SRL on top of UD #17
Comments
|
Yet another case to encourage some thoughts. Basically, here, the 'that' was annotated as WHADVP in the constituent analysis and in UD it is SCONJ/mark introducing the subordinate clause.
Previously |
Well, the sentence isn't 100% grammatical. This sentence exemplifies a tough-construction: [How much is its accuracy] + hard + [to determine]. |
|
This is way above my pay grade.
Katie, haven’t you done a lot of PB annotation on dependency parses? How would you have annotated the sentence below?
Nathan may well be right that it isn’t grammatical or the right parse, but PropBank would still try to annotate what is there.
Martha
Begin forwarded message:
From: Nathan Schneider ***@***.******@***.***>>
Subject: Re: [propbank/propbank-release] SRL on top of UD (Issue #17)
Date: November 26, 2021 at 11:42:52 PM MST
To: propbank/propbank-release ***@***.******@***.***>>
Cc: Martha Palmer ***@***.******@***.***>>, Mention ***@***.******@***.***>>
Reply-To: propbank/propbank-release ***@***.******@***.***>>
74 How much is its accuracy , I think , is still quite hard to determine at this time , indeed ,
@nschneid<https://github.com/nschneid>, what about the syntactic annotation?
Well, the sentence isn't 100% grammatical.
This sentence exemplifies a tough-construction: [How much is its accuracy] + hard + [to determine].
I'm not entirely sure how to analyze it, but I suspect it should be csubj instead of ccomp for the attachment of the first clause. There is a long unresolved discussion at UniversalDependencies/docs#308<UniversalDependencies/docs#308>.
On Nov 24, 2021, at 1:25 PM, Alexandre Rademaker ***@***.******@***.***>> wrote:
74 How much is its accuracy , I think , is still quite hard to determine at this time , indeed ,
─┮
│ ╭─╼ How ADV advmod 1 2
│ ╭─┶ much ADJ dep 2 3
│ ╭─┾ is VERB ccomp 3 13 <= ARG1-DSP
│ │ │ ╭─╼ its PRON nmod:poss 4 5
│ │ ╰─┶ accuracy NOUN nsubj 5 3
│ ├─╼ , PUNCT punct 6 13
│ │ ╭─╼ I PRON nsubj 7 8
│ ├─┶ think VERB parataxis 8 13 <= PRED think.01
│ ├─╼ , PUNCT punct 9 13
│ ├─╼ is AUX cop 10 13
│ ├─╼ still ADV advmod 11 13
│ ├─╼ quite ADV advmod 12 13
╰─┾ hard ADJ root 13 0 <= ARG1-DSP
│ ╭─╼ to PART mark 14 15
├─┾ determine VERB xcomp 15 13
│ │ ╭─╼ at ADP case 16 18
│ │ ├─╼ this DET det 17 18
│ ├─┶ time NOUN obl 18 15
│ ├─╼ , PUNCT punct 19 15
│ ╰─╼ indeed ADV advmod 20 15
╰─╼ , PUNCT punct 21 13
The cases of ARG?-DSP<https://github.com/propbank/propbank-release/blob/master/docs/conll-conversion-notes.md#argx-dsp-arguments>, when projected to dependencies may not be trivial.
Does the annotation above make sense? @MarthaSPalmer<https://github.com/MarthaSPalmer>? Considering that token 3 is argument of token 13, can we only annotate token 13? The DSP would only mark that the argument is actually an ancestor of the token 8 (the predicate).
@nschneid<https://github.com/nschneid>, what about the syntactic annotation?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#17>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABB327USNK7XHCLNG4ZXVNDUNVC27ANCNFSM5IW56WYQ>.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
The cases of ARG?-DSP, when projected to dependencies may not be trivial.
Does the annotation above make sense? @MarthaSPalmer? Considering that token 3 is argument of token 13, can we only annotate token 13? The DSP would only mark that the argument is actually an ancestor of the token 8 (the predicate).
@nschneid, what about the syntactic annotation?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: