-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 43
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
Goeswith edits #314
Goeswith edits #314
Conversation
6 T t X GW _ 2 goeswith 2:goeswith _ | ||
7 E e X GW _ 2 goeswith 2:goeswith _ | ||
8 D d X GW _ 2 goeswith 2:goeswith _ | ||
2 U updated VERB VBN Tense=Past|Typo=Yes|VerbForm=Part 0 root 0:root _ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Technically I don't think this is a typo, but rather a stylistic choice to break the word. That said it's probably simpler to use Typo=Yes
for all goeswith
as currently required in the spec. @dan-zeman agreed?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@nschneid I think it was you who proposed that goeswith
always implies Typo=Yes
:-) I just implemented it in the validator once it was approved by the core group. And I cannot imagine how the validator could discriminate, so yes, agreed.
@@ -11256,27 +11256,27 @@ | |||
# text = - PPA Guaranty.doc | |||
1 - - PUNCT NFP _ 2 punct 2:punct _ | |||
2 PPA ppa NOUN GW _ 0 root 0:root _ | |||
3 Guaranty.doc guaranty.doc X NN Number=Sing 2 goeswith 2:goeswith _ | |||
3 Guaranty.doc guaranty.doc X NN Number=Sing 2 flat 2:flat _ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure what is best for the UPOS and features in these filenames. If Number
is specified does that imply NOUN
rather than X
?
18 surv surv VERB GW _ 14 advcl 14:advcl:as _ | ||
19 ive ive X VB VerbForm=Inf 18 goeswith 18:goeswith SpaceAfter=No | ||
18 surv survive VERB GW Typo=Yes|VerbForm=Inf 14 advcl 14:advcl:as _ | ||
19 ive _ X VB _ 18 goeswith 18:goeswith SpaceAfter=No |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should UD take a position on XPOS? It seems the tagger convention was to put the linguistic XPOS on the last token in the goeswith
group and GW
for the rest, the opposite of all the other info. Would be nicer to search if the meaningful XPOS was also on the first token but maybe that would interfere with PTB tagger compatibility.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we discussed XPOS. @amir-zeldes said that UD should not take a position on XPOS, which I agree with, as XPOS is mostly a non-UD thing (except that UD provides a space where XPOS can be shown).
5 h _ X GW _ 1 goeswith 1:goeswith _ | ||
6 o _ X GW _ 1 goeswith 1:goeswith _ | ||
7 u _ X GW _ 1 goeswith 1:goeswith _ | ||
8 t _ X GW _ 1 goeswith 1:goeswith _ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Another one with intentional stylistic spacing within a word
…rd if it contains non-space typos; fix a few lemmas
Corrections for "goeswith" relation to comply with the UD description: https://universaldependencies.org/u/dep/goeswith.html