DOCSLIB.ORG

User Contributions to Online Dictionaries Andrea Abel and Christian M

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
User Contributions to Online Dictionaries Andrea Abel and Christian M The dynamics outside the paper: User Contributions to Online Dictionaries Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer Electronic lexicography in the 21st century (eLex): Thinking outside the paper, Tallinn, Estonia, October 17–19, 2013. 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 1 Introduction Online dictionaries rely increasingly on their users and leverage methods for facilitating user contributions at basically any step of the lexicographic process. 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 2 Previous work . Mostly focused on specific type/dimension of user contribution . e.g., Carr (1997), Storrer (1998, 2010), Køhler Simonsen (2005), Fuertes-Olivera (2009), Melchior (2012), Lew (2011, 2013) . Ambiguous, partly overlapping terms: www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/7124863/User_contributions (02.10.2013) www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/7124863/User_contributions http:// 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 3 Research goals and contribution How to effectively plan the user contributions for new and established dictionaries? . Comprehensive and systematic classification is still missing . Mann (2010): analysis of 88 online dictionaries . User contributions roughly categorized as direct / indirect contributions and exchange with other dictionary users . Little detail given, since outside the scope of the analysis . We use this as a basis for our work We propose a novel classification of the different types of user contributions based on many practical examples 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 4 Functional classification 1. Direct 2. Indirect 3. Accessory user contributions user contributions user contributions •Contributions to •Explicit feedback •Exchange between open-collaborative − form-based feedback dictionary makers and dictionaries − free form feedback dictionary users − unidirectional •Contributions to •Implicit feedback communication collaborative- − log file analysis − bidirectional institutional dictionaries − external user-generated communication content •Contributions to •Exchange among semi-collaborative dictionary users dictionaries 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 5 1. Direct user contributions Additions, modifications, deletions of dictionary articles (or parts of them) performed by a dictionary user. 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 6 1. Direct user contributions Additions, modifications, deletions of dictionary articles (or parts of them) performed by a dictionary user. Contributions to open-collaborative dictionaries . dictionaries completely built by users without editorial control . fixed lexicographic instructions vs. structural openness . dictionary-specific vs. general-purpose user interface (e.g., wiki) 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 7 1. Direct user contributions Additions, modifications, deletions of dictionary articles (or parts of them) performed by a dictionary user. Contributions to collaborative-institutional dictionaries . provided by major dictionary publishers . usually no direct modifications/deletions of existing articles . collect evidence and suggestions for improving editorial dictionaries . keep dictionary users interested in the publisher’s activities 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 8 1. Direct user contributions Additions, modifications, deletions of dictionary articles (or parts of them) performed by a dictionary user. Contributions to semi-collaborative dictionaries . submissions of new entries, donations of word lists . carefully examined by professional editors . directly integrated into the dictionary if valid 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 9 2. Indirect user contributions Suggestions, corrections, supplementary material, comments, external content, usage data provided by users as feedback to the dictionary makers. 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 10 2. Indirect user contributions Suggestions, corrections, supplementary material, comments, external content, usage data provided by users as feedback to the dictionary makers. Explicit feedback . suggestions, wishes, error corrections on existing content . supplementary material (e.g., illustrations, quotations) . quality judgements . form-based vs. free form feedback 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 11 Feedback forms 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 12 2. Indirect user contributions Suggestions, corrections, supplementary material, comments, external content, usage data provided by users as feedback to the dictionary makers. Implicit feedback . provided by users through their usage of the dictionary . no explicit user effort . contribution often not realized . log files, Google Analytics . favorite articles, word lists . external user-generated content (e.g., Flickr, Twitter) Base lexicale du français 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 13 3. Accessory user contributions Exchange between the dictionary makers and their users or among the users themselves beyond the dictionary content. 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 14 3. Accessory user contributions Exchange between the dictionary makers and their users or among the users themselves beyond the dictionary content. Exchange between dictionary makers and dictionary users . blogs, newsletters, social networks, etc. language games, professional language service . unidirectional communication vs. bidirectional communication 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 15 3. Accessory user contributions Exchange between the dictionary makers and their users or among the users themselves beyond the dictionary content. Exchange among the dictionary users . forums . discussion pages . user comments 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 16 Conclusion New classification of user contributions: 1. Direct 2. Indirect 3. Accessory user contributions user contributions user contributions •Contributions to •Explicit feedback •Exchange between open-collaborative − form-based feedback dictionary makers and dictionaries − free form feedback dictionary users − unidirectional •Contributions to •Implicit feedback communication collaborative- − log file analysis − bidirectional institutional dictionaries − external user-generated communication content •Contributions to •Exchange among semi-collaborative dictionary users dictionaries 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 17 Thank you for your attention! Questions? 18.10.2013 | European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano and Technische Universität Darmstadt | Andrea Abel and Christian M. Meyer | 18 Literature Carr, M. (1997). Internet Dictionaries and Lexicography. Mann, M. (2010). Internet-Wörterbücher am Ende der International Journal of Lexicography, 10(3), pp. 209–230. „Nullerjahre“: Der Stand der Dinge. Eine vergleichende Fuertes-Olivera, P.A. (2009). The Function Theory of Untersuchung beliebter Angebote hinsichtlich formaler Lexicography and Electronic Dictionaries: WIKTIONARY as a Kriterien. In R.H. Gouws, U. Heid, St.J. Schierholz, W. Prototype of Collective Free Multiple-Language Internet Schweickard & H.E. Wiegand (eds.) Lexicographica 26. Lexicography. In H. Bergenholtz, S. Nielsen & S. Tarp (eds) Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, pp. 19–46. Lexicography at a Crossroads: Dictionaries and Encyclopedias Melchior, L. (2012). Halbkollaborativität und Inline- Today, Lexicographical Tools Tomorrow. Bern: Peter Lang, pp. Lexikographie. Ansätze und Überlegungen zu 99–134. Wörterbuchredaktion und Wörterbuchforschung am Beispiel Køhler Simonsen, H. (2005). User Involvement in Corporate LEO Deutsch-Italienisch. In R.H. Gouws, U. Heid, St.J. LSP Intranet Lexicography. In H. Gottlieb, J.E. Mogensen & A. Schierholz, W. Schweickard & H.E. Wiegand (eds.) Zettersten (eds.) Symposium on Lexicography XI. Proceedings of Lexicographica 28. Berlin/New York: de Gruyter, pp. 337–372. the Eleventh International Symposium on Lexicography May 2-4, Melchior, L. (2013). Ansätze zu einer halbkollaborativen 2002, at the University of Copenhagen. Tübingen: Niemeyer, pp. Lexikographie. In A. Abel & A. Klosa (eds.) Ihr Beitrag bitte! – 489–510. Der Nutzerbeitrag im Wörterbuchprozess (OPAL – Online Lew, R. (2011). Online dictionaries of English. In P.A. Fuertes- publizierte Arbeiten zur Linguistik). Mannheim: Institut für Olivera & H. Bergenholtz (eds.)
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Dictionary Users Do Look up Frequent Words. a Logfile Analysis
    Erschienen in: Müller-Spitzer, Carolin (Hrsg.): Using Online Dictionaries. Berlin/ Boston: de Gruyter, 2014. (Lexicographica: Series Maior 145), S. 229-249. Alexander Koplenig, Peter Meyer, Carolin Müller-Spitzer Dictionary users do look up frequent words. A logfile analysis Abstract: In this paper, we use the 2012 log files of two German online dictionaries (Digital Dictionary of the German Language1 and the German Version of Wiktionary) and the 100,000 most frequent words in the Mannheim German Reference Corpus from 2009 to answer the question of whether dictionary users really do look up fre- quent words, first asked by de Schryver et al. (2006). By using an approach to the comparison of log files and corpus data which is completely different from that of the aforementioned authors, we provide empirical evidence that indicates - contra - ry to the results of de Schryver et al. and Verlinde/Binon (2010) - that the corpus frequency of a word can indeed be an important factor in determining what online dictionary users look up. Finally, we incorporate word dass Information readily available in Wiktionary into our analysis to improve our results considerably. Keywords: log file, frequency, corpus, headword list, monolingual dictionary, multi- lingual dictionary Alexander Koplenig: Institut für Deutsche Sprache, R 5, 6-13, 68161 Mannheim, +49-(0)621-1581- 435, [email protected] Peter Meyer: Institut für Deutsche Sprache, R 5, 6-13, 68161 Mannheim, +49-(0)621-1581-427, [email protected] Carolin Müller-Spitzer: Institut für Deutsche Sprache, R 5, 6-13, 68161 Mannheim, +49-(0)621-1581- 429, [email protected] Introduction We would like to Start this chapter by asking one of the most fundamental questions for any general lexicographical endeavour to describe the words of one (or more) language(s): which words should be included in a dictionary? At first glance, the answer seems rather simple (especially when the primary objective is to describe a language as completely as possible): it would be best to include every word in the dictionary.
    [Show full text]
  • Etytree: a Graphical and Interactive Etymology Dictionary Based on Wiktionary
    Etytree: A Graphical and Interactive Etymology Dictionary Based on Wiktionary Ester Pantaleo Vito Walter Anelli Wikimedia Foundation grantee Politecnico di Bari Italy Italy [email protected] [email protected] Tommaso Di Noia Gilles Sérasset Politecnico di Bari Univ. Grenoble Alpes, CNRS Italy Grenoble INP, LIG, F-38000 Grenoble, France [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT a new method1 that parses Etymology, Derived terms, De- We present etytree (from etymology + family tree): a scendants sections, the namespace for Reconstructed Terms, new on-line multilingual tool to extract and visualize et- and the etymtree template in Wiktionary. ymological relationships between words from the English With etytree, a RDF (Resource Description Framework) Wiktionary. A first version of etytree is available at http: lexical database of etymological relationships collecting all //tools.wmflabs.org/etytree/. the extracted relationships and lexical data attached to lex- With etytree users can search a word and interactively emes has also been released. The database consists of triples explore etymologically related words (ancestors, descendants, or data entities composed of subject-predicate-object where cognates) in many languages using a graphical interface. a possible statement can be (for example) a triple with a lex- The data is synchronised with the English Wiktionary dump eme as subject, a lexeme as object, and\derivesFrom"or\et- at every new release, and can be queried via SPARQL from a ymologicallyEquivalentTo" as predicate. The RDF database Virtuoso endpoint. has been exposed via a SPARQL endpoint and can be queried Etytree is the first graphical etymology dictionary, which at http://etytree-virtuoso.wmflabs.org/sparql.
    [Show full text]
  • Wiktionary Matcher
    Wiktionary Matcher Jan Portisch1;2[0000−0001−5420−0663], Michael Hladik2[0000−0002−2204−3138], and Heiko Paulheim1[0000−0003−4386−8195] 1 Data and Web Science Group, University of Mannheim, Germany fjan, [email protected] 2 SAP SE Product Engineering Financial Services, Walldorf, Germany fjan.portisch, [email protected] Abstract. In this paper, we introduce Wiktionary Matcher, an ontology matching tool that exploits Wiktionary as external background knowl- edge source. Wiktionary is a large lexical knowledge resource that is collaboratively built online. Multiple current language versions of Wik- tionary are merged and used for monolingual ontology matching by ex- ploiting synonymy relations and for multilingual matching by exploiting the translations given in the resource. We show that Wiktionary can be used as external background knowledge source for the task of ontology matching with reasonable matching and runtime performance.3 Keywords: Ontology Matching · Ontology Alignment · External Re- sources · Background Knowledge · Wiktionary 1 Presentation of the System 1.1 State, Purpose, General Statement The Wiktionary Matcher is an element-level, label-based matcher which uses an online lexical resource, namely Wiktionary. The latter is "[a] collaborative project run by the Wikimedia Foundation to produce a free and complete dic- tionary in every language"4. The dictionary is organized similarly to Wikipedia: Everybody can contribute to the project and the content is reviewed in a com- munity process. Compared to WordNet [4], Wiktionary is significantly larger and also available in other languages than English. This matcher uses DBnary [15], an RDF version of Wiktionary that is publicly available5. The DBnary data set makes use of an extended LEMON model [11] to describe the data.
    [Show full text]
  • Extracting an Etymological Database from Wiktionary Benoît Sagot
    Extracting an Etymological Database from Wiktionary Benoît Sagot To cite this version: Benoît Sagot. Extracting an Etymological Database from Wiktionary. Electronic Lexicography in the 21st century (eLex 2017), Sep 2017, Leiden, Netherlands. pp.716-728. hal-01592061 HAL Id: hal-01592061 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01592061 Submitted on 22 Sep 2017 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Extracting an Etymological Database from Wiktionary Benoît Sagot Inria 2 rue Simone Iff, 75012 Paris, France E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Electronic lexical resources almost never contain etymological information. The availability of such information, if properly formalised, could open up the possibility of developing automatic tools targeted towards historical and comparative linguistics, as well as significantly improving the automatic processing of ancient languages. We describe here the process we implemented for extracting etymological data from the etymological notices found in Wiktionary. We have produced a multilingual database of nearly one million lexemes and a database of more than half a million etymological relations between lexemes. Keywords: Lexical resource development; etymology; Wiktionary 1. Introduction Electronic lexical resources used in the fields of natural language processing and com- putational linguistics are almost exclusively synchronic resources; they mostly include information about inflectional, derivational, syntactic, semantic or even pragmatic prop- erties of their entries.
    [Show full text]
  • Wiktionary Matcher Results for OAEI 2020
    Wiktionary Matcher Results for OAEI 2020 Jan Portisch1;2[0000−0001−5420−0663] and Heiko Paulheim1[0000−0003−4386−8195] 1 Data and Web Science Group, University of Mannheim, Germany fjan, [email protected] 2 SAP SE Product Engineering Financial Services, Walldorf, Germany [email protected] Abstract. This paper presents the results of the Wiktionary Matcher in the Ontology Alignment Evaluation Initiative (OAEI) 2020. Wiktionary Matcher is an ontology matching tool that exploits Wiktionary as exter- nal background knowledge source. Wiktionary is a large lexical knowl- edge resource that is collaboratively built online. Multiple current lan- guage versions of Wiktionary are merged and used for monolingual on- tology matching by exploiting synonymy relations and for multilingual matching by exploiting the translations given in the resource. This is the second OAEI participation of the matching system. Wiktionary Matcher has been improved and is the best performing system on the knowledge graph track this year.3 Keywords: Ontology Matching · Ontology Alignment · External Re- sources · Background Knowledge · Wiktionary 1 Presentation of the System 1.1 State, Purpose, General Statement The Wiktionary Matcher is an element-level, label-based matcher which uses an online lexical resource, namely Wiktionary. The latter is "[a] collaborative project run by the Wikimedia Foundation to produce a free and complete dic- tionary in every language"4. The dictionary is organized similarly to Wikipedia: Everybody can contribute to the project and the content is reviewed in a com- munity process. Compared to WordNet [2], Wiktionary is significantly larger and also available in other languages than English. This matcher uses DBnary [13], an RDF version of Wiktionary that is publicly available5.
    [Show full text]
  • S Wiktionary Wikisource Wikibooks Wikiquote Wikimedia Commons
    SCHWESTERPROJEKTE Wiktionary S Das Wiktionary ist der lexikalische Partner der freien Enzyklopädie Wikipedia: ein Projekt zur Erstellung freier Wörterbücher und Thesau- ri. Während die Wikipedia inhaltliche Konzepte beschreibt, geht es in ihrem ältesten Schwester- projekt, dem 2002 gegründeten Wiktionary um Wörter, ihre Grammatik und Etymologie, Homo- nyme und Synonyme und Übersetzungen. Wikisource Wikisource ist eine Sammlung von Texten, die entweder urheberrechtsfrei sind oder unter ei- ner freien Lizenz stehen. Das Projekt wurde am 24. November 2003 gestartet. Der Wiktionary-EIntrag zum Wort Schnee: Das Wörterbuch präsen- Zunächst mehrsprachig auf einer gemeinsamen tiert Bedeutung, Deklination, Synonyme und Übersetzungen. Plattform angelegt, wurde es später in einzel- ne Sprachversionen aufgesplittet. Das deutsche Teilprojekt zählte im März 2006 über 2000 Texte Wikisource-Mitarbeiter arbeiten an einer digitalen, korrekturge- und über 100 registrierte Benutzer. lesenen und annotierten Ausgabe der Zimmerischen Chronik. Wikibooks Das im Juli 2003 aus der Taufe gehobene Projekt Wikibooks dient der gemeinschaftlichen Schaf- fung freier Lehrmaterialien – vom Schulbuch über den Sprachkurs bis zum praktischen Klet- terhandbuch oder der Go-Spielanleitung Wikiquote Wikiquote zielt darauf ab, auf Wiki-Basis ein freies Kompendium von Zitaten und Das Wikibooks-Handbuch Go enthält eine ausführliche Spielanleitung Sprichwörtern in jeder Sprache zu schaffen. Die des japanischen Strategiespiels. Artikel über Zitate bieten (soweit bekannt) eine Quellenangabe und werden gegebenenfalls in die deutsche Sprache übersetzt. Für zusätzliche Das Wikimedia-Projekt Wikiquote sammelt Sprichwörter und Informationen sorgen Links in die Wikipedia. Zitate, hier die Seite zum Schauspieler Woody Allen Wikimedia Commons Wikimedia Commons wurde im September 2004 zur zentralen Aufbewahrung von Multime- dia-Material – Bilder, Videos, Musik – für alle Wi- kimedia-Projekte gegründet.
    [Show full text]
  • Resources for Freelancers
    Resources for Freelancers Organizations, websites and a list citation guide; online subscription available) ACES (blog, news, resources, jobs, and the Quick Check Editorial Reference Cards ACES forums): www.copydesk.org (from Copyediting.com) Copyediting Newsletter (Links, blog, jobs, Purdue’s Online Writing Lab (guides to resources, training): www.copyediting.com Chicago, MLA and APA style) Editorial Freelancers Association (Training, Garner’s Modern American Usage resources, jobs): www.the-efa.org Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of English Usage Journalists’ Toolbox (Compendium of links The Gregg Reference Manual to useful sites) www.journaliststoolbox.org Grammar Girl’s Quick & Dirty Tips for Better Copyeditor’s Knowledge Base (Links to Writing resources for freelance copyeditors): http://www.kokedit.com/ckb.php Elephants of Style and Lapsing into a Comma (Bill Walsh) Common Errors in English Usage (Big list of quick-hit usage tips): OnlineStylebooks.com www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/errors.html Grammar Girl’s Quick and Dirty Tips Dictionaries (transcripts of all the podcasts, more): http://www.quickanddirtytips.com Merriam-Webster Collegiate 11th (Chicago’s preferred; online free, on CD-ROM, and as a Grant Barrett’s searches (word-related sites, free app; Unabridged by subscription) Google books): http://www.copyediting.com/two-copy- Webster’s New World College (AP’s desk-power-searches preferred; also as an app) CE-L (mailing list for copyeditors): Sign up Oxford dictionaries (New Oxford American at http://www.copyediting-l.info/ free
    [Show full text]
  • Thank You - Wiktionary 4/24/11 9:56 PM Thank You
    thank you - Wiktionary 4/24/11 9:56 PM thank you Definition from Wiktionary, the free dictionary See also thankyou and thank-you Contents 1 English 1.1 Etymology 1.2 Pronunciation 1.3 Interjection 1.3.1 Synonyms 1.3.2 Translations 1.4 Noun 1.5 References 1.6 See also English Etymology Thank you is a shortened expression for I thank you; it is attested since c. 1400.[1] Pronunciation Audio (UK) (file) Interjection thank you 1. An expression of gratitude or politeness, in response to something done or given. http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/thank_you Page 1 of 5 thank you - Wiktionary 4/24/11 9:56 PM Synonyms cheers (informal), thanks, thanks very much, thank you very much, thanks a lot, ta (UK, Australia), thanks a bunch (informal), thanks a million (informal), much obliged Translations an expression of gratitude [hide ▲] Select targeted languages ﺳﻮﭘﺎﺱ ,Afar: gadda ge Kurdish: spas Afrikaans: dankie, baie dankie Ladin: giulan Albanian: faleminderit, ju falem nderit Lao: (kööp cai) Gheg: falimineres Latin: benignē dīcis (la), tibi gratiās agō (la) Latvian: paldies (lv) Aleut: qaĝaasakuq (Atkan), qaĝaalakux̂ Lithuanian: ačiū (lt) (Eastern) Luo: erokamano Alutiiq: quyanaa Macedonian: благодарам (mk) (blagódaram) American Sign Language: OpenB@Chin- (formal), фала (mk) (fála) (informal) PalmBack OpenB@FromChin-PalmUp Malagasy: misaotra (mg) Amharic: (am) (amesegenallo) Malay: terima kasih (ms) (ar) (mersii) Malayalam: (ml) (nandhi) ﻣﻴﺮﺳﻲ ,(ar) (shúkran) ﺷﻜﺮًﺍ :Arabic (informal) Maltese: grazzi (mt) Armenian: Maori: kia ora (mi) շնորհակալություն
    [Show full text]
  • Detecting Non-Compositional MWE Components Using Wiktionary
    Detecting Non-compositional MWE Components using Wiktionary Bahar Salehi,♣♥ Paul Cook♥ and Timothy Baldwin♣♥ NICTA Victoria Research Laboratory Department♣ of Computing and Information Systems ♥ The University of Melbourne Victoria 3010, Australia [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract components of a given MWE have a composi- tional usage. Experiments over two widely-used We propose a simple unsupervised ap- datasets show that our approach outperforms state- proach to detecting non-compositional of-the-art methods. components in multiword expressions based on Wiktionary. The approach makes 2 Related Work use of the definitions, synonyms and trans- Previous studies which have considered MWE lations in Wiktionary, and is applicable to compositionality have focused on either the iden- any type of MWE in any language, assum- tification of non-compositional MWE token in- ing the MWE is contained in Wiktionary. stances (Kim and Baldwin, 2007; Fazly et al., Our experiments show that the proposed 2009; Forthergill and Baldwin, 2011; Muzny and approach achieves higher F-score than Zettlemoyer, 2013), or the prediction of the com- state-of-the-art methods. positionality of MWE types (Reddy et al., 2011; 1 Introduction Salehi and Cook, 2013; Salehi et al., 2014). The identification of non-compositional MWE tokens A multiword expression (MWE) is a combina- is an important task when a word combination tion of words with lexical, syntactic or seman- such as kick the bucket or saw logs is ambiguous tic idiosyncrasy (Sag et al., 2002; Baldwin and between a compositional (generally non-MWE) Kim, 2009). An MWE is considered (semanti- and non-compositional MWE usage.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wiki Family of Web Sites
    The Federal Lawyer In Cyberia MICHAEL J. TONSING The Wiki Family of Web Sites he growth in the number of informative Web set of resources. Much of what follows is drawn from the sites seems exponential. It is increasingly hard self-descriptions on the Wiki Web sites themselves. Tto keep up with them. If you’re not using the “Wiki” family of sites, you’re missing some sources that Wiktionary are almost stupefying in their scope. A “wiki” is essen- Wiktionary (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiktionary) is tially a Web site in which contributors can add their a sister site to Wikipedia. Wiktionary is not an online own copy. (I capitalize the word in most instances in encyclopedia but an online dictionary, and its entries this column to make it clear that I am referring to a par- are about words. A Wiktionary entry focuses on mat- ticular family of wikis. There are many other wikis out ters of language and wordsmithery, spelling, pronun- there. You may decide to start your own someday.) ciation, etymology, translation, usage, quotations, and links to related words and concepts. Because Wiktion- Wikipedia ary is not written on paper, it has no size limits, it can Wikipedia (www.wikipedia.org), then, is an online include links, and its information can be more timely encyclopedia in which visitors can read infor- than that found in a written dictionary. mation on the topics they visit, then edit the information on the site itself if they choose Wikisource to do so. (The name “Wikipedia” is a meld- Wikisource (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikisource), which ing of the works “wiki” and “encyclopedia.”) dubs itself “the free library,” collects and stores previ- Out of what might at first have seemed like ously published texts in digital format; contents include online chaos has come semirespectability and novels, nonfiction works, letters, speeches, constitutional order.
    [Show full text]
  • The Demands of Users and the Publishing World: Printed Or Online, Free Or Paid For?
    The demands of users and the publishing world: printed or online, free or paid for? Hilary Nesi Accepted manuscript PDF deposited in Coventry University’s Repository Original citation: ‘The demands of users and the publishing world: printed or online, free or paid for?’, in The Oxford Handbook of Lexicography, ed. by Philip Durkin, pub 2015 (ISBN 9780199691630) Publisher: Oxford University Press Reproduced by permission of Oxford University Press - https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-oxford-handbook-of-lexicography- 9780199691630?cc=gb&lang=en& Copyright © and Moral Rights are retained by the author(s) and/ or other copyright owners. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This item cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. 1 Nesi, H. (2015) The demands of users and the publishing world: printed or online, free or paid for? In: Durkin. P. (ed) The Oxford Handbook of Lexicography. Oxford: Oxford University Press pp. 579-589 Pre-publication version Abstract This chapter examines the extent of the digital migration of reference works from print to screen, and the effect this is having on dictionary publishers and dictionary users. It discusses the place of the human lexicographer, and possible new sources of e-dictionary revenue in the new ‘give-away’ internet environment. It also considers the automatic and collaborative generation of dictionary content, quality issues, and the needs and preferences of dictionary users around the world.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wiki-Fication of the Dictionary: Defining Lexicography in the Digital Age
    THE WIKI-FICATION OF THE DICTIONARY: DEFINING LEXICOGRAPHY IN THE DIGITAL AGE Darrell J. Penta College of Professional Studies Northeastern University [email protected] Abstract The future of lexical reference books, such as the 20-volume Oxford English Dictionary (OED), is going to be determined, in part, by the emergence of free on-line dictionaries, such as Wiktionary and Urban Dictionary. Specifically, we are witnessing a paradigmatic shift of authority in which users, rather than editorial boards, are making decisions concerning the content associated with a lexical entry’s definition. In effect, an exclusive privilege formerly enjoyed by professional lexicographers is now being extended unequivocally to laypersons. It is pertinent to ask, therefore, what effect this state of affairs will have on the ways that dictionaries are compiled and used. For some, including Jill Lepore of the New Yorker Magazine, online collaborative lexical references are “Maoist” resources, “cobble[d]…together” by non-experts who “pilfer” definitions (79). This paper rejects such a characterization and seeks, instead, to provide a description more suitable for critical inquiry. By contrasting the entry “bomb” as it appears in the OED, Wiktionary, and Urban Dictionary, and by making use of contemporary linguistic theory, the author posits that: word meanings are highly constrained by popular usage; and, users regularly provide semantically and pragmatically significant, and grammatical accurate, definitions; and, in providing users the flexibility to modify entries in real-time, user-generated dictionaries are uniquely practical as catalogues of the current state of language. It is concluded that, whereas traditional dictionaries may be the better resource for diachronic analyses of words, Wiktionary and the like may prove better for synchronic analyses.
    [Show full text]