Who cites «Does Universal Dependencies need a parsing representation? An investigation of English»
- Comparing learnability of two dependency schemes: `semantic'' (UD) and `syntactic'' (SUD) — 2021 · Findings of the Association for Computational Linguistics: EMNLP 2021
- The status of function words in dependency grammar: A critique of Universal Dependencies (UD) — 2019 · Glossa: a journal of general linguistics
- Automatically Selecting the Best Dependency Annotation Design with Dynamic Oracles — our card · 2018 · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Human Language Technologies, Volume 2 (Short Papers)
- A Systematic Comparison of Syntactic Representations of Dependency Parsing — 2017 · Proceedings of the NoDaLiDa 2017 Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW 2017)
- Multilingual Back-and-Forth Conversion between Content and Function Head for Easy Dependency Parsing — 2017 · Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 2, Short Papers
- Universal Dependencies are Hard to Parse – or are They? — 2017 · Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Dependency Linguistics (Depling 2017)
- From Noisy Questions to Minecraft Texts: Annotation Challenges in Extreme Syntax Scenario — 2016 · Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Noisy User-generated Text (WNUT)
- Should Have, Would Have, Could Have. Investigating Verb Group Representations for Parsing with Universal Dependencies. — 2016 · Proceedings of the Workshop on Multilingual and Cross-lingual Methods in NLP
- constant-2017-benchmarking-joint-lexical-syntactic-analysis
- patejuk-2019-coordination-unlike-grammatical-functions
This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/cited-by/silveira-2015-does-universal-dependencies-need-parsing/