question about spanish MOR

[Brian MacWhinney]

Dear Janet,
    Typically, automatic taggers get about 95% of the words right.  The best for adult written English are up to 97%.  For CHILDES English, we can hit about 97%.  For Spanish, we are probably down around 95%, although sometimes it seems better.  

In the case of ratito, you must be using some much earlier version of SPA MOR.  The current version doesn't have this problem.  The case of bonita is different. It created a few test sentences and it seems that this problem arises when bonita is the last word in the sentences, as in "es una niña bonita".  The problem is that the association of "co" with final position is so strong that it overrides the association of an adjective with the preceding noun.  This can be corrected with a couple of prepost rules that take words that can be either co or adj and force them to be adj when they follow a noun.  Here are the rules:

# es una gata bonita
n|* co:voc|*^adj|* => n|* adj|*
# es una niña bonita
co:voc|*^n|* co:voc|*^adj|* => n|* adj|*

These work for these cases, but (1) you may have other cases I don't know about, and (2) prepost rules can also mess up other things.  So, please give this a try.

--Brian

> On Jan 16, 2020, at 8:47 PM, Janet Y Bang <jbang at stanford.edu> wrote:
> 
> Hello, 
> 
> We are working with the Spanish MOR and noticed a few errors in the MOR line: 
> 
> bonita oftentimes gets broken down into co:voc|bonita=pretty in cases where the word "bonita" is being used to modify a noun, e.g., utterance is "niña bonita. 
> In cases were "rato" or "ratito" is used to indicate a period of time, oftentimes the breakdown is n|rato&m-DIM=rat OR n|rato-m=rat. 
> What would be the most efficient way to fix these errors? We have a lab-internal .cut file where we are adding new words to our internal mor dictionary that were not in the downloaded dictionary (so that we can keep track of differences between our lab lexical items and the downloaded dictionary), but we weren't sure how to override words that were already in the dictionary? Would it be best to fix these in the relevant cut files in the lex folder (i.e., adj.cut, n.cut, respectively)? 
> 
> Thank you,
> Janet
> 
> --
> Janet Y. Bang, Ph.D.
> Postdoctoral Fellow
> Department of Psychology
> Stanford University
> 
> jbang at stanford.edu <mailto:jbang at stanford.edu>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "chibolts" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chibolts+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com <mailto:chibolts+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com>.
> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chibolts/DM5PR02MB3275154B3A345DAA4BD9B5A2D7310%40DM5PR02MB3275.namprd02.prod.outlook.com <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chibolts/DM5PR02MB3275154B3A345DAA4BD9B5A2D7310%40DM5PR02MB3275.namprd02.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "chibolts" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to chibolts+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chibolts/ECE843B9-F0F4-4D19-920D-BE7D4DD5F425%40andrew.cmu.edu.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/chibolts/attachments/20200116/2df140aa/attachment.htm>