Proceedings - FTP Directory Listing

108 Pages·2012·14.16 MB·English

Preface
The8thInternationalWorkshopoftheISCASpecialInterestGrouponSpeechandLanguageTechnol-
ogyforMinorityLanguages(SALTMIL)1 andtheFourthWorkshoponAfricanLanguageTechnology
(AfLaT2012)2 is held as a joint effort as part of the 2012 International Language Resources and Eval-
uation Conference (LREC 2012). Entitled “Language technology for normalisation of less-resourced
languages”, the workshop is intended to continue the series of SALTMIL/LREC workshops on com-
putational language resources for minority languages, held in Granada (1998), Athens (2000), Las
Palmas de Gran Canaria (2002), Lisbon (2004), Genoa (2006), Marrakech (2008) and Malta (2010),
andtheseriesofAfLaTworkshops,heldinAthens(EACL2009),Malta(LREC2010)andAddisAbaba
(AGIS11).
The Istanbul 2012 workshop aims to share information on tools and best practices, so that isolated
researchers will not need to start from scratch. An important aspect will be the forming of personal
contacts, which can minimize duplication of effort. There will be a balance between presentations of
existing language resources, and more general presentations designed to give background information
neededbyallresearchers.
While less-resourced languages and minority languages often struggle to find their place in a digi-
tal world dominated by only a handful of commercially interesting languages, a growing number of
researchers are working on alleviating this linguistic digital divide, through localisation efforts, the
developmentofBLARKs(basiclanguageresourcekits)andpracticalapplicationsofhumanlanguage
technologies. The joint SALTMIL/AfLaT workshop on “Language technology for normalisation of
less-resourced languages” provides a unique opportunity to connect these researchers and set up a
commonforumtomeetandsharethelatestdevelopmentsinthefield.
The workshop takes an inclusive approach to the word normalisation, considering it to include both
technologies that help make languages more “normal” in society and everyday life, as well as tech-
nologies that normalise languages, i.e. help create or maintain a written standard or support diversity
instandards. Weparticularlyfocusonthechallengesless-resourcedandminoritylanguagesfaceinthe
digitalworld.
TheWorkshopOrganizers
MikelL.Forcada
GuyDePauw
Gilles-MauricedeSchryver
KepaSarasola
FrancisM.Tyers
PeterWaiganjoWagacha
1http://ixa2.si.ehu.es/saltmil
2http://AfLaT.org
i
Workshop Organizers
Mikel L. Forcada (SALTMIL)
DepartamentdeLlenguatgesiSistemesInforma`tics,Universitatd’Alacant,Spain
Guy De Pauw (AfLaT)
CLiPS-ComputationalLinguisticsGroup,UniversityofAntwerp,Belgium
Gilles-Maurice de Schryver (AfLaT)
AfricanLanguagesandCultures,GhentUniversity,Belgium
XhosaDepartment,UniversityoftheWesternCape,SouthAfrica
Kepa Sarasola (SALTMIL)
Dept. ofComputerLanguages,UniversityoftheBasqueCountry
Francis M. Tyers (SALTMIL)
DepartamentdeLlenguatgesiSistemesInformtics,Universitatd’Alacant,Spain
Peter Waiganjo Wagacha (AfLaT)
SchoolofComputing&Informatics,UniversityofNairobi,Kenya
ii
Workshop Program Committee
In˜akiAlegria-UniversityoftheBasqueCountry,Spain
Nu´riaBel-UniversitatPompeuFabra,Barcelona,Spain
LarsBorin-Go¨teborgsuniversitet,Sweden
SonjaBosch-UniversityofSouthAfrica,SouthAfrica
KhalidChoukri-ELRA/ELDA,France
GuyDePauw-UniversiteitAntwerpen,Belgium
Gilles-MauricedeSchryver-UniversiteitGent
MikelL.Forcada-Universitatd’Alacant,Spain
DafyddGibbon-Universita¨tBielefeld,Germany
LoriLevin-CarnegieMellonUniversity,USA
HrafnLoftsson-UniversityofReykjavik,Iceland
GirishNathJha-JawaharlalNehruUniversity,India
Ode´˙tu´nj´ıOde´job´ı-ObafemiAwolowoUniversity,Nigeria
. . . . .
LaurettePretorius-UniversityofSouthAfrica,SouthAfrica
BenoˆıtSagot-INRIA,France
FelipeSa´nchez-Mart´ınez-Universitatd’Alacant,Spain
KepaSarasola-UniversityoftheBasqueCountry,Spain
KevinScannell-SaintLouisUniversity,UnitedStates
TrondTrosterud-UniversityofTromsø,Norway
FrancisM.Tyers-Universitatd’Alacant,Spain
PeterWaiganjoWagacha-UniversityofNairobi,Kenya
All contributions found in the present proceedings were peer-reviewed by at
leasttwomembersoftheprogrammecommittee.
iii
iv
Table of Contents
IssuesinDesigningaSpokenCorpusofIrish
ElaineU´ıDhonnchadha,AlessioFrendaandBrianVaughan....................................1
LearningMorphologicalRulesforAmharicVerbsUsingInductiveLogicProgramming
WondwossenMulugetaandMichaelGasser...................................................7
TheDatabaseofModernIcelandicInflection
Krist´ınBjarnadottir ....................................................................... 13
NaturalLanguageProcessingforAmazighLanguage: ChallengesandFutureDirections
FadouaAtaaAllahandSihamBoulaknadel..................................................19
CompilingApertiummorphologicaldictionarieswithHFSTandusingtheminHFSTapplications
TommiA.PirinenandFrancisM.Tyers.....................................................25
AutomaticstructuringandcorrectionsuggestionsystemforHungarianclinicalrecords
Borba´laSiklo´si,Gyo¨rgyOrosz,AttilaNova´kandGa´borPro´sze´ky ............................. 29
ConstraintGrammarbasedCorrectionofGrammaticalErrorsforNorthSa´mi
LindaWiechetek..........................................................................35
TowardaRule-BasedSystemforEnglish-AmharicTranslation
MichaelGasser...........................................................................41
Technological Tools for Dictionary and Corpora Building for Minority Languages: Example of the
French-basedCreoles
PaolaCarrionGonzalezandEmmanuelCartier...............................................47
DescribingMorphologically-richLanguagesusingMetagrammars: aLookatVerbsinIkota
DenysDuchier,BrunelleMagnanaEkoukou,YannickParmentier,SimonPetitjeanandEmannuelSchang..55
ACorpusofSantome
TjerkHagemeijer,IrisHendrickx,AbigailTinyandHaldaneAmaro ........................... 61
TheTaggedIcelandicCorpus(MM)
Sigru´nHelgado´ttir,A´staSvavarsdo´ttir,Eir´ıkurRo¨gnvaldsson,Krist´ınBjarnado´ttirandHrafnLoftsson.....67
Semi-automated extraction of morphological grammars for Nguni with special reference to Southern
Ndebele
LaurettePretoriusandSonjaBosch.........................................................73
TaggingandVerifyinganAmharicNewsCorpus
Bjo¨rnGamba¨ck...........................................................................79
Resource-LightBantuPart-of-SpeechTagging
GuyDePauw,Gilles-MauricedeSchryverandJannekevandeLoo............................85
POSAnnotated50MCorpusofTajikLanguage
GulshanDovudov,V´ıtSuchomelandPavelSˇmerk ...........................................93
AuthorIndex..............................................................................99
v
vi
The Workshop Program
Tuesday,May22,2012
09:15–09:30 Welcome/OpeningSession
09:30–10:30 InvitedTalk-Howtobuildlanguagetechnologyresourcesforthenext100
years
SjurMoshagenNørstebø,Sa´miParliament
10:30–11:00 CoffeeBreak
11:00–13:00 ResourceCreation
11:00–11:30 IssuesinDesigningaSpokenCorpusofIrish
ElaineU´ıDhonnchadha,AlessioFrendaandBrianVaughan
11:30–12:00 Learning Morphological Rules for Amharic Verbs Using Inductive Logic
Programming
WondwossenMulugetaandMichaelGasser
12:00–12:30 TheDatabaseofModernIcelandicInflection
Krist´ınBjarnadottir
12:30–13:00 Natural Language Processing for Amazigh Language: Challenges and Fu-
tureDirections
FadouaAtaaAllahandSihamBoulaknadel
13:00–14:00 LunchBreak
vii
Tuesday,May22,2012(continued)
14:00–16:00 ResourceUse
14:00–14:30 Compiling Apertium morphological dictionaries with HFST and using them
inHFSTapplications
TommiA.PirinenandFrancisM.Tyers
14:30–15:00 AutomaticstructuringandcorrectionsuggestionsystemforHungarianclin-
icalrecords
Borba´laSiklo´si,Gyo¨rgyOrosz,AttilaNova´kandGa´borPro´sze´ky
15:00–15:30 Constraint Grammar based Correction of Grammatical Errors for North
Sa´mi
LindaWiechetek
15:30–16:00 TowardaRule-BasedSystemforEnglish-AmharicTranslation
MichaelGasser
16:00–16:30 CoffeeBreak
16:30–17:30 PosterSession
•TechnologicalToolsforDictionaryandCorporaBuildingforMinorityLanguages: Example
oftheFrench-basedCreoles–PaolaCarrionGonzalezandEmmanuelCartier
• Describing Morphologically-rich Languages using Metagrammars: a Look at Verbs in
Ikota – Denys Duchier, Brunelle Magnana Ekoukou, Yannick Parmentier, Simon Petitjean
andEmannuelSchang
•ACorpusofSantome–TjerkHagemeijer,IrisHendrickx,AbigailTinyandHaldaneAmaro
• The Tagged Icelandic Corpus (MM) – Sigru´n Helgado´ttir, A´sta Svavarsdo´ttir, Eir´ıkur
Ro¨gnvaldsson,Krist´ınBjarnado´ttirandHrafnLoftsson
• Semi-automated extraction of morphological grammars for Nguni with special reference to
SouthernNdebele–LaurettePretoriusandSonjaBosch
•TaggingandVerifyinganAmharicNewsCorpus–Bjo¨rnGamba¨ck
• Resource-Light Bantu Part-of-Speech Tagging – Guy De Pauw, Gilles-Maurice de Schryver
andJannekevandeLoo
•POSAnnotated50MCorpusofTajikLanguage–GulshanDovudov,V´ıtSuchomelandPavel
Sˇmerk
17:30–17:45 ClosingSession
viii
WorkshoponLanguageTechnologyforNormalisationofLess-ResourcedLanguages(SALTMIL8/AfLaT2012)
Issues in Designing a Corpus of Spoken Irish
Elaine Uí Dhonnchadha, Alessio Frenda, Brian Vaughan
Centre for Language and Communication Studies,
Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.
E-mail: {uidhonne; frendaa; bvaughan}@tcd.ie
Abstract
This paper describes the stages involved in implementing a corpus of spoken Irish. This pilot project (consisting of approximately
140K words of transcribed data) implements part of the design of a larger corpus of spoken Irish which it is hoped will contain
approximately 2 million words when complete. It hoped that such a corpus will provide material for linguistic research, lexicography,
the teaching of Irish and for development of language technology for the Irish language.

Keywords: spoken language, corpus design, Irish

1. Introduction 3. Corpus Design
In order to design a corpus that is representative and
This paper describes the design of a corpus of spoken Irish. authoritative, it is useful to take into account the design
The proposed spoken corpus, consisting of approximately adopted by recent, state-of-the art corpora for other
2 million words will provide material for linguistic languages. We examined the design of a number of
research, lexicography, the teaching of Irish and for corpora (London-Lund Corpus of Spoken English3,
Lancaster/IBM Spoken English Corpus (SEC)4, Corpus of
development of language technology for the Irish
Spoken New Zealand English5 British National Corpus6,
language. Also described are various stages involved in
COREC (Corpus oral de referencia del Español
the pilot implementation of part of the proposed corpus.
Contemporáneo)7, CLIPS (Corpora e Lessici dell’Italiano
Parlato e Scritto)8, ICE (The International Corpus of
In order to create a comprehensive corpus of spoken Irish, English)9 and CGN (Corpus Gesproken Nederlands)10
the design includes dialectal and chronological variation, One common feature shared by the more recent corpora
as well as different registers and contexts of language use. surveyed here is the extent of naturalistic conversational
In addition to new recordings, material will also be drawn material they include.
from existing collections and archives (radio and TV There is no existing corpus of spoken Irish which meets
broadcast and folklore archives). The corpus is in line our criteria of including dialectal and chronological
with current standards in terms of time-alignment of variation. The most substantial collection of spoken
language transcripts, Caint Chonamara (Wigger, 2000)
transcripts, XML formatting and part-of-speech tagging
(1.2 million words approx.) relates to one dialect only
for electronic searchability and querying. It will also be
(Conamara) and one year, 1964, and is not linguistically
available online.
annotated.

2. Linguistic Background
Our design considers the following variables:
Irish is the first official language of Ireland with English • time frame: we aim to create a diachronic corpus by
being the second official language. In practice Irish is including spoken Irish from the earliest available
spoken as a first language in only a small number of areas recordings to the present day. We have decided upon
known as Gaeltachtaí which are mainly on the western

seaboard. For the remainder of the population Irish is
3 London-Lund Corpus of Spoken English http://kh
learned at school (compulsorily) as a second language.
nt.hit.uib.no/icame/manuals/LONDLUND/INDEX.HTM
While 1.6 million1 of the 3.9 million population report 4Lancaster/IBM Spoken English Corpus (SEC) http://kh
proficiency in the spoken language, the number of native nt.hit.uib.no/icame/manuals/sec/INDEX.HTM.
speakers is much lower, at 64 thousand2 and dwindling in 5 Corpus of Spoken New Zealand English http://ic
the Gaeltachtaí (although numbers are increasing in ame.uib.no/wsc/index.htm.
urban areas). These sociolinguistic conditions mean that a 6 British National Corpus http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.
comprehensive spoken corpus has a vital role to play in uk/corpus/index.xml.
promoting and preserving the spoken language. 7A reference corpus for contemporary spoken Spanish
http://www.lllf.uam.es/~fmarcos/informes/corpus/corpul
ee.html.
8 Corpora and Lexica for Spoken and Written Italian
1 Census 2006 http://www.cso.ie/en/newsandevents/press http://www.clips.unina.it/it/.
releases/2007pressreleases/2006censusofpopulation-volu 9 International Corpus of English http://ice-corp
me9-irishlanguage/ ora.net/ice/.
2 Census 2006 http://census.cso.ie/Census/TableViewer 10 Spoken Dutch Corpus http://lands.let.kun.nl/cgn
/tableView.aspx?ReportId=96447 /ehome.htm.
1
WorkshoponLanguageTechnologyforNormalisationofLess-ResourcedLanguages(SALTMIL8/AfLaT2012)
the three time periods, P1: 1930-1971, P2: 1972-1995 cross-border body responsible for promoting the Irish
and P3 1996-present. In our pilot corpus we language on the island of Ireland) to carry out a pilot study.
concentrated on contemporary speech (P3 We decided to concentrate our initial efforts in the
1996-present). contemporary period (P3) and on dialogic speech. As time
• dialectal variation: we aim to cover the three main and resources were limited we used readily available
dialects of Irish in equal measure: i.e. not public broadcast dialogues (radio interviews and
proportionally to the number of speakers of each discussions).
dialect, given that the corpus is diachronic and the
relative proportions might have varied over the years, We also carried out a small amount of video recording of
but to provide equal documentation of each dialect private dialogue conversations. Four pairs of volunteers
insofar as possible. agreed to be video recorded in informal conversation in
• sociolinguistic variation: we aim to include Irish the Speech Communications Laboratory11, TCD. The
speakers from all linguistic backgrounds (a) interactions were video recorded using a Sony
‘traditional’ native speakers, (b) non-native speakers HDR-XR500v High Definition Handycam. The audio
and (c) ‘non-traditional’ native speakers, i.e. those was recorded in two ways: 1) using the onboard camera
who describe themselves as native speakers having microphone and 2) using two Sennheiser MKH-60
being raised through Irish by L1 or L2 parents, shotgun microphones and an Edirol 4-channel HD Audio
typically in a non-Gaeltacht setting, and who have recorder. Audio was recorded at a sampling rate of 96KhZ
subsequently attended Irish-medium schools (Ó with a bit rate of 24 bits. For practical purposes, the audio
Giollagáin & Mac Donnacha, 2008, p. 111f.). was bounced down to a sampling rate of 44.1KhZ with a
• gender and age: we aim to represent both males and bit rate of 16bits (the Redbook audio standard), with the
females proportionally, and to include a spread of higher 96KhZ files being used for archiving.
ages (e.g. young adults, middle aged and elderly).
• context and subject matter: we aim to include In total, 70 x 8 min. recording extracts were transcribed
conversations recorded in a variety of contexts (home, giving 102,000 words of transcribed speech. By also
work, leisure, education etc.) and cover a variety of aligning and formatting some existing transcripts12, the
topics. overall total is currently 140,000 words (approximately).

The corpus design for Period 3 (1996-present), which is
inspired by the ICE and CGN corpus designs, proposes 5. Transcription
70% dialogic speech (420 X 8-10 min recordings) and
Spoken and written language differ in a number of
30% monologic speech (180 X 8-10 min recordings).
important respects. The syntactic structure of spontaneous
Each of the 600 recording transcriptions will contain
spoken utterances is usually simpler, but any faithful
1500-2000 words giving a corpus of between 900,000 and
transcript of a spoken conversation will not look as
1,200,000 words. The dialogic speech is further
orderly as a written dialogue. It is natural in spontaneous
categorised into ‘private’ (e.g. face-to-face conversations,
speech to produce repetitions, make false starts, to
phonecalls and interviews) and public (e.g. broadcast
hesitate or simply to leave part of a message unfinished,
discussions and interviews, parliamentary debates,
relying instead on non-verbal communication such as a
classroom lessons, business meetings etc.) speech. The
gesture or the tone of voice. This together with dialectal
monologic speech is categorised as either scripted (news
pronunciations which deviate substantially from standard
broadcasts, speeches etc.) or unscripted (e.g. sports
orthographical representations means that transcribing
commentaries, unscripted speeches, demonstrations, legal
spoken language presents immediate challenges.
presentations etc.) speech.
For Period 1 (1930-1971) and Period 2 (1972-1995), not
5.1 Guidelines
all of the required types of material will be available. We
will aim to keep the same proportions as for Period 3 but We examined a number of transcription conventions
the quantities will necessarily be less. In order to ensure already in use including CHAT13, LINDSEI14, and LDC15.
that as many of the design categories are repesented as The CHAT (Codes for the Human Analysis of Transcripts)
fully as is possible, a thorough investigation of available System is a comprehensive standard for transcribing and
archival material will have to be undertaken. encoding the characteristics of spoken language
(MacWhinney, 2000). These guidelines were developed
4. Data Collection and Recording for the transcription of spoken interactions between
children and their carers in order to study child language
In the case of dialogic speech (70%) there is ample public

broadcast material available in the form of radio podcasts
11 http://www.tcd.ie/slscs/clcs/scl/
and archives. Other categories such as classroom lessons
12 Frenda (2011) material transcribed for PhD research
and business meetings will have to be recorded. All
TCD (20K); Wigger (2000) Caint Chonamara (10K);
private dialogue speech will have to be recorded in the
Dillon, G.., material transcribed for PhD research TCD
various dialectal regions. In the case of monologic speech (5K).
(30%), the majority of this can be sourced from broadcast 13 CHAT http://childes.psy.cmu.edu/manuals/chat.pdf
media and archives, with some categories such as legal 14 Louvain International Database of Spoken English
presentations being recorded. Interlanguage Transcription guidelines
http://www.uclouvain.be/en-307849.html
Funding was obtained from Foras na Gaeilge (the 15 Linguistic Data Consortium http://www.ldc.upenn.edu
/Creating/creating_annotated.shtml#Transcription
2