Alternation - Revision history

Bech: Category:Documentation in English

2012-03-24T11:26:40Z

Category:Documentation in English

Francis Tyers: /* See also */

2008-10-01T10:16:47Z

Francis Tyers at 09:54, 1 October 2008

2008-10-01T09:54:27Z

Francis Tyers at 09:52, 1 October 2008

2008-10-01T09:52:19Z

Trondtr: terminology

2008-10-01T09:45:00Z

terminology

Francis Tyers: Alternation and umlaut moved to Alternation

2008-10-01T09:42:46Z

Alternation and umlaut moved to Alternation

Francis Tyers at 09:36, 1 October 2008

2008-10-01T09:36:37Z

Francis Tyers at 09:26, 1 October 2008

2008-10-01T09:26:25Z

Francis Tyers at 09:25, 1 October 2008

2008-10-01T09:25:08Z

Francis Tyers: New page: In some languages, in certain declensions part of the stem changes. This change may be completely regular, but at the moment we cannot model it nicely with Apertium monodices. ...

2008-10-01T09:24:00Z

New page: In some languages, in certain declensions part of the stem changes. This change may be completely regular, but at the moment we cannot model it nicely with Apertium monodices. ...

New page

In some languages, in certain declensions part of the stem changes. This change may be completely regular, but at the moment we cannot model it nicely with Apertium [[monodix|monodices]].

==Example==

Here is an example of umlaut in North Sámi, the plural forms with the exception of the nominative reduce the dipthong "uo" to "u". In Apertium dictionaris as they are, this would involve cutting the paradigm at "g". This substantially limits the generalisation power of paradigms.

<pre>
guolli N+Sg+Nom guolli
guolli N+Sg+Gen guoli guole
guolli N+Sg+Acc guoli
guolli N+Sg+Ill guollái
guolli N+Sg+Loc guolis
guolli N+Sg+Com guliin
guolli N+Pl+Nom guolit
guolli N+Pl+Gen guliid
guolli N+Pl+Acc guliid
guolli N+Pl+Ill guliide
guolli N+Pl+Loc guliin
guolli N+Pl+Com guliiguin
</pre>

We can take care of this with over analysis, which would mean basically analysing both "uo" and "u" as valid for all declensions. However, over analysis is ugly and it would be nice to have a way to restrict a change based on the following tags, discarding impossible paths.

[[Category:Development]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:26, 24 March 2012
Line 64:		Line 64:

	[[Category:Development]]		[[Category:Development]]
			[[Category:Documentation in English]]

@@ Line 59: / Line 59: @@
 * [[SFST]] and [[Omorfi]] (a free Finnish morphological analyser)
+==External links==
+* [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternation Wikipedia: Alternation]
 [[Category:Development]]

@@ Line 46: / Line 46: @@
 </pre>
-This would over analyse, because '''gulli''' is not a valid form in the language.
+This would over analyse, because '''gulli''' is not a valid form in the language. It would also be possible to split the paradigm, and have two entries in the main section. This would be ugly as we usually consider the main section to have one entry per lemma.
 <pre>

← Older revision		Revision as of 09:52, 1 October 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	In some languages, in certain declensions part of the stem changes. This change may be completely regular, but at the moment we cannot model it nicely with Apertium [[monodix\|monodices]].		In some languages, in certain declensions part of the stem changes. This change may be completely regular, but at the moment we cannot model it nicely with Apertium [[monodix\|monodices]]. Examples of this are: umlaut, consonant gradation, diphthong simplification, etc.

	==Example==		==Example==

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 </pre>
-We can take care of this with over analysis, which would mean basically analysing both "uo" and "u" as valid for all declensions. However, over analysis is ugly and it would be nice to have a way to restrict a change based on the following tags, discarding impossible paths. Taking care of this would probably involve both a change to the format of the dictionaries and to the analyser. We welcome suggestions!
+We can take care of this with over analysis, which would mean basically analysing both "uo" and "u" as valid for all declensions. For example:
+<pre>
+  <pardefs>
+    <pardef n="guol/li__n">
+      <e>
+        <p>
+          <l>li</l>
+          <r>li<s n="n"/><s n="sg"/><s n="nom"/></r>
+        </p>
+      </e>
+      ...
+    </pardef>
+    <pardef n="u_uo">
+      <e><p><l>u</l><r>uo</r></p></e>
+      <e><p><l>uo</l><r>uo</r></p></e>
+    </pardef>
+  </pardefs>
+  <section id="main" type="standard">
+    <e lm="guolli">
+      <i>g</i><par n="u_uo"/><i>l</i>
+      <par n="guol/li__n"/>
+    </e>
+  </section>
+</pre>
+This would over analyse, because '''gulli''' is not a valid form in the language.
+<pre>
+guolli:guolli<n><sg><nom>
+gulli:guolli<n><sg><nom>
+</pre>
+However, over analysis is ugly and it would be nice to have a way to restrict a change based on the following tags, discarding impossible paths. Taking care of this would probably involve both a change to the format of the dictionaries and to the analyser. We welcome suggestions!
 ==See also==

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ==Example==
-Here is an example of umlaut in North Sámi, the plural forms with the exception of the nominative reduce the dipthong "uo" to "u". In Apertium dictionaris as they are, this would involve cutting the paradigm at "g". This substantially limits the generalisation power of paradigms.
+Here is an example of consonant gradation and diphthong simplification in North Sámi, the plural forms with the exception of the nominative reduce the dipthong "uo" to "u". In Apertium dictionaris as they are, this would involve cutting the paradigm at "g". This substantially limits the generalisation power of paradigms.
 <pre>

← Older revision	Revision as of 09:42, 1 October 2008
(No difference)