Postags are a challenge. There are so many words having that amount of
postags, it will be hard to get those really wel determined.
I will spend some time in the disambiguator, for assigning postags as
deleting ambiguous ones where possible.
First we have to establish a better postagging system
On 2014-08-19 13:43, R.J. Baars wrote:
> hand some; wrong; handsome
> I hand some tools to; correct
> It is a very compact way of defining very simple rules.
I see, but the thing is that these rules probably won't stay simple for
long. What if you want to add "you hand some tools", "we hand som
What I mean is just making a list of token groups, good and bad.
I'll try a different example:
hand some; wrong; handsome
I hand some tools to; correct
Another one:
bene; wrong;been
nota bene;correct
It is a very compact way of defining very simple rules.
I encounter rules that work fine, but
On 2014-08-19 09:14, R.J. Baars wrote:
> bed : ok
> bed english : not ok => bad english
> For some types of errors, I think it works better then current
> rule/exception type of check.
I'm not sure I understand: do you suggest a different (more compact) way
to write down simple rules, or do you
I think a good addition for LT would be to have a general rule, just
acting on tokens, a bit like srx does wit letters.
bed : ok
bed english : not ok => bad english
A mechanism, that lets the longer token list overrule the shorter one.
This would create the option to add found errors empirically.
