the multilingual Chalmers community:
@@ -98,6 +154,7 @@ Resource library patches and suggestions from the WebALT staff:
+
The main device of division of labour in programming. @@ -123,6 +180,7 @@ Practical advantages:
+
Libraries promote abstraction: you abstract away from details. @@ -141,6 +199,7 @@ if it just has a support for functions or macros.
+
Example: we want to create a GUI (Graphical User Interface) button @@ -190,6 +249,7 @@ The library has an API (Application Programmer's Interface) with:
+
This is what you often see as a feedback from a program: @@ -217,6 +277,7 @@ The code that should be written is of course
+
The same as with "Yes": you have to know the words "you", @@ -243,6 +304,7 @@ of "message":
+
You also have to know the case required by the verb "have" @@ -266,6 +328,7 @@ address the user:
+
In analogy with the "Yes" case, you write @@ -287,6 +350,7 @@ It is time to move from canned text to a grammar.
+
You may want to write @@ -314,6 +378,7 @@ For this purpose, you need a library with the API
+
The library API for language will certainly grow big and become @@ -358,6 +423,7 @@ Thus some amount of interaction is needed.
+
The library has construction functions like @@ -385,6 +451,7 @@ knowledge by application programmers!
+
GF = Grammatical Framework @@ -428,6 +495,7 @@ Simplest possible example:
+
The realizatin function is, for each language, implemented by @@ -449,6 +517,7 @@ The GF formalism moreover has the property of reversibility:
+
multilingual grammar = abstract syntax + concrete syntaxes @@ -465,6 +534,7 @@ Examples of the idea:
+
An abstract syntax has other names: @@ -496,6 +566,7 @@ Problem: the expertise of both a linguist and a domain expert are required.
+
Arithmetic of natural numbers: abstract syntax @@ -518,6 +589,7 @@ Arithmetic of natural numbers: abstract syntax
+
We can translate using the abstract syntax as interlingua: @@ -539,6 +611,7 @@ But is it really so simple?
+
The previous multilingual grammar breaks these rules in many situations: @@ -555,6 +628,7 @@ All these sentences are grammatically incorrect.
+
GF can express the linguistic rules that are needed to @@ -585,6 +659,7 @@ Linguistic knowledge dominates in the size of this grammar.
+
Application grammar ("semantic grammar") @@ -607,6 +682,7 @@ Resource grammar ("syntactic grammar")
+
The expressive power is between TAG and HPSG. @@ -626,6 +702,7 @@ We have built a module system that can hide details.
+
Assume the following API @@ -656,6 +733,7 @@ Notice: the choice of adjective is domain expert knowledge.
+
What should there be in the library? @@ -687,6 +765,7 @@ hence cannot use existing proprietary resources.
+
Coverage, for each language: @@ -719,6 +798,7 @@ Presentation:
+
Where do we get the data from? @@ -732,11 +812,13 @@ Where do we get the data from?
-The resource grammar library is entirely open-source free software (under GNU GPL license). +The resource grammar library is entirely open-source free software +(under GNU GPL license).
+
Grammatical correctness of everything generated. @@ -751,8 +833,12 @@ Usability as library for non-linguists. Evaluation: tested in third-party projects.
+Tools for regression testing (treebank generation and comparison) +
++
Language coverage: @@ -787,6 +873,7 @@ Linguistic innovation in syntax:
+
Application grammars use domain-specific @@ -810,6 +897,7 @@ for all for the whole language.
+
Grammar composition: any grammar can serve as resource to another one.
@@ -847,6 +935,7 @@ In Lang (ground level resource API)
+
The current GF Resource Project covers ten languages: @@ -873,6 +962,7 @@ In addition, we have parts (morphology) of Arabic, Estonian, Latin, and Urdu
+
@@ -889,6 +979,7 @@ Cf. "matrix" in BLARK, LinGo
+
ParadigmsSwe
@@ -909,6 +1000,7 @@ Cf. "matrix" in BLARK, LinGo
+
English: negation and auxiliary vs. non-auxiliary verbs @@ -931,6 +1023,7 @@ Scandinavian: determiners
+
For the ten languages we have considered, it is possible @@ -956,6 +1049,7 @@ Reservations:
+
Simplest case: use the API in the same way for all languages. @@ -984,6 +1078,7 @@ than writing a resource grammar!
+
We can go even farther than share an abstract API: we can share implementations @@ -1003,6 +1098,7 @@ Exploited in two families:
+
We cannot anticipate all vocabulary needed in application grammars. @@ -1026,6 +1122,7 @@ Example heuristic, from ParadigsSwe:
+
decl2Noun : Str -> N = \bil ->
@@ -1042,6 +1139,7 @@ Example heuristic, from ParadigsSwe:
+
Some formats that can be generated from GF grammars
-printer=lbnf BNF Converter, thereby C/Bison, Java/JavaCup
@@ -1059,6 +1157,7 @@ Example heuristic, from ParadigsSwe:
+
Use as program components
Haskell, Java, Prolog
@@ -1072,6 +1171,7 @@ Push-button creation of spoken language translators (using Nuance)
+
Grammar library as linguistic resource
Can we use the libraries outside domain-specific fragments?
@@ -1094,6 +1194,7 @@ Two ideas:
+
Corpus generation
The most general format is multilingual treebank generation:
@@ -1124,6 +1225,7 @@ Can this be useful? Cf. Rebecca Jonson this afternoon.
+
Related work
CLE = Core Language Engine
@@ -1153,6 +1255,7 @@ Parsing detached from grammar (Nivre) - grammar detached from parsing
+
Demo
Stoneage grammar, based on the Swadesh word list.
@@ -1164,6 +1267,6 @@ Implemented as application on top of the resource grammar.
Illustrate generation and spoken-language parsing.
-
-
+
+