Mova0.5 pre-release⌕
☰
home / docs / papers / English / CoBra: A Compound Branching Resource for Nominal Triconstituent Compounds in English and German

CoBra: A Compound Branching Resource for Nominal Triconstituent Compounds in English and German

What it is about

The paper presents CoBra, 295 nominal compounds of three constituents (for example "notch width index") in English and German, from general and scientific text: 53 English scientific, 85 English general, 47 German general and 110 German scientific. Each compound is annotated for its branching (left or right) with UD labels extended as compound:nmod, with head IDs, and with a semantic relation from the Benjamin and Schmidtke classes. Closed compounds are stored as multi-word tokens. A small German pilot asks whether the transparency of the internal node predicts the gold branching; the transparency asymmetry gives a delta accuracy of 0.717, head-alignment coherence 0.711, and general coherence only 0.33. In likelihood-ratio tests, transparency asymmetry (p = 0.005) and head-alignment (p = 0.023) add to the model, but their interaction does not.

Ideas

For Mova

The English part is 18. Compounding, conversion and the minor processes and en/src/tok.rs. Because the resource is non-commercial, it may only be used for tests and measurements, never shipped in what Mova builds. The German pilot is not for Mova's English work, but the method (compare the internal node with the whole word, measure delta accuracy, run a likelihood-ratio test) carries over to English.

Cite

The paper itself, not this card. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.63317/4hbr9zq3ty8c

@inproceedings{schacht2026cobra,
  title = {{CoBra: A Compound Branching Resource for Nominal Triconstituent Compounds in English and German}},
  author = {Schacht, Carmen and Landwehr, Isabell and Davidson, Diana and Grabowski, Konrad and Meiser, Magdalena and Wiedmann, Sophia},
  booktitle = {Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW 2026)},
  year = {2026},
  doi = {10.63317/4hbr9zq3ty8c},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.63317/4hbr9zq3ty8c}
}

References

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

  1. Multi-Word Token (MWT) Expansion — stanfordnlp.github.io. https://stanfordnlp.github.io/stanza/mwt.html. [Accessed 16-02-2026]. Open Science Framework (OSF). ↗
  2. Hirotogu Akaike. 1998. Information theory and an extension of the maximum likelihood principle. In Selected Papers of Hirotugu Akaike, pages 199–213. Springer. find
  3. Sally Andrews, Brett Miller, and Keith Rayner. 2004. Eye movements and morphological segmentation of compound words: There is a mouse in mousetrap. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 16(1-2):285–311. find
  4. Harald Baayen, Victor Kuperman, and Raymond Bertram. 2010. Frequency effects in compound processing. In Cross-disciplinary Issues in Compounding, pages 257–270. John Benjamins Publishing Company. find
  5. Laurie Bauer. 1998. When is a sequence of nouns a compound in English? English Language and Linguistics, 2(1):65–86. find
  6. Laurie Bauer. 2019. Compounds and multi-word expressions in English. In Barbara Schlücker, editor, Complex Lexical Units: Compounds and Multi-Word Expressions, pages 45–68. De Gruyter. find
  7. Shaina Benjamin and Daniel Schmidtke. 2023. Conceptual combination during novel and existing compound word reading in context: A self-paced reading study. Memory and Cognition, 51(5):1170–1197. find
  8. Marie-Catherine de Marneffe, Christopher D. Manning, Joakim Nivre, and Daniel Zeman. 2021. Universal Dependencies. Computational Linguistics, 47(2):255–308. find our card
  9. Stefania Degaetano-Ortlieb. 2021. Measuring informativity: The rise of compounds as informationally dense structures in 20th-century scientific English. In Corpus-based Approaches to Register Variation, pages 291–312. John Benjamins Publishing Company. ↗
  10. Fabienne Fritzinger and Alexander Fraser. 2010. How to avoid burning ducks: Combining linguistic analysis and corpus statistics for German compound processing. In Proceedings of the Joint Fifth Workshop on Statistical Machine Translation and Metrics (MATR), pages 224–234. find
  11. Sandra E. Geer, Henry Gleitman, and Lila Gleitman. 1972. Paraphrasing and remembering compound words. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11:348–355. find
  12. Kim Gerdes and Sylvain Kahane. 2016. Dependency annotation choices: Assessing theoretical and practical issues of Universal Dependencies. In Proceedings of the 10th Linguistic Annotation Workshop held in conjunction with ACL 2016 (LAW-X 2016), pages 131–140, Berlin, Germany. Association for Computational Linguistics. find
  13. Omer Goldman, Leonie Weissweiler, Kutay Acar, Diego Alves, Anna Baczkowska, Gulsen Eryigit, Lenka Krippnerová, Adriana Pagano, Tanja Samardžić, Luigi Talamo, Alina Wróblewska, Daniel Zeman, Joakim Nivre, and Reut Tsarfay. 2025. Findings of the UniDive 2025 shared task on multilingual morpho-syntactic parsing. In Proceedings of The UniDive 2025 Shared Task on Multilingual Morpho-Syntactic Parsing, pages 1– 18, Ljubljana, Slovenia. Association for Computational Linguistics. find
  14. Gaël Guibon, Marine Courtin, Kim Gerdes, and Bruno Guillaume. 2020. When collaborative treebank curation meets graph grammars. In Proceedings of The 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, pages 5293–5302, Marseille, France. European Language Resources Association. find
  15. Fritz Günther, Marco Marelli, and Jens Bölte. 2020. Semantic transparency effects in german compounds: A large dataset and multiple-task investigation. Behavior Research Methods, 52(3):1208– 1224. find
  16. Verena Henrich and Erhard Hinrichs. 2011. Determining immediate constituents of compounds in GermaNet. In Proceedings of Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing, pages 420–426. find
  17. Jukka Hyönä, Alexander Pollatsek, Minna Koski, and Henri Olkoniemi. 2020. An eye-tracking study of reading long and short novel and lexicalized compound words. Journal of Eye Movement Research, 13(4):1–18. find
  18. Barbara J. Juhasz, Matthew S. Starr, Albrecht W. Inhoff, and Lars Placke. 2003. The effects of morphology on the processing of compound words: Evidence from naming, lexical decisions and eye fixations. British Journal of Psychology, 94:223– 244. find
  19. Jan-Christoph Klie, Michael Bugert, Beto Boullosa, Richard Eckart de Castilho, and Iryna Gurevych. 2018. The INCEpTION platform: Machine-assisted and knowledge-oriented interactive annotation. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, pages 5–9. Association for Computational Linguistics. find
  20. Katharina Korecky-Kröll, Sabine Sommer-Lolei, and Wolfgang U. Dressler. 2017. Emergence and early development of German compounds. In Nominal Compound Acquisition, pages 19–37. John Benjamins Publishing Company. find
  21. Kristina Kösling and Ingo Plag. 2009. Does branching direction determine prominence assignment? an empirical investigation of triconstituent compounds in English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 5(2):201–239. find
  22. Andrea Krott, Gary Libben, Gonia Jarema, Wolfgang Dressler, Robert Schreuder, and Harald Baayen. 2004. Probability in the grammar of German and Dutch: Interfixation in triconstituent compounds. Language and Speech, 47(1):83– 106. find
  23. Victor Kuperman, Robert Schreuder, Raymond Bertram, and Harald Baayen. 2009. Reading polymorphemic Dutch compounds: toward a multiple route model of lexical processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 35(3):876–895. find
  24. Judith N. Levi. 1978. The Syntax and Semantics of Complex Nominals. Academic Press. find
  25. Gary Libben, Christina L. Gagné, and Wolfgang U. Dressler. 2020. The representation and processing of compounds words. In Vito Pirrelli, Ingo Plag, and Wolfgang U. Dressler, editors, Word Knowledge and Word Usage: A Cross-Disciplinary Guide to the Mental Lexicon, pages 336–352. De Gruyter Mouton, Berlin, Boston. find
  26. Fredrik Lundh. 1999. An introduction to tkinter. www.pythonware.com/library/tkinter/introduction/index.htm. find
  27. Marco Marelli, Christina L. Gagné, and Thomas L. Spalding. 2017. Compounding as abstract operation in semantic space: Investigating relational effects through a large-scale, data-driven computational model. Cognition, 166:207–224. find
  28. Julia A. Meßmer, Regine Bader, and Axel Mecklinger. 2021. The more you know: Schema-congruency supports associative encoding of novel compound words. Evidence from event-related potentials. Brain and Cognition, 155:105813. find
  29. Filip Miletić and Sabine Schulte im Walde. 2023. A systematic search for compound semantics in pretrained BERT architectures. In Proceedings of the 17th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pages 1499–1512. find
  30. Mark Ormerod, Jesús Martínez del Rincón, and Barry Devereux. 2024. How is a “kitchen chair” like a “farm horse”? Exploring the representation of noun-noun compound semantics in Transformer-based language models. Computational Linguistics, 50(1):49–81. find
  31. Peng Qi, Yuhao Zhang, Yuhui Zhang, Jason Bolton, and Christopher D. Manning. 2020. Stanza: A Python natural language processing toolkit for many human languages. arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.07082. ↗ our card
  32. Siva Reddy, Diana McCarthy, and Suresh Manandhar. 2011. An empirical study on compositionality in compound nouns. In Proceedings of 5th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, pages 210–218, Chiang Mai, Thailand. Asian Federation of Natural Language Processing. find
  33. Agata Savary, Sara Stymne, Verginica Barbu Mititelu, Nathan Schneider, Carlos Ramisch, and Joakim Nivre. 2023. PARSEME meets Universal Dependencies: Getting on the same page in representing multiword expressions. Northern European Journal of Language Technology, 9(1). find
  34. Carmen Schacht, Tobias Nischk, Oleksandra Yazdanfar, and Stefanie Dipper. 2025. Cheap annotation of complex information: A study on the annotation of information status in German TEDx talks. In Proceedings of the 19th Linguistic Annotation Workshop (LAW-XIX-2025), pages 297– 307, Vienna, Austria. Association for Computational Linguistics. find
  35. Annika Schebesta and Gero Kunter. 2022. Constituent durations in English NNN compounds: A case of strategic speaker behavior? Journal of Phonetics, 94:101164. find
  36. Sabine Schulte im Walde, Stefan Müller, and Stefan Roller. 2013. Exploring vector space models to predict the compositionality of German noun-noun compounds. In Second Joint Conference on Lexical and Computational Semantics (* SEM), Volume 1: Proceedings of the Main Conference and the Shared Task: Semantic Textual Similarity, pages 255–265. find
  37. Elisabeth O. Selkirk. 1982. The Syntax of Words: Volume 7. Linguistic Inquiry Monographs. MIT Press, London, England. find
  38. Emil Svoboda and Magda Ševčíková. 2024. Compounds in Universal Dependencies: A survey in five European languages. In Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Research in Computational Linguistic Typology and Multilingual NLP, pages 88–99, St. Julian’s, Malta. Association for Computational Linguistics. find
  39. Don Tuggener. 2016. Incremental Coreference Resolution for German. Ph.D. thesis, University of Zurich. find
  40. Guido Van Rossum and Fred L. Drake. 2009. Python 3 Reference Manual. CreateSpace, Scotts Valley, CA. 11. Language Resource References Digitales Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache (DWDS, online). DocCheck Flexikon (online). Duden (online). Merriam-Webster Medical Dictionary (online). MuchMore Springer Bilingual Corpus. https://muchmore.dfki.de/resources1.htm. ↗
  41. [Accessed 02-06-2025]. Oxford English Dictionary (online). find
  42. Sabine Brants, Stefanie Dipper, Peter Eisenberg, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, Esther König, Wolfgang Lezius, Christian Rohrer, George Smith, and Hans Uszkoreit. 2004. TIGER: Linguistic interpretation of a German corpus. Research on Language and Computation, 2(4):597–620. find
  43. Phoebe Chen, David Poeppel, and Arianna Zuanazzi. 2023. A dataset of 108 novel noun-noun compound words with active and passive interpretation. Journal of Open Psychology Data, 11(1). find
  44. BNC Consortium. 2007. The British National Corpus, XML Edition. find
  45. Christina L. Gagné, Thomas L. Spalding, and Daniel Schmidtke. 2019. LADEC: The large database of English compounds. Behavioral Research Methods, 51(5):2152–2179. find
  46. Barbara J. Juhasz, Yun-Hsuan Lai, and Michelle L. Woodcock. 2015. A database of 629 English compound words: ratings of familiarity, lexeme meaning dominance, semantic transparency, age of acquisition, imageability, and sensory experience. Behavior Research Methods, 47(4):1004–1019. find
  47. Daniel Schmidtke, Julie A Van Dyke, and Victor Kuperman. 2021. CompLex: An eye-movement database of compound word reading in English. Behavioral Research Methods, 53(1):59–77. find
  48. Sabine Schulte im Walde, Anna Hätty, Stefan Bott, and Nana Khvtisavrishvili. 2016. GhoSt-NN: A representative gold standard of German noun-noun compounds. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’16), pages 2285–2292. find

This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/schacht-2026-cobra-compound-branching-resource-nominal/