Mova0.5 pre-release⌕
☰
home / docs / papers / Semitic languages / Une description morphologique structurée en arbre du verbe akkadien qui utilise des structures de traits et des transducteurs multirubans [A Tree-Structured morphological description of the Akkadian verb which uses Feature Structures and Multi-tape Transducers]

Une description morphologique structurée en arbre du verbe akkadien qui utilise des structures de traits et des transducteurs multirubans [A Tree-Structured morphological description of the Akkadian verb which uses Feature Structures and Multi-tape Transducers]

What it is about

This is the French, long version of the Karamel grammar of the Akkadian verb. Each verb form is a tree: a core (root, stem gemination, infixes, aspect vowels) and, around it, personal affixes and clitics. Inside the core, small parts are separated by the rule that a part must be significant and determined by a set of features. The author distinguishes three kinds of vowel: aspectual, lexical, and support vowels, which vanish in weak contexts. Morphotactics are simultaneous constraints on the structure; surface changes are a cascade of rewrite rules. The grammar has 71 regular expressions, 65 computations and 6 rules. The transducer without lexicon has about 496,000 states, and with a 799-root lexicon about 3 million. Coverage is partial: strong triliteral verbs and verbs with one weak radical; the test data are conjugation tables from textbooks and a few dozen forms from the Code of Hammurabi, which the author says is not a representative coverage measure. The paper argues that the two-vowel scheme of older handbooks is not well supported, and that support vowels are better inserted in a fixed priority order than deleted from a full form.

Ideas

For Mova

I1 and I2 go into Phonology of Biblical Hebrew and The verb (vocalisation and the vowel positions of the verb). I3 is a mode for the lexicon step, The lexicon, and a test in tools/hbo. The weak-verb section of the paper is a reference for The weak verbs.

Topics: Akkadian and cuneiform NLP

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

@inproceedings{barthelemy2009une,
  title = {{Une description morphologique structurée en arbre du verbe akkadien qui utilise des structures de traits et des transducteurs multirubans [A Tree-Structured morphological description of the Akkadian verb which uses Feature Structures and Multi-tape Transducers]}},
  author = {Barthélémy, François},
  booktitle = {Traitement Automatique des Langues, Volume 50, Numéro 2 : Langues anciennes [Ancient Languages]},
  year = {2009},
  url = {https://aclanthology.org/2009.tal-2.8/}
}

References

26 references, 2 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Barthélemy F., « Finite-State Compilation of Feature Structures for Two-Level Morphology », International Workshop on Finite State Methods in Natural Language Processing (FSMNLP), Potsdam, Germany, 2007a. find
  2. Barthélemy F., « Multi-grain Relations », Implementation and Application of Automata, 12th International Conference (CIAA), Prague, Czech Republic, p. 243-252, 2007b. find
  3. Barthélemy F., « Using Mazurkiewicz Trace Languages for Partition-Based Morphology », ACL, Prague (Czech Republic), 2007c. find
  4. Beesley K., « Finite-state morphological analysis and generation of Arabic at Xerox Research : Status and plans in 2001 », ACL Workshop on Arabic Language Processing, 2001. find
  5. Beesley K. R., « Arabic morphology using only finite-state operations », in M. Rosner (ed.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Computational Approaches to Semitic languages, 1998a. find our card
  6. Beesley K. R., « Arabic morphology using only finite-state operations », Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Computational Approaches to Semitic languages, p. 50-57, 1998b. find our card
  7. Beesley K. R., Karttunen L., Finite State Morphology, CSLI Publications, 2003. find
  8. Breckwoldt T., Cunningham G., Black J., George A., Postgate N., A Concise Dictionary of Akkadian, Harrassowitz Verlag, 2000. find
  9. Buccellati G., A Structural Grammar of Babylonian, Harrassowitz Verlag, 1996. find
  10. Grimley-Evans E., Kiraz G., Pulman S., « Compiling a Partition-Based Two-Level Formalism », COLING, Copenhagen, Denmark, p. 454-459, 1996. find
  11. Heise J., « The Akkadian language », , http ://www.sron.nl/˜jheise/akkadian/, 1995. find
  12. Huehnergard J., A Grammar of Akkadian, Eisenbrauns, Harvard Semitic Studies, 2005. find
  13. Kaplan R. M., Kay M., « Regular Models of Phonological Rule Systems », Computational Linguistics, vol. 20 :3, p. 331-378, 1994. find
  14. Karttunen L., « Constructing Lexical Transducers », COLING-94, Kyoto, Japan, p. 406-411, 1994. find
  15. Karttunen L., Beesley K. R., « Finite-State Non-Concatenative Morphotactics », Fifth Workshop of the ACL Special Interest Group in Computational Phonology, Luxembourg (Luxembourg), p. 1-12, 2000. find
  16. Kataja L., Koskenniemi K., « Finite-state description of semitic morphology : a case study of Ancient Akkadian », Proceedings of the 12th conference on Computational linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, Morristown, NJ, USA, p. 313-315, 1988. find
  17. Kay M., « Nonconcatenative finite-state morphology », ACL Proceedings, Third European Conference, p. 2-10, 1987. find
  18. Kiraz G. A., « Compiling Regular Formalisms with Rule Features into Finite-State Automata », ACL, Madrid, Spain, 1997. find
  19. Kiraz G. A., Computational Nonlinear Morphology, Cambridge University Press, 2001. find
  20. Koskenniemi K., « Two-Level Model for Morphological Analysis », IJCAI-83, Karlsruhe, Germany, p. 683-685, 1983. find
  21. Malbran-Labat F., Manuel de langue akkadienne, Publications de l’institut Orientaliste de Louvain (50), Peeters, 2001. find
  22. McCarthy J. J., « A Prosodic Theory of Nonconcatenative Morphology », Linguistic Inquiry, vol. 12, p. 373-418, 1981. find
  23. Sanchez R., « Cours d’akkadien », , disponible sur http ://gedomia.ens-lsh.fr/, 2005. find
  24. Wintner S., « Strengths and weaknesses of finite-state technology : A case study in morphological grammar development », Nat. Lang. Eng., vol. 14, n° 4, p. 457-469, 2008. find
  25. Yli-Jyrä A. M., Koskenniemi K., « Compiling contextual restrictions on strings into finite-state automata », Proceedings of the Eindhoven FASTAR Days 2004 (September 3–4), Eindhoven, The Netherlands, December, 2004. find
  26. Zajac R., « Feature Structures, Unification and Finite-State Transducers », In FSMNLP’98 : International Workshop, on Finite State Methods in Natural Language Processing., 1998. find

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/aclbulk-2009-barthelemy-une-description-morphologique-structuree-en/