Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Inconsistent UPOS for anyone, someone and everyone across English treebanks #372

Closed
bguil opened this issue Oct 15, 2022 · 8 comments
Closed
Milestone

Comments

@bguil
Copy link

bguil commented Oct 15, 2022

These 3 lemmas (anyone, someone and everyone) are annotated inconsistently (either NOUN or PRON) in different English treebanks.

In 2.10 data, the UPOS tags used are:

Corpus NOUN PRON
UD_English-GUM 83 0
UD_English-ParTUT 0 40
UD_English-PUD 8 0
UD_English-LinES 0 74
UD_English-EWT 3 265
@nschneid
Copy link
Contributor

In PTB they are considered nouns, but according to https://universaldependencies.org/u/pos/PRON.html they should be considered PRON in UD. Since this is a closed class I don't see that divergence as a problem.

See also #230 re: feats

@nschneid
Copy link
Contributor

Full table at https://universaldependencies.org/en/pos/PRON.html#indefinite-pronouns

EWT query for all except "no one": http://universal.grew.fr/?custom=634adbc7a092f

I will fix the 5 errors in EWT.

nschneid added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 15, 2022
…me Enron acronyms, including it->IT; validator issue with feat sorting on 2 tokens
nschneid added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 15, 2022
…; expect PronType=Ind for all indefinite pronouns (#230)
@amir-zeldes
Copy link
Contributor

I'm not passionate about upos, if those guidelines are meant to be/can be made consistent across languages, let's do it. I'll fix GUM/Reddit.

@amir-zeldes
Copy link
Contributor

Full table at https://universaldependencies.org/en/pos/PRON.html#indefinite-pronouns

Looking at that page I think 'everything/one' should not be PronType=Ind, it should be PronType=Tot, no?

@nschneid
Copy link
Contributor

nschneid commented Oct 16, 2022

I'm not familiar with "indefinite" versus "total" versus "negative" pronouns being a distinction in English grammar. See this table, for example. @dan-zeman was that intended mainly for determiners?

@amir-zeldes
Copy link
Contributor

That table has a column 'universal' - I think that's what is intended here. GUM uses Tot for things like "all, each":

https://gucorpling.org/annis/#_q=UHJvblR5cGU9IlRvdCI&_c=R1VN&cl=5&cr=5&s=0&l=10

@nschneid
Copy link
Contributor

Ah, I see here that Ind is intended to cover both the "some" and "any" varieties, which could be distinguished with language-specific extensions (do any languages do this?). OK we can implement this for English. I was just confused by the different use of the term "indefinite".

This was referenced Oct 16, 2022
@nschneid nschneid added this to the v2.11 milestone Oct 22, 2022
@nschneid
Copy link
Contributor

OK I think this is fixed for EWT and GUM (the treebanks maintained at Georgetown). Consider opening an issue in the repo for PUD.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants