C-NNLA output measures

Wed Oct 12 15:24:29 UTC 2022

Thank you Leonid! I reran the files and the numbers look much closer to our 
manual coding.

On Saturday, October 8, 2022 at 8:02:54 PM UTC-4 Leonid Spektor wrote:

> Hi,
>
> The way C-NNLA computes columns "% sentences produced", "% sentences with 
> correct syntax, semantics*", "% sentences with flawed syntax" and "% 
> sentences with flawed semantics*" has been fixed. The bug had to do with 
> word contractions. For example, when computing those particular columns 
> for the word "she's" C-NNLA did not see the "~cop|be&3S" part of the word.
>
> This bug has been fixed and new CLAN has been updated on the web.
>
>
> Leonid. 
>
> On Oct 7, 2022, at 12:17, mara.st... at gmail.com <mara.st... at gmail.com> 
> wrote:
>
> Hi chiblots,
>
> We were wondering if there was a way to determine which 
> sentences/utterances are  included in the output measures from C-NNLA. 
> Specifically, we are looking at the % sentences with flawed syntax. We are 
> getting a mismatch between our manual coding and the automated output and 
> are wondering if we are coding something incorrectly or different than the 
> program. We see the formula in the CLAN manual (p.119), but were unsure of 
> exactly how the calculation works, especially in terms of which utterances/ 
> sentences get included (i.e., abandoned utterances, complete, etc.).
>
> In the example below, C-NNLA reported 100% as the output for % sentences 
> with flawed syntax. Manually, we counted 11 utterances total from the 
> participant, 5 were excluded using [+exc] since they were unrelated to the 
> picture description and 3 were marked as ungrammatical [+gram]. That would 
> leave 3 utterances that could be counted as grammatically correct but we 
> are not sure if single word or fragmented utterances were counted. It seems 
> like there’s at least one grammatically correct sentence (“she's just out 
> of it” - but includes a revision) making the reported value of 100% 
> possibly incorrect.
>
> *PAR: &-right now <where do I> [/] where do I put the <another> [>] +/. [+ 
> exc] 
> *INV: <you need> [<] to tell me about it . 
> *PAR: or just tell you about it . [+ exc] 
> *PAR: sorry &=laughs . [+ exc] 
> *PAR: the mum's not very clever because she's xxx xxx sink &=laughs . [+ 
> gram] 
> *PAR: &-uh and the boys [: boy] [* m:+s] are [: is] [* m:vun:a] very 
> naughty because they're [: he's] [* s:r:gc:pro] xxx the cookie jar and he's 
> gonna fall off the +... [+ gram] [+ gcc] 
> *PAR: I've done that before . [+ exc] 
> *PAR: &-um yes . 
> *PAR: and [e] &-yep xxx &+fai <the kid> [//] <the boy> [//] the &-um (.) 
> girl was [: is] [* m] gaving [: giving] [* m] xxx her [//] him and her +... 
> [+ gram] 
> *PAR: and [e] &-you_know they're in the kitchen +... 
> *PAR: she [//] she's just out of it . 
> *PAR: &=laughs and that's about it . [+ exc] 
> *INV: yep ! 
>
> Thanks for your help!
>
> ~Mara Steinberg Lowe & Kirrie Ballard
>
> -- 
> 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+u... at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit 
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chibolts/03fb5c3c-4050-46fa-94b5-bc1710f45173n%40googlegroups.com 
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/chibolts/03fb5c3c-4050-46fa-94b5-bc1710f45173n%40googlegroups.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/4dabe367-be31-4229-a24c-57b4d56303efn%40googlegroups.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/chibolts/attachments/20221012/15fdf24b/attachment.htm>