Article | Proceedings of the NoDaLiDa 2017 Workshop on Universal Dependencies, 22 May, Gothenburg Sweden | Swedish Prepositions are not Pure Function Words
Göm menyn

Title:
Swedish Prepositions are not Pure Function Words
Author:
Lars Ahrenberg: Department of Computer and Information Science, Linköping University, Sweden
Download:
Full text (pdf)
Year:
2017
Conference:
Proceedings of the NoDaLiDa 2017 Workshop on Universal Dependencies, 22 May, Gothenburg Sweden
Issue:
135
Article no.:
002
Pages:
11-18
No. of pages:
8
Publication type:
Abstract and Fulltext
Published:
2017-05-29
ISBN:
978-91-7685-501-0
Series:
Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings
ISSN (print):
1650-3686
ISSN (online):
1650-3740
Series:
NEALT Proceedings Series
Publisher:
Linköping University Electronic Press, Linköpings universitet


Export in BibTex, RIS or text

As for any categorial scheme used for annotation, UD abound with borderline cases. The main instruments to resolve them are the UD design principles and, of course, the linguistic facts of the matter. UD makes a fundamental distinction between content words and function words, and a, perhaps less fundamental, distinction between pure function words and the rest. It has been suggested that adpositions are to be included among the pure function words. In this paper I discuss the case of prepositions in Swedish and related languages in the light of these distinctions. It relates to a more general problem: How should we resolve cases where the linguistic intuitions and UD design principles are in conflict?

Proceedings of the NoDaLiDa 2017 Workshop on Universal Dependencies, 22 May, Gothenburg Sweden

Author:
Lars Ahrenberg
Title:
Swedish Prepositions are not Pure Function Words
References:

Bas Aarts. 2007. Syntactic Gradience: The Nature of Grammatical Indeterminacy. Oxford University Press, Oxford.


Dwight L. Bolinger. 1971. The Phrasal Verb in English. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.


Joseph E. Emonds. 1976. A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. Academic Press, New York.


Joseph E. Emonds. 1985. A Unified Theory of Syntactic Categories. Foris, Dordrecht.


Marie-Catherine De Marneffe, Timothy Dozat, Natalia Silveira, Katri Haverinen, Filip Ginter, Joakim Nivre, and Christopher D. Manning. 2014. Universal stanford dependencies: a cross-linguistic typology. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14), Reykjavik, Iceland, may.


Joakim Nivre,Marie-Catherine deMarneffe, Filip Ginter, Yoav Goldberg, Jan Hajic, Christopher D. Manning, Ryan McDonald, Slav Petrov, Sampo Pyysalo, Natalia Silveira, Reut Tsarfaty, and Daniel Zeman. 2016. Universal dependencies v1: A multilingual treebank collection. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and
Evaluation (LREC 2016).


Joakim Nivre, ŇĹeljko Agic, Lars Ahrenberg, Maria Jesus Aranzabe, Masayuki Asahara, Aitziber Atutxa, Miguel Ballesteros, John Bauer, Kepa Bengoetxea, Riyaz Ahmad Bhat, Eckhard Bick, Cristina Bosco, Gosse Bouma, Sam Bowman, Marie Candito, G√ľls¬łen Cebirolu Eryiit, Giuseppe G. A. Celano, Fabricio Chalub, Jinho Choi, √áar √á√∂ltekin, Miriam Connor, Elizabeth Davidson, Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Valeria de Paiva, Arantza Diaz de Ilarraza, Kaja Dobrovoljc, Timothy Dozat, Kira Droganova, Puneet Dwivedi, Marhaba Eli, TomaŇĺ Erjavec, Rich¬īard Farkas, Jennifer Foster, Cl¬īaudia Freitas, Katar√≠na GajdoŇ°ov√°, Daniel Galbraith, Marcos Garcia, Filip Ginter, Iakes Goenaga, Koldo Gojenola, Memduh G√∂krmak, Yoav Goldberg, Xavier G√≥mez Guinovart, Berta Gonz√°les Saavedra, Matias Grioni, Normunds Gruzitis, Bruno Guillaume, Nizar Habash, Jan Hajic, Linh H√† M, Dag Haug, Barbora Hladk√°, Petter Hohle, Radu Ion, Elena Irimia, Anders Johannsen, Fredrik J√łrgensen, H√ľner Kas¬łkara, Hiroshi Kanayama, Jenna Kanerva, Natalia Kotsyba, Simon Krek, Veronika Laippala, Phng L√™ Hng, Alessandro Lenci, Nikola LjubeŇ°ic, Olga Lyashevskaya, Teresa Lynn, Aibek Makazhanov, Christopher Manning, Catalina Maranduc, David Marecek, H√©ctor
Mart√≠nez Alonso, Andr√© Martins, Jan MaŇ°ek, Yuji Matsumoto, Ryan McDonald, Anna Missil√§, Verginica Mititelu, Yusuke Miyao, Simonetta Montemagni, Amir More, Shunsuke Mori, Bohdan Moskalevskyi, Kadri Muischnek, Nina Mustafina, Kaili M√ľ√ľrisep, Lng Nguyn Th, Huyn Nguyn Th Minh, Vitaly Nikolaev, Hanna Nurmi, Stina Ojala, Petya Osenova, Lilja √ėvrelid, Elena Pascual, Marco Passarotti, Cenel-Augusto Perez, Guy Perrier, Slav Petrov, Jussi Piitulainen, Barbara Plank, Martin Popel, Lauma Pretkalnia, Prokopis Prokopidis, Tiina Puolakainen, Sampo Pyysalo, Alexandre Rademaker, Loganathan Ramasamy, Livy Real, Laura Rituma, Rudolf Rosa, Shadi Saleh, Manuela Sanguinetti, Baiba Saulite, Sebastian Schuster, Djam√© Seddah, Wolfgang Seeker, Mojgan Seraji, Lena Shakurova, Mo Shen, Dmitry Sichinava, Natalia Silveira, Maria Simi, Radu Simionescu, Katalin Simk√≥, M√°ria ҆imkov√°, Kiril Simov, Aaron Smith, Alane Suhr, Umut Sulubacak, Zsolt Sz√°nt√≥, Dima Taji, Takaaki Tanaka, Reut Tsarfaty, Francis Tyers, Sumire Uematsu, Larraitz Uria, Gertjan van Noord, Viktor Varga, Veronika Vincze, Jonathan North Washington, Zden?ek ?Zabokrtsk√Ĺ, Amir Zeldes, Daniel Zeman, and Hanzhi Zhu. 2017. Universal dependencies 2.0. LINDAT/CLARIN digital library at the Institute of Formal and Applied Linguistics, Charles University.


Slav Petrov, Dipanjan Das, and RyanMcDonald. 2012. A universal part-of-speech tagset. In Proceedings of the Eigth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016), Istanbul, Turkey, may.


Ulf Teleman, Erik Andersson, and Staffan Hellberg. 2010. Svenska Akademins Grammatik. Norstedts, Stockholm.


UD. 2017a. Core dependents in ud v2. http://universaldependencies.org/v2/coredependents.html.


UD. 2017b. Morphology: General principles. http://universaldependencies.org/u/overview/morphology.html.


UD. 2017c. Syntax: General principles. http://universaldependencies.org/u/overview/syntax.html.

Proceedings of the NoDaLiDa 2017 Workshop on Universal Dependencies, 22 May, Gothenburg Sweden

Author:
Lars Ahrenberg
Title:
Swedish Prepositions are not Pure Function Words
Note: the following are taken directly from CrossRef
Citations:
No citations available at the moment


Responsible for this page: Peter Berkesand
Last updated: 2017-02-21