-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 253
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Validator support for ExtPos in checking external deprels #1062
Comments
+1 - the correct deprel is case and not amod. An alternative is to directly tag "due" as a preposition in this context, but I like this suggestion better, since it's really just due an error ;) |
Implemented. In consequence, some treebanks have errors that were not reported before (because the treebanks use
|
Ok, I can fix the Portuguese GSD and Bosque. |
I am now going to gradually remove the exception for |
Thanks. Would it be worth adding a warning for ANY |
I don't know. But according to will probably be flagged in the next round. I am modifying the tests one-by-one, and |
"According" is tagged VERB so it can attach as |
Shouldn't it now use ExtPos=ADP? |
There are two issues here: the general policy on VERBs as case/mark and the treatment of fixed expressions. It looks like the validator change UniversalDependencies/tools@5d0d028 prohibits regarding, given, and such as VERBs attaching as case/mark. But the guidelines explicitly say it is OK and we never discussed repealing that in favor of ExtPos. Assuming the single-word verbal connectives are allowed, my question was whether there should be a WARNING for any fixed expressions lacking ExtPos. I think that was the conclusion of the Core Group discussion. |
My recollection matches Nathan's - using ExtPos for single word 'case' would be a new policy. |
Well, using ExtPos for single word The change regarding VERBs can be reverted in the validator if desired. But the note that I had there from the time we discussed it in the core group was saying:
So now I thought that instead of implementing a language-specific list of exceptions, one could simply put ExtPos in the data. |
I found a note from Dec. 9, 2021: "Remove the categorical prohibition [on VERB/mark]; Dan will add a lexical list of exceptions (but it may take time)" Perhaps ExtPos is a more economical solution than adding a lexical list. We should discuss in our next meeting. A concern is that we may be moving too fast in making ExtPos mandatory in some circumstances where it wasn't previously. |
Hello everyone I'm having problems validating cases annotated with ExtPos=PRON, in fixed expressions composed of two PRON (in some cases, two nominative forms). These are fixed expressions common to Portuguese UD corpora ("o qual", "os quais", "o que", etc). In the ExtPos table (https://quest.ms.mff.cuni.cz/udvalidator/cgi-bin/unidep/langspec/specify_feature.pl?lcode=pt&feature=ExtPos) there is no possibility of PRON and PRON, because there is no line for PRON. I've seen that this possibility has been included for French. How can I do the same for Portuguese? |
I believe this will be solved by adding |
Thank you Nathan! |
In fact, Even if you are not authorized to edit the page directly, you can propose changes as a pull request; someone with the rights can then merge it. Once the documentation is (correctly) updated, the clickable form will offer the new value, too. |
Thank you, Dan. I will do this. |
Sorry, in the above link I gave the URL of the universal ExtPos page. It should be the Portuguese one. |
It is done (I hope I did it right). Please check it. |
You mean a pull request? I am afraid you did not do it right because I do not see any open pull request here. Alternatively, just send me the suggested text + example that should be there and I can edit it myself. |
I did it here: e3029b0 And now I tried again: pages-source...MagaliDuran:docs:patch-2 The text to be inserted is:
|
This time the PR worked and I just merged it. You can now go to the ExtPos registration page for Portuguese and you will see the new checkboxes for |
Thanks a lot! It worked! |
In English-EWT sentence answers-20111108103930AA7FPhc_ans-0007 there is a connective that is clearly supposed to be prepositional "due to" but the "to" is omitted.
The way "due to" is normally handled is as an ADJ+ADP fixed expression, functioning holistically like a preposition, which we indicate with
ExtPos=ADP
on the first word (#1037).At present, the validator ignores external deprel checks on
fixed
heads. But in this sentence, the "to" is missing, so there is no overtfixed
relation, and the validator is throwing an error that an ADJ cannot attach ascase
.I think the correct validator behavior is to use the
ExtPos
if present for checking the deprel. I will temporarily change "due" fromcase
toamod
but hope to change it back in the future.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: