Compounds - Revision history

Unhammer: /* Simple lttoolbox example */

2021-04-06T09:07:54Z

Simple lttoolbox example

Unhammer: /* Simple lttoolbox example */

2021-04-06T09:07:20Z

Simple lttoolbox example

Unhammer: /* Simple lttoolbox example */

2021-04-06T09:06:37Z

Simple lttoolbox example

Unhammer: /* Simple lttoolbox example */

2021-04-06T09:06:14Z

Simple lttoolbox example

Unhammer: /* Simple lttoolbox example */

2021-04-06T09:05:17Z

Simple lttoolbox example

Unhammer at 09:04, 6 April 2021

2021-04-06T09:04:51Z

Unhammer: /* Further reading */

2021-04-06T08:32:45Z

Unhammer: /* Limitations of lttoolbox compounding */

2019-02-15T09:29:11Z

Limitations of lttoolbox compounding

Unhammer: /* Limitations of lttoolbox compounding */

2019-02-15T09:29:02Z

Limitations of lttoolbox compounding

Unhammer: /* Differences in left-parts and right-parts of compounds */

2019-02-15T09:28:24Z

Differences in left-parts and right-parts of compounds

@@ Line 27: / Line 27: @@
 and some words that use this are "snikmordar" (assassin) and "tørrfisk" (stockfish). Now someone writes a book about a stockfish assassin and we have to analyse that.
-We'll now add some helper paradigms:
+We'll add some helper paradigms, to avoid repetition:
 <pre>
@@ Line 51: / Line 51: @@
 </pre>
-And we use them like this:
+And we use the helpers like this:
 <pre>

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 </pre>
-and some words that use this are "snikmordar" (assassin) and "tørrfisk" (stockfish). We'll now add some helper paradigms:
+and some words that use this are "snikmordar" (assassin) and "tørrfisk" (stockfish). Now someone writes a book about a stockfish assassin and we have to analyse that.
+We'll now add some helper paradigms:
 <pre>

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 ==Simple lttoolbox example==
-In Norwegian, we ''generally'' want nouns to be possible non-final parts of compounds when they are in "lemma form", while they can be final parts in all forms (similar to how you can say "bookshops" but not "booksshop" – we will ignore examples for now). Say we have a noun paradigm <code>ep__n</code> that looks like
+In Norwegian, we ''generally'' want nouns to be possible non-final parts of compounds when they are in "lemma form", while they can be final parts in all forms (similar to how you can say "bookshops" but not "booksshop" – we will ignore exceptions for now). Say we have a noun paradigm <code>ep__n</code> that looks like
 <pre>

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 In Norwegian, we ''generally'' want nouns to be possible non-final parts of compounds when they are in "lemma form", while they can be final parts in all forms (similar to how you can say "bookshops" but not "booksshop" – we will ignore examples for now). Say we have a noun paradigm <code>ep__n</code> that looks like
+<pre>
         <pardef n="ep__n">
           <e>       <p><l>ane</l>   <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="pl"/><s n="def"/></r></p></e>
@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
           <e>       <p><l></l>      <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="sg"/><s n="ind"/></r></p></e>
         </pardef>
+</pre>
 and some words that use this are "snikmordar" (assassin) and "tørrfisk" (stockfish). We'll now add some helper paradigms:
+<pre>
     <pardef n="cp-R"
             c="Add hidden tag during analysis (allowing use as final compound part),
@@ Line 45: / Line 47: @@
       <e>       <p><l></l>            <r></r></p> <par n="cp-R"/></e>
     </pardef>
+</pre>
 And we use them like this:
+<pre>
     <pardef n="ep__n">
       <e>       <p><l>ane</l>   <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="pl"/><s n="def"/></r></p><par n="cp-R"/></e>
@@ Line 59: / Line 63: @@
     <e>       <i>tørrfisk</i>  <par n="ep__n"/></e>
     <e>       <i>snikmordar</i><par n="ep__n"/></e>
+</pre>
 Using <code>lt-proc</code> with the <code>-e</code> switch we turn on dynamic compounding:
+<pre>
     $ lt-comp lr cmp.dix cmp.bin
     main@standard 32 36
@@ Line 71: / Line 77: @@
     ^tørrfisksnikmordaren/tørrfisk<n><m><sg><ind><cmp>+snikmordar<n><m><sg><def>$
     ^tørrfiskensnikmordar/*tørrfiskensnikmordar$
+</pre>
 Note how we don't allow inflected non-final parts (<code>tørrfisk&lt;def&gt;+snikmordar</code>).
 lttoolbox will also allow longer strings of (non-final)+ final
+<pre>
     ^snikmordartørrfisksnikmordaren/snikmordar<n><m><sg><ind><cmp>+tørrfisk<n><m><sg><ind><cmp>+snikmordar<n><m><sg><def>$
+</pre>
 There is no dynamic compounding magic for generation – transfer should simply output several lexical units in a row with no spaces between them. We typically use a (non-hidden) &lt;cmp&gt; tag for the non-final parts in case they differ from the "uninflected" form
+<pre>
     $ lt-comp rl cmp.dix cmp.gin
     main@standard 30 33
     $ echo '^tørrfisk<n><m><sg><ind><cmp>$^snikmordar<n><m><sg><def>$' | lt-proc -g cmp.gin
     tørrfisksnikmordaren
+</pre>
 ==Differences in left-parts and right-parts of compounds==

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 In Norwegian, we ''generally'' want nouns to be possible non-final parts of compounds when they are in "lemma form", while they can be final parts in all forms (similar to how you can say "bookshops" but not "booksshop" – we will ignore examples for now). Say we have a noun paradigm <code>ep__n</code> that looks like
-    <pardef n="ep__n">
+        <pardef n="ep__n">
-      <e>       <p><l>ane</l>   <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="pl"/><s n="def"/></r></p></e>
+          <e>       <p><l>ane</l>   <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="pl"/><s n="def"/></r></p></e>
-      <e>       <p><l>ar</l>    <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="pl"/><s n="ind"/></r></p></e>
+          <e>       <p><l>ar</l>    <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="pl"/><s n="ind"/></r></p></e>
-      <e>       <p><l>en</l>    <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="sg"/><s n="def"/></r></p></e>
+          <e>       <p><l>en</l>    <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="sg"/><s n="def"/></r></p></e>
-      <e>       <p><l></l>      <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="sg"/><s n="ind"/></r></p></e>
+          <e>       <p><l></l>      <r><s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="sg"/><s n="ind"/></r></p></e>
-    </pardef>
+        </pardef>
 and some words that use this are "snikmordar" (assassin) and "tørrfisk" (stockfish). We'll now add some helper paradigms:
@@ Line 83: / Line 84: @@
     $ echo '^tørrfisk<n><m><sg><ind><cmp>$^snikmordar<n><m><sg><def>$' | lt-proc -g cmp.gin
     tørrfisksnikmordaren
 ==Differences in left-parts and right-parts of compounds==

@@ Line 172: / Line 172: @@
 </pre>
 (where cp-R adds compound-R, cp-both\Ø_LR_s adds compound-only-L with no epenthetic, LR with s epenthetic, and compound-R)
+==See also==
+* [[Conjoined lexical units]]
 ==Further reading==

@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 </section>
 </pre>
-then you won't even get "100-kake", it'l become <pre>^100<det>$^-<guio>$^kake<n>$</pre>
+then you won't even get "100-kake", it'll become <pre>^100<det>$^-<guio>$^kake<n>$</pre>
 ==Epenthetics==

@@ Line 55: / Line 55: @@
 Then you'll get compound analyses of "ostekake" and "100-kake" but not "200-kake" ("2" is missing from alphabet).
-But if you have an inconditional analysis of numbers like
+But if you have an inconditional analysis of numbers and dashes like
 <pre>
 <section id="main" type="inconditional">
@@ Line 62: / Line 62: @@
 </section>
 </pre>
-then you'll won't even get "100-kake", it'l become <pre>^100<det>$^-<guio>$^kake<n>$</pre>
+then you won't even get "100-kake", it'l become <pre>^100<det>$^-<guio>$^kake<n>$</pre>
 ==Epenthetics==

@@ Line 36: / Line 36: @@
 The "only" in here <code>compound-only-L</code> means that this form may '''only''' appear as part of a compound, not alone. The reason for this is explained [[Compounds#Epenthetics|below]].
-Note: the compound symbols do '''not''' appear in the output, they only signal to lt-proc-j that this form may appear in compounds.
+Note: the compound symbols do '''not''' appear in the output, they only signal to lt-proc that this form may appear in compounds.
+==Limitations of lttoolbox compounding==
-Note: '''lttoolbox will only do compounding on characters that appear in &lt;alphabet&gt;''' (because it only compounds tokens that end up being unknown from regular analysis, and unknown-tokenisation is governed by alphabet). So if you want to do compounding on digits, you need digits in &lt;alphabet&gt;.
+The lttoolbox method is to first try analyzing a token without compounding, and only do compounding if the other methods would give an unknown word. Unknown words are made up of strings of characters from &lt;alphabet&gt;, separated by non-alphabetics or inconditional analyses.
+So if the dictionary contains
+<pre>
+<alphabet>abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz01-</alphabet>
+…
+<section id="main" type="standard">
+  <e>       <p><l>oste</l>      <r>ost<s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="sg"/><s n="ind"/><s n="compound-only-L"/></r></p></e>
+  <e>       <p><l>kaker</l>      <r>kake<s n="n"/><s n="m"/><s n="pl"/><s n="ind"/><s n="compound-R"/></r></p></e>
+  <e>       <p><l>100-</l>      <r>100<s n="det"/><s n="compound-only-L"/></r></p></e>
+  <e>       <p><l>200-</l>      <r>200<s n="det"/><s n="compound-only-L"/></r></p></e>
+</section>
+</pre>
+Then you'll get compound analyses of "ostekake" and "100-kake" but not "200-kake" ("2" is missing from alphabet).
+But if you have an inconditional analysis of numbers like
+<pre>
+<section id="main" type="inconditional">
+  <e>       <re>[0-9]+</re><p><l></l>      <r><s n="det"/><s n="qnt"/><s n="pl"/></r></p></e>
+  <e>       <p><l>-</l>      <r>-<s n="guio"/></r></p></e>
+</section>
+</pre>
+then you'll won't even get "100-kake", it'l become <pre>^100<det>$^-<guio>$^kake<n>$</pre>
 ==Epenthetics==