2008
DOI: 10.1162/coli.2008.34.4.627
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dependency Parsing of Turkish

Abstract: The suitability of different parsing methods for different languages is an important topic in syntactic parsing. Especially lesser-studied languages, typologically different from the languages for which methods have originally been developed, poses interesting challenges in this respect. This article presents an investigation of data-driven dependency parsing of Turkish, an agglutinative free constituent order language that can be seen as the representative of a wider class of languages of similar type. Our in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 39 publications
(34 citation statements)
references
References 64 publications
0
33
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…For the parsing experiments, we have concatenated IGs into word forms to get a word-based tokenization and used a reduced version of the part-of-speech tagset given by the treebank, very similar to the reduced tagset used in the parser of Eryigit and Oflazer (2006). For each word, we use the part-of-speech of each IG and in addition include the case and possessive information if the stem is a noun or pronoun.…”
Section: Turkishmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the parsing experiments, we have concatenated IGs into word forms to get a word-based tokenization and used a reduced version of the part-of-speech tagset given by the treebank, very similar to the reduced tagset used in the parser of Eryigit and Oflazer (2006). For each word, we use the part-of-speech of each IG and in addition include the case and possessive information if the stem is a noun or pronoun.…”
Section: Turkishmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We believe that morphological features of the context words will be also informative in morpheme tagging task because Eryigit et al [9] shows that using Table 8. Comparison of our model with suffix based tagger [19] and the perceptron algorithm [16] on the datasets obtained from Metu Sabancı Turkish Treebank.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given a question, the question is first parsed using a Turkish dependency parser (Eryiğit, Nivre and Oflazer 2008). The accuracy of the parser is around eighty percent in terms of word-to-word attachment score.…”
Section: Question Analysis and Representationmentioning
confidence: 99%