DOCSLIB.ORG

Lexical Markup Framework (LMF) for NLP Multilingual Resources

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Lexical Markup Framework (LMF) for NLP Multilingual Resources Lexical markup framework (LMF) for NLP multilingual resources Gil Francopoulo, Nuria Bel, Monte George, Nicoletta Calzolari, Monica Monachini, Mandy Pet, Claudia Soria To cite this version: Gil Francopoulo, Nuria Bel, Monte George, Nicoletta Calzolari, Monica Monachini, et al.. Lexical markup framework (LMF) for NLP multilingual resources. International Committee on Computa- tional Linguistic and the Association for Computational Linguistics - COLING / ACL 2006, coling acl, 2006, Sydney/Australia. inria-00121483 HAL Id: inria-00121483 https://hal.inria.fr/inria-00121483 Submitted on 21 Dec 2006 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. LEXICAL MARKUP FRAMEWORK (LMF) FOR NLP MULTILINGUAL RESOURCES Gil Francopoulo1, Nuria Bel2, Monte George3, Nicoletta Calzolari4, Monica Monachini5, Mandy Pet6, Claudia Soria7 1INRIA-Loria: [email protected] 2UPF: [email protected] 3ANSI: [email protected] 4CNR-ILC: [email protected] 5CNR-ILC: [email protected] 6MITRE: [email protected] 7CNR-ILC: [email protected] applications is not restricted. LMF is also used to Abstract model machine readable dictionaries (MRD), which are not within the scope of this paper. Optimizing the production, maintenance and extension of lexical resources is one 2 History and current context the crucial aspects impacting Natural In the past, this subject has been studied and de- Language Processing (NLP). A second veloped by a series of projects like GENELEX aspect involves optimizing the process [Antoni-Lay], EAGLES, MULTEXT, PAROLE, leading to their integration in applica- SIMPLE, ISLE and MILE [Bertagna]. More re- tions. With this respect, we believe that cently within ISO1 the standard for terminology the production of a consensual specifica- management has been successfully elaborated by tion on multilingual lexicons can be a the sub-committee three of ISO-TC37 and pub- useful aid for the various NLP actors. lished under the name "Terminology Markup Within ISO, one purpose of LMF (ISO- Framework" (TMF) with the ISO-16642 refer- 24613) is to define a standard for lexi- ence. Afterwards, the ISO-TC37 National dele- cons that covers multilingual data. gations decided to address standards dedicated to NLP. These standards are currently elaborated as 1 Introduction high level specifications and deal with word Lexical Markup Framework (LMF) is a model segmentation (ISO 24614), annotations that provides a common standardized framework (ISO 24611, 24612 and 24615), feature struc- for the construction of Natural Language Proc- tures (ISO 24610), and lexicons (ISO 24613) essing (NLP) lexicons. The goals of LMF are to with this latest one being the focus of the current provide a common model for the creation and paper. These standards are based on low level use of lexical resources, to manage the exchange specifications dedicated to constants, namely of data between and among these resources, and data categories (revision of ISO 12620), lan- to enable the merging of a large number of indi- guage codes (ISO 639), script codes vidual electronic resources to form extensive (ISO 15924), country codes (ISO 3166), dates global electronic resources. (ISO 8601) and Unicode (ISO 10646). Types of individual instantiations of LMF can include monolingual, bilingual or multilingual This work is in progress. The two level organiza- lexical resources. The same specifications are to tion will form a coherent family of standards be used for both small and large lexicons. The with the following simple rules: descriptions range from morphology, syntax, 1) the low level specifications provide standard- semantic to translation information organized as ized constants; different extensions of an obligatory core pack- age. The model is being developed to cover all natural languages. The range of targeted NLP 1 www.iso.org 2) the high level specifications provide struc- In other words, LMF is mainly focused on the tural elements that are adorned by the standard- linguistic representation of lexical information. ized constants. 4 Key standards used by LMF 3 Scope and challenges LMF utilizes Unicode in order to represent the The task of designing a lexicon model that satis- orthographies used in lexical entries regardless of fies every user is not an easy task. But all the language. efforts are directed to elaborate a proposal that Linguistic constants, like /feminine/ or fits the major needs of most existing models. /transitive/, are not defined within LMF but are In order to summarise the objectives, let's see specified in the Data Category Registry (DCR) what is in the scope and what is not. that is maintained as a global resource by ISO TC37 in compliance with ISO/IEC 11179- LMF addresses the following difficult chal- 3:2003. lenges: The LMF specification complies with the • Represent words in languages where modeling principles of Unified Modeling Lan- multiple orthographies (native scripts or guage (UML) as defined by OMG2 [Rumbaugh transliterations) are possible, e.g. some 2004]. A model is specified by a UML class dia- Asian languages. gram within a UML package: the class name is not underlined in the diagrams. The various ex- • Represent explicitly (i.e. in extension) amples of word description are represented by the morphology of languages where a de- UML instance diagrams: the class name is under- scription of all inflected forms (from a list lined. of lemmatised forms) is manageable, e.g. English. 5 Structure and core package • Represent the morphology of languages LMF is comprised of two components: where a description in extension of all in- 1) The core package consists of a structural flected forms is not manageable (e.g. Hun- skeleton that describes the basic hierarchy of in- garian). In this case, representation in in- formation in a lexical entry. tension is the only manageable issue. 2) Extensions to the core package are ex- • Easily associate written forms and spo- pressed in a framework that describes the reuse ken forms for all languages. of the core components in conjunction with addi- tional components required for the description of • Represent complex agglutinating com- the contents of a specific lexical resource. pound words like in German. In the core package, the class called Database • Represent fixed, semi-fixed and flexible represents the entire resource and is a container multiword expressions. for one or more lexicons. The Lexicon class is the container for all the lexical entries of the • Represent specific syntactic behaviors, same language within the database. The Lexicon as in the Eagles recommendations. Information class contains administrative infor- • Allow complex argument mapping be- mation and other general attributes. The Lexical tween syntax and semantic descriptions, as Entry class is a container for managing the top in the Eagles recommendations. level language components. As a consequence, the number of representatives of single words, • Allow a semantic organisation based on multi-word expressions and affixes of the lexicon SynSets (like in WordNet) or on semantic is equal to the number of lexical entries in a predicates (like in FrameNet). given lexicon. The Form and Sense classes are • Represent large scale multilingual re- parts of the Lexical Entry. Form consists of a text sources based on interlingual pivots or on string that represents the word. Sense specifies or transfer linking. identifies the meaning and context of the related form. Therefore, the Lexical Entry manages the LMF does not address the following topics: relationship between sets of related forms and • General sentence grammar of a language their senses. If there is more than one orthogra- • World knowledge representation 2 www.omg.org phy for the word form (e.g. transliteration) the gories that describe the attributes of that orthog- Form class may be associated with one to many raphy. Representation Frames, each of which contains a The core package classes are linked by the re- specific orthography and one to many data cate- lations as defined in the following UML class diagram: Dat abas e 1 1..* 1 Lexicon 1 Lexicon Information 1 1..* Lexical Entry 1 0..* Entry Relation 0..* 0..* 1 1 1..* 0..* For m 1 Sense 1 0..* Sense Relation 0..* 0..* 0..* 1 0..* Representation Frame Form class can be sub-classed into Lemmatised age. Current extensions for NLP dictionaries are: Form and Inflected Form class as follows: NLP Morphology 3 , NLP inflectional paradigm, NLP Multiword Expression pattern, NLP Syntax, For m NLP Semantic and Multilingual notations, which is the focus of this paper. 6 NLP Multilingual Extension Lemmatised Form Inflected Form The NLP multilingual notation extension is dedicated to the description of the mapping be- A subset of the core package classes are ex- tween two or more languages in a LMF database. tended to cover different kinds of linguistic data. The model is based on the notion of Axis that All extensions conform to the LMF core package links Senses, Syntactic Behavior and examples and cannot be used to represent lexical data in- pertaining to different languages. "Axis" is a dependently of the core package. From the point of view of UML, an extension is a UML pack- 3 Morphology, Syntax and Semantic packages are described in [Francopoulo]. term taken from the Papillon4 project [Sérasset sider them as two separate languages. In fact, one 2001] 5 . Axis can be organized at the lexicon is a variant of the other. The differences are mi- manager convenience in order to link directly or nor: a certain number of words are different and indirectly objects of different languages.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Standardisation Action Plan for Clarin
    Standardisation Action Plan for Clarin State: Proposal to CLARIN community Nuria Bel, Jonas Beskow, Lou Boves, Gerhard Budin, Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Erhard Hinrichs, Steven Krauwer, Lothar Lemnitzer, Stelios Piperidis, Adam Przepiorkowski, Laurent Romary, Florian Schiel, Helmut Schmidt, Hans Uszkoreit, Peter Wittenburg August 2009 Summary This document describes a proposal for a Standardisation Action Plan (SAP) for the Clarin initiative in close synchronization with other relevant initiatives such as Flarenet, ELRA, ISO and TEI. While Flarenet is oriented towards a broader scope since it is also addressing standards that are typically used in industry, CLARIN wants to be more focussed in its statements to the research domain. Due to the overlap it is agreed that the Flarenet and CLARIN documents on standards need to be closely synchronized. This note covers standards that are generic (XML, UNICODE) as well as standards that are domain specific where naturally the LRT community has much more influence. This Standardization Action Plan wants to give an orientation for all practical work in CLARIN to achieve a harmonized domain of language resources and technology stepwise and therefore its core message is to overcome fragmentation. To meet these goals it wants to keep its message as simple as possible. A web-site will be established that will contain more information about examples, guidelines, explanations, tools, converters and training events such as summer schools. The organization of the document is as follows: • Chapter 1: Introduction to the topic. • Chapter 2: Recommended standards that CLARIN should endorse page 4 • Chapter 3: Standards that are emerging and relevant for CLARIN page 8 • Chapter 4: General guidelines that need to be followed page 12 • Chapter 5: Reference to community practices page 14 • Chapter 6: References This document tries to be short and will give comments, recommendations and discuss open issues for each of the standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the Workshop on Multilingual Language Resources and Interoperability, Pages 1–8, Sydney, July 2006
    COLING •ACL 2006 MLRI’06 Multilingual Language Resources and Interoperability Proceedings of the Workshop Chairs: Andreas Witt, Gilles Sérasset, Susan Armstrong, Jim Breen, Ulrich Heid and Felix Sasaki 23 July 2006 Sydney, Australia Production and Manufacturing by BPA Digital 11 Evans St Burwood VIC 3125 AUSTRALIA c 2006 The Association for Computational Linguistics Order copies of this and other ACL proceedings from: Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL) 209 N. Eighth Street Stroudsburg, PA 18360 USA Tel: +1-570-476-8006 Fax: +1-570-476-0860 [email protected] ISBN 1-932432-82-5 ii Table of Contents Preface .....................................................................................v Organizers . vii Workshop Program . ix Lexical Markup Framework (LMF) for NLP Multilingual Resources Gil Francopoulo, Nuria Bel, Monte George, Nicoletta Calzolari, Monica Monachini, Mandy Pet and Claudia Soria . 1 The Role of Lexical Resources in CJK Natural Language Processing Jack Halpern . 9 Towards Agent-based Cross-Lingual Interoperability of Distributed Lexical Resources Claudia Soria, Maurizio Tesconi, Andrea Marchetti, Francesca Bertagna, Monica Monachini, Chu-Ren Huang and Nicoletta Calzolari. .17 The LexALP Information System: Term Bank and Corpus for Multilingual Legal Terminology Consolidated Verena Lyding, Elena Chiocchetti, Gilles Sérasset and Francis Brunet-Manquat . 25 The Development of a Multilingual Collocation Dictionary Sylviane Cardey, Rosita Chan and Peter Greenfield. .32 Multilingual Collocation Extraction: Issues and Solutions Violeta Seretan and Eric Wehrli . 40 Structural Properties of Lexical Systems: Monolingual and Multilingual Perspectives Alain Polguère . 50 A Fast and Accurate Method for Detecting English-Japanese Parallel Texts Ken’ichi Fukushima, Kenjiro Taura and Takashi Chikayama . 60 Evaluation of the Bible as a Resource for Cross-Language Information Retrieval Peter A.
    [Show full text]
  • Standardization Work Isotiger Transcription of Spoken Language CQLF: Corpus Query Lingua Franca
    Recent Initiatives towards New Standards for Language Resources Gottfried Herzog1, Ulrich Heid2, Thorsten Trippel3, Piotr Ba´nski4, Laurent Romary5, Thomas Schmidt4, Andreas Witt4, Kerstin Eckart6 1DIN Deutsches Institut fur¨ Normung e. V., Berlin, 2Universit¨at Hildesheim, 3Universit¨at Tubingen,¨ 4Institut fur¨ Deutsche Sprache, Mannheim, 5Inria, 6Universit¨at Stuttgart E-mail: [email protected] Standardization Work Transcription of spoken language • Who? A representation format to compare, interchange and combine { Experts from industry, academia and administrations orthography-based transcriptions of spoken language. { Experts are nominated { based on expertise and interest The standard is developed in cooperation with TEI proposals in the field. [Schmidt 2011] { ISO committee TC 37/SC 4 and national mirror committees, Based on e.g. for Germany: Normenausschuss NA-105-00-06 AA • State of the art tools and formats for creating, editing, Sprachressourcen publishing and querying transcribed data DIN { Deutsches Institut f¨ur Normung e.V. • Widely used transcription systems • How? { Stepwise procedures: Encoded components Example on handout Proposals { working drafts { (draft) international standards • Metadata: based on TEI header { Consensus-based: drafting { commenting { ballot • Macrostructure: timeline, single and grouped utterances, { National standards organizations provide infrastructure elements outside utterances (e.g. <pause> and <incident>) • Microstructure: Excerpt of the list of standards and standard proposals by ISO
    [Show full text]
  • Mise En Page 1
    Catalogue général Janvier 2019 27-37 St George’s Road – London SW19 4EU — United Kingdom www.iste-editions.fr – www.openscience.fr – www.iste.co.uk – www.istegroup.com Table des matières Table of contents Organisation éditoriale, SCIENCES .................................................................................. 4 Biologie, médecine et santé • Biology, Medecine and Health ........................................ 7 Bioingénierie médicale • Biomedical Engineering ................................................................ 8 Biologie • Biology ................................................................................................................. 11 Ingénierie de la santé et société • Health Engineering and Society ..................................... 12 Chimie • Chemistry ............................................................................................................ 17 Agriculture, science des aliments et nutrition ....................................................................... 18 Agriculture, Food Science and Nutrition Chimie • Chemistry ............................................................................................................... 20 Écologie et environnement • Ecology and Environment ................................................ 23 Écologie • Ecological Sciences ............................................................................................ 24 Environnement • Environmental Sciences ........................................................................... 28
    [Show full text]
  • A Method for Reusing and Re-Engineering Non-Ontological Resources for Building Ontologies
    Departamento de Inteligencia Artificial Facultad de Informatica´ PhD Thesis A Method for Reusing and Re-engineering Non-ontological Resources for Building Ontologies Author : Msc. Boris Marcelo Villazon´ Terrazas Advisor : Prof. Dr. Asuncion´ Gomez´ Perez´ 2011 ii Tribunal nombrado por el Sr. Rector Magfco. de la Universidad Politecnica´ de Madrid, el d´ıa...............de.............................de 20.... Presidente : Vocal : Vocal : Vocal : Secretario : Suplente : Suplente : Realizado el acto de defensa y lectura de la Tesis el d´ıa..........de......................de 20...... en la E.T.S.I. /Facultad...................................................... Calificacion´ .................................................................................. EL PRESIDENTE LOS VOCALES EL SECRETARIO iii iv Abstract Current well-known methodologies for building ontologies do not consider the reuse and possible subsequent re-engineering of existing knowledge resources. The ontologization of non-ontological resources has led to the design of several specific methods, techniques and tools. These are mainly specific to a particular resource type, or to a particular resource implementation. Thus, everytime ontol- ogy engineers are confronted with the task of re-engineering a new resource into an ontology, they develop ad-hoc solutions for transforming such resource into a single ontology. Within the context of the NeOn project, we propose a novel methodology for building ontology networks: the NeOn Methodology, a methodology based on sce- narios. One
    [Show full text]
  • LMF for a Selection of African Languages Chantal Enguehard, Mathieu Mangeot
    LMF for a selection of African Languages Chantal Enguehard, Mathieu Mangeot To cite this version: Chantal Enguehard, Mathieu Mangeot. LMF for a selection of African Languages. Francopoulo, Gil. LMF: Lexical Markup Framework, theory and practice, Hermès science, pp.8, 2013. hal-00959228 HAL Id: hal-00959228 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00959228 Submitted on 1 Apr 2014 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. Chapter 71 LMF for a selection of African Languages Chantal Enguehard LINA, 2 rue de la Houssiniere, BP 92208, 44322 Nantes Cedex 03, France Mathieu Mangeot GETALP-LIG, 41 rue des Mathématiques, BP 53 F-38041 GRENOBLE CEDEX 9 7.1. Introduction Electronic resources are scarce regarding less-resourced languages, so it is wise to take published dictionaries and convert them into a standard format usable by automated tools for natural language processing. We introduce the notion of less- resourced languages and then discuss the methodology of conversion that we have defned and implemented. The fourth part presents examples of conversion from the initial published format to the LMF format. The last part describes some diffculties encountered when representing certain information into LMF format.
    [Show full text]
  • An Experiment in Lexical Information Extraction
    LEXIE - an Experiment in Lexical Information Extraction John J. Camilleri Michael Rosner Dept. Intelligent Computer Systems Dept. Intelligent Computer Systems University of Malta University of Malta MSD2080 Msida, Malta MSD2080 Msida, Malta john @johnjcamilleri.com mike.rosner @um.edu.mt Abstract to the general approach adopted there. However, the This document investigates the possibility of ex- two main differences we see between their approach tracting lexical information automatically from and ours are that (a) Boguraev’s work was oriented the pages of a printed dictionary of Maltese. An rather heavily towards the GPSG grammatical frame- experiment was carried out on a small sample work and (b) they were able to access the original of dictionary entries using hand-crafted rules to source tapes of the dictionary. The input they used parse the entries. Although the results obtained was therefore faithful to the orginal. were quite promising, a major problem turned out to errors introduced by OCR and the incon- In our case we had to rely upon OCR input as de- sistent style adopted for writing dictionary en- scribed further in section 4. The inherent errors caused tries. certain problems. One of the aims of this work is to establish a viable method for extracting lexical entries for lesser-studied languages lacking the usual battery of language re- Keywords sources in machine readable form. Most languages of the world fall into this category. The availability of a lexicon extraction, lexical information, lexicon, semitic paper dictionary, is, however, fairly widespread, even for exotic languages so that the methods being pro- posed could provide a robust alternative to dictionary 1 Introduction extraction for a relatively large number of languages.
    [Show full text]
  • PANACEA Project Grant Agreement No.: 248064
    SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME THEME 3 Information and communication Technologies PANACEA Project Grant Agreement no.: 248064 Platform for Automatic, Normalized Annotation and Cost-Effective Acquisition of Language Resources for Human Language Technologies D5.1 Parallel technology tools and resources Dissemination Level: Public Delivery Date: July 16th 2010 Status – Version: Final v1.0 Author(s) and Affiliation: Pavel Pecina (DCU), Antonio Toral (DCU), Gregor Thurmair (LinguaTec), Andy Way (DCU) Parallel technology tools and resources Table of contents Table of contents ........................................................................................................................... 1 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................... 4 2 Terminology .......................................................................................................................... 4 2.1 Definitions ..................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Acronyms ....................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Related documents ......................................................................................................... 6 3 Task description .................................................................................................................... 6 3.1 Alignment .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Toward an Architecture for the Global Wordnet Initiative
    1 Toward an Architecture for the Global Wordnet Initiative Andrea Marchetti 1, Maurizio Tesconi 1, Francesco Ronzano 1, Marco Rosella 1 Francesca Bertagna 2, Monica Monachini 2, Claudia Soria 2, Nicoletta Calzolari 2, Chu-Ren Huang 3, Shu-Kai Hsieh 3 1Istituto di Informatica e Telematica-CNR, Via Moruzzi 1, Pisa, Italy {andrea.marchetti, maurizio.tesconi, francesco.ronzano, marco.rosella}@iit.cnr.it 2Istituto di Linguistica Computazionale-CNR, Via Moruzzi 1, Pisa, Italy {francesca.bertagna, monica.monachini, claudia.soria, nicoletta.calzolari}@ilc.cnr.it, 3Academia Sinica, Nankang, Taipei, Taiwan, [email protected], [email protected] handle and define the semantics of data. As a consequence, we Abstract — Enhancing the development of multilingual lexicons have assisted to the first attempts of integration of lexical is of foremost importance for intercultural collaboration to take resource in the Semantic Web infrastructure and content place, as multilingual lexicons are the cornerstone of several organization model. Nevertheless, large-scale multilingual multilingual applications. However, the development and maintenance of large-scale, robust multilingual dictionaries is a lexical resources are not as widely available and are very tantalizing task. Moreover, Semantic Web’s growing interest costly to construct. towards the availability of high-quality lexical resources and their The previous trend in lexical resource was oriented to multilingual interoperability, is focusing more and more attention maximization of effort by building large-scale, general- on this topic. In this paper we present a tool, based on a web purpose lexicons. However, these lexical resources are not service architecture, enabling semi-automatic generation of always satisfactory despite the tremendous amount of work bilingual lexicons through linking of distributed monolingual lexical resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Multilingual Language Resources and Interoperability
    Published in: Language Resources & Evaluation vol. 43 (2009) no. 1, pp. 1-14. Multilingual language resources and interoperability Andreas Witt Æ Ulrich Heid Æ Felix Sasaki Æ Gilles Se´rasset Abstract This article introduces the topic of ‘‘Multilingual language resources and interoperability’’. We start with a taxonomy and parameters for classifying language resources. Later we provide examples and issues of interoperatability, and resource architectures to solve such issues. Finally we discuss aspects of linguistic formalisms and interoperability. Keywords Language Á Resources Á Interoperability 1 Introduction This special issue of Language Resources and Evaluation, entitled ‘‘Multilingual language resources and interoperability’’, is composed of extended versions of selected papers from the COLING/ACL Workshop on Multilingual language resources and interoperability, held in 2006, in Sydney (cf. Witt et al. 2006 ). This introduction does not attempt to provide a complete overview of this vast topic, but A. Witt (&) IDS, Mannheim, Germany e-mail: [email protected] U. Heid University of Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany e-mail: [email protected] F. Sasaki Keio University, Fujisawa, Japan e-mail: [email protected] G. Se´rasset Universite´ Joseph Fourier, Grenoble Cedex 9, France e-mail: [email protected] 2 rather sketches the background against which the articles assembled in this issue are to be read. In particular, we examine the notions of (multilingual) language resources (Sect. 2) and interoperability of resources (Sect. 3), and assess resource architectures (Sect. 4) and linguistic representation formalisms (Sect. 5) with respect to their potential to support resource interoperability. This background provides a framework in which each paper in this issue of the journal is then situated.
    [Show full text]
  • Interoperability and Standards
    Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure Interoperability and Standards 2010-12-23 Version: 1 Editors: Erhard Hinrichs, Iris Vogel www.clarin.eu Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure The ultimate objective of CLARIN is to create a European federation of existing digital repositories that include language-based data, to provide uniform access to the data, wherever it is, and to provide existing language and speech technology tools as web services to retrieve, manipulate, enhance, explore and exploit the data. The primary target audience is researchers in the humanities and social sciences and the aim is to cover all languages relevant for the user community. The objective of the current CLARIN Preparatory Phase Project (2008-2010) is to lay the technical, linguistic and organizational foundations, to provide and validate specifications for all aspects of the infrastructure (including standards, usage, IPR) and to secure sustainable support from the funding bodies in the (now 23) participating countries for the subsequent construction and exploitation phases beyond 2010. CLARIN-D5C-3 2 Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure Interoperability and Standards CLARIN-D5C-3 EC FP7 project no. 212230 Deliverable: D5.C-3 - Deadline: 31.12.2010 Responsible: Erhard Hinrichs CLARIN-D5C-3 3 Common Language Resources and Technology Infrastructure Contributing Partners: UTU, UHEL, IPPBAS, KTH, IMCS, IPIPAN, ILC-CNR, ILSP, MPI Contributing Members: BBAW, U Hamburg, U Stuttgart, Vienna With contributions
    [Show full text]
  • LMF Reloaded
    LMF Reloaded 1,3,4 1,2,3 8 1,6,7 Laurent Romary ,​ Mohamed Khemakhem ,​ Fahad Khan ,​ Jack Bowers ,​ Nicoletta ​ 8 5 ​ 5 ​ 9 ​ Calzolari ,​ Monte George ,​ Mandy Pet ,​ Piotr Bański ​ ​ ​ ​ 1. Inria-ALMAnaCH - Automatic Language Modelling and ANAlysis & Computational Humanities 2. UPD7 - Université Paris Diderot - Paris 7 3. CMB - Centre Marc Bloch 4. BBAW - Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and Humanities 5. ANSI- American National Standards Institute 6. EPHE - École Pratique des Hautes Études ​ 7. ÖAW - Austrian Academy of Sciences 8. CNR-ILC - Istituto di Linguistica Computazionale "Antonio Zampolli" 9. IDS - Institut für Deutsche Sprache Abstract The Lexical Markup Framework (LMF) or ISO 24613 [1] is a de jure standard ​ which constitutes a framework for modelling and encoding lexical information both in retrodigitised print dictionaries as well as in NLP lexical databases. An in-depth review is currently underway within the standardisation sub-committee, ISO-TC37/SC4/WG4 with the goal of creating a more modular, flexible and durable follow up to the original LMF standard published by ISO in 2008. In this paper we will showcase some of the major improvements which have so far been implemented in the new version of LMF. Key words: ISO 24613, LMF, Lexical resources ​ 1. Introduction The previous version of LMF, published by ISO in 2008 [1] offered a framework for modelling, publishing and sharing lexical resources with a special focus on requirements arising from the domain of Natural Language Processing (NLP). Due to the potential richness and the multi-layered nature of linguistic descriptions in lexical resources the LMF meta-model ended up taking on a great deal of complexity in its attempt to reflect these various different linguistic facets.
    [Show full text]