Approximator, distance-AWAY #35
Comments
|
John_A lives_S [about_E 3_E miles_C west of here]_A
…On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 9:49 PM Nathan Schneider ***@***.***> wrote:
"John lives about 3 miles away"
John_A lives_S [[about_E 3_E miles_C]_Q away_R]_A ?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG86_KyQ2q9fwXy10OwwRZgy7p9M5Liks5ugmO_gaJpZM4XCq8m>
.
|
|
The original example I encountered actually had "to": something like "They moved to about 3 miles away". |
|
|
|
Dotan, could you add this to the interesting examples section? |
|
"quantity modifiers, distances, and directions" |
|
Sure, added.
|
|
A different question regarding all the non-scene examples: |
|
Good point.
…On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 2:01 PM dotdv ***@***.***> wrote:
A different question regarding all the non-scene examples:
In the guidelines we say that "by convention, we place the Rs in non-Scene
units as siblings of the Es, Qs and Cs they relate", so for example instead
of "cities_C [north_R of_R DC_C]_E" according to the guidelines it should
be:
cities_C north_R of_R DC_E
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG86yEVKb-PUpYldprLUmtzhDvlDToaks5ujIIigaJpZM4XCq8m>
.
|
Should there be an exception for coordinated modifiers? "cities north of DC and south of Boston": cities_C [[north_R of_R DC_C]_C and_N [south_R of_R Boston_C]_C]_E ? Regarding multiword prepositions, it is clear that some are fixed expressions and therefore UNA (e.g. "in front of", "next to"). By contrast, "from" can be stacked with a locative preposition in a motion scene: "the cat emerged from behind/next to/under/... the couch". I could go either way on cardinal direction + OF, e.g. "north of". |
|
And what if there are multiple adnominal PPs? "the party on Saturday from 8 to midnight" |
|
Why is that an issue? isn't that just multiple As?
…On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 4:40 PM Nathan Schneider ***@***.***> wrote:
And what if there are multiple adnominal PPs? "the party on Saturday from
8 to midnight"
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG86z47gdeiR8xsxx-6N9EnD3ErqMnFks5ujKdlgaJpZM4XCq8m>
.
|
|
Oops, I forgot "party" was scene-evoking. Let's make it: "the house on Main Street between the school and the church" |
|
I think it should be two Es.
…On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 5:34 PM Nathan Schneider ***@***.***> wrote:
Oops, I forgot "party" was scene-evoking. Let's make it: "the house on
Main Street between the school and the church"
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG86083qcAmYUSt72fCGpylf2DdM4etks5ujLPZgaJpZM4XCq8m>
.
|
|
You mean: the_E house_C on_R [Main Street]_E between_R [the_E school_C]_E and_N [the_E church_C]_E? This leaves it unclear which R's go with which E's, which could be a problem for supersense alignment. |
|
I mean:
the_E house_C on_R [Main Street]_E between_R [[the_E school_C]_C and_N
[the_E church_C]_C]_E
…On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:25 PM Nathan Schneider ***@***.***> wrote:
You mean: the_E house_C on_R [Main Street]_C between_R the_E school_C
and_N the_E church_C?
This leaves it unclear which R's go with which C's, which could be a
problem for supersense alignment.
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG86_20jOIUVxNxOUhXRXcGjFqwevY2ks5ujNwjgaJpZM4XCq8m>
.
|
|
So "on" and "between" are at the same level even though they pertain to different elaborators. Is that going to cause problems? |
|
we can use a syntactic parser to do the PSS alignment.
…On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:29 PM Nathan Schneider ***@***.***> wrote:
So "on" and "between" are at the same level even though they pertain to
different elaborators. Is that going to cause problems?
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG869J12XKVIXSnKw8vXiTNqxlDv0D-ks5ujN0BgaJpZM4XCq8m>
.
|
|
But from a theoretical perspective, why associate the R with the "case-marked" expression under a scene, but not in a non-scene unit? |
|
I think it's because then it becomes confusing when there's more than one
C, or when the C is the second, such as in: "[two barrels of]_Q smoked_E
herring_C". if we were to put "of" with its prepositional object we would
end up with "[two barrels]_Q of_{C-} smoked_E herring_{-C}"
which is confusing.
…On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:33 PM Nathan Schneider ***@***.***> wrote:
But from a theoretical perspective, why associate the R with the
"case-marked" expression under a scene, but not in a non-scene unit?
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG867L60AtRGry24qymDudwHNyHQAnPks5ujN4DgaJpZM4XCq8m>
.
|
|
Oh, and not [two barrels]_Q [of_R smoked_E herring_C]_C because that would be a C within a C? I wonder if the policy should be limited to "of" (and equivalent genitive/quantity markers in other languages). It feels weird for "the party on the street" and "the house on the street" to be so structurally different. |
|
To put it another way: I don't think you'd ever have a preposition other than "of" followed by a C. So maybe the policy should be limited to C-relators as opposed to E/A/etc.-relators. |
|
For Quantities, I see why we don't necessarily want to group the R with the center. I think it should be But if the pobj is an Elaborator, I agree with Nathan that it would be more intuitive and consistent and less ambiguous if it was |
|
What about "two types of smoked herring"? where "types" is not a C, and
maybe the next language would have some other rationale.
My point is that where Rs should be is just a matter of convention, we
chose the simplest option for annotators, but if you don't like it, we can
easily post-process the corpus to put the Rs wherever we want in close to
100% accuracy.
…On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 8:46 PM Jakob Prange ***@***.***> wrote:
For Quantities, I see why we don't necessarily want to group the R with
the center. I think it should be
"[two barrels]_Q of_R smoked_E herring_C" right?
But if the pobj is an Elaborator or aDverbial, I agree with Nathan that it
would be more intuitive, consistent and unabmibguous if it was
the_E house_C [on_R Main Street]_E [between_R [the_E school_C]_C and_N
[the_E church_C]_C]_E
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#35 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIG86-zzlk-ADf7mdubaywdabuhVQO4Iks5ujODlgaJpZM4XCq8m>
.
|
But "herring" is a C, right? The policy would be that an R that marks a C (syntactically, "of" applies to "herring") should not form a nested unit, but R's marking E's, A's, etc. should. I suspect this policy would actually be easier for annotators to remember. |
|
I went over the list of issues Jakob sent and it looks like the main open issue is how to deal with Rs. Apart from non-scene units, I think it will also help if we clarify how Rs should be marked when they pertain to a P/S (at the moment it's not mentioned at all in the guidelines). |
"John lives about 3 miles away"
John_A lives_S [[about_E 3_E miles_C]_Q away_R]_A ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: