Comments (5)
The strong similarities between ADP and SCONJ may be peculiar for English -- it does not hold for Swedish, for example, which is otherwise similar to English in many respects -- but I nevertheless agree that it is awkward to treat "case" and "mark" differently in this respect. If we are going to change this, I would definitely prefer to ban dependents of "mark". Trying to draw a distinction between two types of adpositions is likely to open a big can of worms.
from docs.
There was a long and dynamic discussion about this when UD v1 was being drafted (end of September 2014). Only nine years passed and we have it back :-) In those ancient times we still used e-mail to discuss the guidelines. I'm not sure it would help to copy all the e-mails here but I find at least this contribution from Stanford (@ngiordani) interesting:
Below is the conclusion Chris and arrived at today, after discussing what has come up in this thread, as well as additional English Web Treebank (EWT) data that we've talked about within our group.
Here are two crucial examples that I think represent the class of constructions we're focused on:
right on time
two hours after the concert
Historically: in the EWT annotation, we made right and hours dependents of the respective prepositions. However, as Joakim pointed out elsewhere, in dependency syntax there is always an ambiguity between head modification and phrase modification, and the annotation we produced is ambiguous in that respect. While I agree that there's an intuition that right modifies on, it seems perfectly plausible to say that it modifies on time; note that it's also possible to say
right then
two hours later
to extend the argument that Joakim has made before. (It's interesting that this works with right, which can't modify other time adverbs.) I also could not come up with a single diagnosis that would distinguish modifying the preposition in these cases from modifying the prepositional phrase. (If anyone has an idea, please share!) So there doesn't seem to be linguistic evidence (in English at least) for this P-attachment analysis. Additionally, allowing prepositions to take dependents hurts the parallel we're trying to draw with case markers. And finally, this is going to create a problem (in fact, it already creates a problem) for the collapsed representation, which a lot of people use. In that representation, any modifiers of a preposition will have to be moved to depend on its complement anyway. For these reasons, both Chris and I feel like case-typed prepositions should not have adverbial modifiers, and modifiers such as right and two hours in the example above should attach to the nominal head, representing phrase-level modification. This is consistent with attachment decisions in the rest of the scheme.
HOWEVER, we think there's a class of examples that should treated differently. Consider:
two hours after they left
In cases like this, we're worried about usability; attaching the adverb to the verbal head would be an analysis that's very difficult to interpret. Again, it's difficult to argue P^0-attachment vs. PP-attachment. But the problem of keeping this parallel to case markers isn't in issue, because in English we would annotate this after as mark, not case (since it takes a verbal complement). So basically we'd like to allow mark
to have adverbial dependents, but not case
.
A unified treatment would of course be desirable, but at the end of the day, it might not even be possible. It's very difficult to propose an analysis in which English prepositions, which can take verbal complements, also share properties with case markers from other languages. We think this solution is a good compromise.
Natalia
from docs.
two hours after they left
In cases like this, we're worried about usability; attaching the adverb to the verbal head would be an analysis that's very difficult to interpret.
obl:npmod:outer
? *ducks*
Here are the modified SCONJ cases.
Honestly, it seems like trying to have it both ways—if mark
s are dependents just like case
s, it's odd to say the former can take modifiers but the latter can't because it is a "pure" function word (which the guidelines admit cannot be defined universally in terms of UD categories).
In English, it is hard to draw a sharp distinction between ADP and SCONJ, but we do so in UD based on the function of case vs. mark, which is based on the category of the head. But parallels like "two hours after NP" / "two hours after VP" show how similar they are. It seems like this guideline is imposing yet another awkward structural distinction (and one that is too rare for most annotators to learn as a special case).
I wonder if there is a universal claim to be made, which is that "true" case markers (such as clitics attaching as case
) don't allow these types of modifiers, while many adpositions (which language-internally are often regarded as heads) and subordinators do? If so, would it be better to distinguish these based on UPOS? I.e. a PART attaching as case
or mark
would not allow the modifier while an ADP or SCONJ would. There is also, e.g., VERB as case
("Especially given the current situation, ..."). However, we may want to treat focusing modifiers as a separate category that always attaches to the head of the phrase ("Only a hero can save the day", "Only after a year of training will you be ready", "Only by training every day will you learn the skills", "Only training every day will prepare you").
from docs.
I don't know that I would need to see dependents of mark banned cross-linguistically, there are many languages out there and I don't think we have thought it through. But for English, I don't see any substantial difference between "two hours after the concert" and "two hours after they left". I would attach "two hours" to the lexical head, not to "after", in both cases, following UD's general lexicocentric framework. Looking at GUM, it looks like this is already the case.
from docs.
I won't discuss the analysis in UD. My concern is the conversion UD => SUD. In the surface-syntactic analysis of these examples, "after" has two dependents: see the analysis in a native SUD French treebank (I am not sure that it is a good idea to treat the phrase before 'after' as a modifier, but it is our current analysis) and the SUD conversion of a UD native English treebank.
The question also concerns requests in UD: how we can easily get these interesting constructions in English and see whether they exist in other languages?
from docs.
Related Issues (20)
- Zero width spaces (U+200b) inside the token HOT 8
- coordinated copulas HOT 2
- when to annotate `compound` versus `obj` HOT 26
- Co-relative relative Clauses in Saraiki HOT 4
- incoherence of `acl:relcl` versus `acl` distinction HOT 13
- problem with annotation of "sadece" in UD_Turkish-BOUN HOT 10
- Insertion of two new Feats for voicing and euphony HOT 13
- Question on requirement for 'aux' not to have children (Tswana) HOT 6
- complements of "be" HOT 9
- Treatment of split "what a ((ADJ) NOUN)" construction in Low Saxon and Dutch HOT 16
- Dative Subjects Saraiki HOT 5
- Misidentified Lemmas in Spanish HOT 1
- clausal appos HOT 36
- Flat:foreign with Typo=Yes HOT 3
- acl vs xcomp vs advcl HOT 1
- Deprel of list item enumerators HOT 11
- English nominal subtypes: merge :npmod and :tmod as :unmarked HOT 18
- Create treebank without syntactic dependencies HOT 2
- How to document script used for the data in treebank? HOT 7
- Some Broken or missing treebank links HOT 4
Recommend Projects
-
React
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
-
Vue.js
🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
-
Typescript
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
-
TensorFlow
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
-
Django
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
-
Laravel
A PHP framework for web artisans
-
D3
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉
-
Recommend Topics
-
javascript
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
-
web
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
-
server
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
-
Machine learning
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
-
Visualization
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
-
Game
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
Recommend Org
-
Facebook
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
-
Microsoft
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
-
Google
Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.
-
Alibaba
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
-
D3
Data-Driven Documents codes.
-
Tencent
China tencent open source team.
from docs.