Hi Eleonora,
For English position in sentence analysers are the tool of choice
(because lots of verbs are substantives, e.g
walk
play, etc...)
For POS-tagging this is the tool of choice but not so for grammar
checking. We had a statistical sentence-level POS tagger in LanguageTool
but it had serious drawbacks: for some sentences, it simply assigned POS
tags which would have been in a correct sentence so we had no access to
real, incorrect POS tags. In reality, it turned out that a
dictionary-based POS tagger is better for grammar checking, takes less
space, and works faster (it's open source, you can look at sources, etc.
at LanguageTool CVS). And when you can look at a surrounding context,
the ambiguity of tagging isn't much of a problem. You can also use some
rules to disambiguate ambiguous tags in such cases.
Of course, in theory, you could try to train a statistical POS tagger on
bad and correct sentences but as far as I know such work hasn't been done.
Anyway, hunspell (hunmorph) is not the best tool for English - my
solution is not based on affixes, it's purely dictionary-based, and
hunmorph is not a statistical tagger.
Best,
Marcin
-eleonora
Hi,
Have anyone tried to use Hunspell for morphological analysis? In our grammar
checker development (CoGrOO), we are using a morphological dictionary we
wrote. But it is big, especially because we didn't care about redundant
data, this would be solved using the Hunspell affixes, and even better, the
grammar checker and spell checker would share the same dictionary.
Does anyone know if the OOo make any interface available to its Hunspell, so
a grammar checker could use this interface to query the dictionaries?
Thanks!
William
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
