Typecraft v2.5
Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Norwegian HPSG grammar NorSource"

Line 12: Line 12:
  
  
As of April 2009, a regimented system of verb type codes is used in NorSource. It is identical to a system developed for a typology of verb constructions, explained in [http://www.typecraft.org/tc2wiki/images/8/85/IntroLabels_May_21-09.pdf. Construction labeling code] The relation of this 'labeling' system to NorSource and in principle other DELPH-IN grammars is laid out in [http://www.typecraft.org/tc2wiki/images/6/6c/Verb_type_labeling_08.pdf Construction labeling code for Norwegian]. For its relation to a simpler type of typed attribute-value systems, see [http://www.typecraft.org/tc2wiki/images/b/b5/AVM_structure_-_April28-09.pdf a simple typed feature grammar].
+
===History and Purpose of the grammar===
  
The 'MRS test suite' commonly used across the DELPH-IN grammars, in its Norwegian form used by the grammar, can be viewed at [http://www.typecraft.org/tc2wiki/images/3/30/Mrs-suite-NorSource.pdf. mrs-suite]
+
''NorSource'' is a so-called ‘deep’ computational grammar (‘DG’) of Norwegian, developed throughout the last 12 years.
 +
The grammar has been developed with a view to the following overall desiderata:
  
Articles providing general introduction to NorSource include:
 
[http://www.typecraft.org/tc2wiki/images/3/35/PrepSem-MRS-NorSource.pdf prepositional semantics in MRS]
 
  
 +
''Desideratum 1. Encoding of Linguistic Meaning''
  
; Sentence adverbs
+
As a ‘generic’ information repository, the DG should have a semantic component from which a Reasoning capacity can be deduced for any domain of discourse – possibly with addition of concepts for the specific domains. It should be like a Fregean ‘Sinn’, in acting as a function from domains of use to models of interpretation. However, contrary to most artificial ‘reasoning’ devices, a DG must span the full  complexity of a natural language, reflecting the size of its vocabulary and its grammar complexity. In this respect,the DG can also be
 
+
Ola kommer ikke
+
 
+
'Ola comes not'
+
 
+
 
+
; Auxiliary ''ha''
+
 
+
Ola har sovet
+
 
+
'Ola has slept'
+
 
+
 
+
; Clause final locative modification
+
 
+
Ola har sovet bak huset
+
 
+
'Ola has slept behind the house'
+
 
+
 
+
; Clause initial locative modification
+
 
+
bak huset har Ola sovet
+
 
+
'behind the house Ola has slept'
+
 
+
 
+
; 'Mid field' locative modification
+
 
+
Ola har under broen sunget
+
 
+
'Ola has under the bridge sung'
+
 
+
 
+
; Directional modification
+
 
+
gutten rusler mot fjellet
+
 
+
'the boy strolls towards the mountain'
+
 
+
gutten rusler til fjellet
+
 
+
'the boy strolls to the mountain'
+
 
+
gutten rusler mot fjellet langs elva
+
 
+
'the boy strolls towards the mountain along the river'
+
 
+
gutten rusler hit
+
 
+
'the boy strolls to here'
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
; Measure and comparative expressions
+
 
+
Ola er tilstrekkelig lang
+
 
+
'Ola is sufficiently tall'
+
+
Ola er to meter lang
+
 
+
'Ola is two meters tall'
+
 
+
Ola er mer storvokst enn Per
+
 
+
'Ola is more tall-built than Per'
+
 
+
Ola er atskillig mer storvokst enn Per
+
 
+
'Ola is considerably more tall-built than Per'
+
 
+
En mer enn to centimeter lengre mann enn Per sover
+
 
+
'a more than two centimeters taller man than Per sleeps'
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
 
+
[[Category:Research Projects]]
+
 
+
 
+
[http://www4.clustrmaps.com/user/8abdaf33 http://www4.clustrmaps.com/stats/maps-no_clusters/www.typecraft.org-thumb.jpg]
+

Revision as of 16:03, 14 April 2014

For the web demo of the Norwegian HPSG grammar Norsource, the sentences below can be used for illustration.

More complete test suites for basic verbal constructions are found in


License

[WWW] Lesser General Public License For Linguistic Resources


History and Purpose of the grammar

NorSource is a so-called ‘deep’ computational grammar (‘DG’) of Norwegian, developed throughout the last 12 years. The grammar has been developed with a view to the following overall desiderata:


Desideratum 1. Encoding of Linguistic Meaning

As a ‘generic’ information repository, the DG should have a semantic component from which a Reasoning capacity can be deduced for any domain of discourse – possibly with addition of concepts for the specific domains. It should be like a Fregean ‘Sinn’, in acting as a function from domains of use to models of interpretation. However, contrary to most artificial ‘reasoning’ devices, a DG must span the full complexity of a natural language, reflecting the size of its vocabulary and its grammar complexity. In this respect,the DG can also be