Base Form - Revision history

imported>Logosfabula at 21:30, 11 March 2014

2014-03-11T21:30:44Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:30, 11 March 2014
Line 127:		Line 127:
	\|give		\|give
	\|-		\|-
	\|pars orationis, partes ~~orationes~~, partem orationis, partis orationis, …		\|pars orationis, partes orationis, partem orationis, partis orationis, …
	\|pars orationis		\|pars orationis
	\|pars		\|pars

imported>Martins at 20:49, 21 September 2012

2012-09-21T20:49:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:49, 21 September 2012
Line 117:		Line 117:
	\|part of speech, parts of speech		\|part of speech, parts of speech
	\|part of speech		\|part of speech
	\|part ~~of speech~~		\|part
	\|-		\|-
	\|skinhead, skinheads		\|skinhead, skinheads

imported>Dgaiv at 18:43, 27 April 2011

2011-04-27T18:43:13Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:43, 27 April 2011
Line 131:		Line 131:
	\|pars		\|pars
	\|-		\|-
	\|bring [sth] back, brings [sth] ~~bak~~, bringing [sth] back, brought [sth] back, ...		\|bring [sth] back, brings [sth] back, bringing [sth] back, brought [sth] back, ...
	\|bring back		\|bring back
	\|bring		\|bring

imported>Admin at 11:12, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T11:12:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:12, 26 January 2010
Line 83:		Line 83:

	{\| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="5"		{\| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="5"
	!~~Lexical Realisations~~		!Word forms
	!~~Lexical Realisation Unit (LRU)~~		!Lemma
	!Base Form (BF)		!Base Form (BF)
	\|-		\|-

imported>Admin at 11:11, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T11:11:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:11, 26 January 2010
Line 16:		Line 16:
	== The use of BF ==		== The use of BF ==

	The use of BFs is derived from a practical limitation rather than from a logical necessity. In order to be efficient and to avoid overcharging the system, generation rules have to be as general and few as possible, what limits considerably the possibility of creating infixation rules. The alternative is to reduce infixable compounds and ~~complex LRUs~~ to the longest common denominator (i.e., to “hyper-regularise” them) in order to treat infixation as a special case of prefixation or suffixation.		The use of BFs is derived from a practical limitation rather than from a logical necessity. In order to be efficient and to avoid overcharging the system, generation rules have to be as general and few as possible, what limits considerably the possibility of creating infixation rules. The alternative is to reduce infixable compounds and multi-word expressions to the longest common denominator (i.e., to “hyper-regularise” them) in order to treat infixation as a special case of prefixation or suffixation.

	In English, the use of BF is limited to phrasal verbs (such as "give in" and "bring ~~(sth)~~ back”) ~~and~~ verbal phrases ("play with fire"). The need of BFs is more noteworthy in highly-inflective languages where compounds and complex ~~LRUs~~ may be reordered or infixed. Consider, for instance, the case of ~~the LRU~~ “lingua” (= “language”), in Latin. As a case-inflectional language, Latin normally has 12 different forms for each noun:		In English, the use of BF is limited to phrasal verbs (such as "give in" and "bring <thing> back”), verbal phrases ("play with fire") and other discontinuous expressions (such as "behind <person>'s back"). The need of BFs is more noteworthy in highly-inflective languages where compounds and complex multi-words may be reordered or infixed. Consider, for instance, the case of “lingua” (= “language”), in Latin. As a case-inflectional language, Latin normally has 12 different forms for each noun:
	{\| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="5"		{\| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="5"
	!case		!case
Line 48:		Line 48:
	\|lingu'''is'''		\|lingu'''is'''
	\|}		\|}
	For single~~-word LRUs~~, as “lingua”, the process of case-inflection is relatively simple, because it is extremely regular and will always correspond to a suffix. In ~~complex LRUs~~, however, the process can be quite more complicated, because of infixation and agreement. For “lingua franca”, for instance, we will have again 12 different forms, but generating them is no longer as simple as adding suffixes to the right of the ~~LRU~~.		For single words, as “lingua”, the process of case-inflection is relatively simple, because it is extremely regular and will always correspond to a suffix. In multi-word expressions, however, the process can be quite more complicated, because of infixation and agreement. For “lingua franca”, for instance, we will have again 12 different forms, but generating them is no longer as simple as adding suffixes to the right of the string.
	{\| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="5"		{\| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="5"
	!case		!case
Line 78:		Line 78:
	\|lingu'''is''' franc'''is'''		\|lingu'''is''' franc'''is'''
	\|}		\|}
	In order to avoid listing all variations of “lingua franca” ~~inside the UNLarium~~ or creating a very specific rule which would apply only in this case, we reduce “lingua franca” to “lingua” and create a special ~~(subcategorization)~~ rule for generating “franca” later on. The ~~LRU~~ will be then “lingua franca”, but the BF will be only “lingua”.		In order to avoid listing all variations of “lingua franca” or creating a very specific rule which would apply only in this case, we reduce “lingua franca” to “lingua” and create a special rule for generating “franca” later on. The lemma will be then “lingua franca”, but the BF will be only “lingua”.

	== Examples ==		== Examples ==

imported>Admin at 11:07, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T11:07:39Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:07, 26 January 2010
Line 11:		Line 11:
	*coffee house (multi-word expression without infixation: "coffee house">"coffee houses"): BF=lemma="coffee house"<br>		*coffee house (multi-word expression without infixation: "coffee house">"coffee houses"): BF=lemma="coffee house"<br>
	*give in (multi-word expression with infixation: "give in">"gave in"): BF="give" <code>≠</code> lemma="give in"<br>		*give in (multi-word expression with infixation: "give in">"gave in"): BF="give" <code>≠</code> lemma="give in"<br>
	*behind one's back (discontinuous multi-word expression without infixation: "behind my back", "behind his back", etc): BF="behind" <code>≠</code>lemma="behind <person>'s back"<br>		*behind one's back (discontinuous multi-word expression without infixation: "behind my back", "behind his back", etc): BF="behind" <code>≠</code> lemma="behind <person>'s back"<br>
	*take into account (discontinuous multi-word LRU with infixation: "take it into account", "took that into account"): BF="take" <code>≠</code> lemma="take into account"		*take into account (discontinuous multi-word LRU with infixation: "take it into account", "took that into account"): BF="take" <code>≠</code> lemma="take into account"

imported>Admin at 11:07, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T11:07:17Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:07, 26 January 2010
Line 11:		Line 11:
	*coffee house (multi-word expression without infixation: "coffee house">"coffee houses"): BF=lemma="coffee house"<br>		*coffee house (multi-word expression without infixation: "coffee house">"coffee houses"): BF=lemma="coffee house"<br>
	*give in (multi-word expression with infixation: "give in">"gave in"): BF="give" <code>≠</code> lemma="give in"<br>		*give in (multi-word expression with infixation: "give in">"gave in"): BF="give" <code>≠</code> lemma="give in"<br>
	*behind ~~<someone~~'s> back (discontinuous ~~multiword LRU~~ without infixation: "behind my back", "behind his back", etc): BF="behind" ~~LRU~~="behind back"<br>		*behind one's back (discontinuous multi-word expression without infixation: "behind my back", "behind his back", etc): BF="behind" <code>≠</code>lemma="behind <person>'s back"<br>
	*take ~~<something>~~ into account (discontinuous ~~multiword~~ LRU with ~~infixaiton~~: "take it into account", "took that into account"): BF="take" ~~and LRU~~="take into account"		*take into account (discontinuous multi-word LRU with infixation: "take it into account", "took that into account"): BF="take" <code>≠</code> lemma="take into account"

	== The use of BF ==		== The use of BF ==

imported>Admin at 11:04, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T11:04:22Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:04, 26 January 2010
Line 10:		Line 10:
	*mouse (simple word with infixation: "mouse">"mice"): BF=lemma="mouse"<br>		*mouse (simple word with infixation: "mouse">"mice"): BF=lemma="mouse"<br>
	*coffee house (multi-word expression without infixation: "coffee house">"coffee houses"): BF=lemma="coffee house"<br>		*coffee house (multi-word expression without infixation: "coffee house">"coffee houses"): BF=lemma="coffee house"<br>
	*give in (multi-word expression with infixation: "give in">"gave in"): BF="give" <code>&ne</code> lemma="give in"<br>		*give in (multi-word expression with infixation: "give in">"gave in"): BF="give" <code>≠</code> lemma="give in"<br>
	*behind <someone's> back (discontinuous multiword LRU without infixation: "behind my back", "behind his back", etc): BF="behind" LRU="behind back"<br>		*behind <someone's> back (discontinuous multiword LRU without infixation: "behind my back", "behind his back", etc): BF="behind" LRU="behind back"<br>
	*take <something> into account (discontinuous multiword LRU with infixaiton: "take it into account", "took that into account"): BF="take" and LRU="take into account"		*take <something> into account (discontinuous multiword LRU with infixaiton: "take it into account", "took that into account"): BF="take" and LRU="take into account"

imported>Admin at 11:03, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T11:03:56Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:03, 26 January 2010
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Base Form''' , or simply BF, is the form used to generate all variants of a given [[morphology\|lexeme]].		'''Base Form''', or simply BF, is the form used to generate all variants of a given [[morphology\|lexeme]].

	The [[lemma]] is not always the most adequate form used to generate the inflections of a given lexeme. ~~As it~~ is a ~~word form~~, ~~it may already include inflections~~ that ~~have to be removed~~, ~~such as in "love"~~>~~"loving". The base form~~, ~~or simply BF, is~~ the ~~part~~ of ~~the word that is common~~ to all ~~its inflected variants ("lov"~~, ~~for instance)~~. ~~It is used as~~ the ~~basis for~~ the ~~generation of~~ the inflectional ~~forms~~.		The [[lemma]] is not always the most adequate form used to generate the inflections of a given lexeme. Consider, for instance, the case of “take into account”, which is actually a discontinuous item, since we can have any noun phrase between “take” and “into account”: “take <u>that</u> into account”, “take <u>it</u> into account”, “take <u>the decision of proliferating dictionary fields</u> into account”, etc. In order to be prepared to process all those possibilities, we have to create a different lexical entity: the '''base form'''. In the case of “take into account”, the base form will be “take”. From the base form, we will be able not only to associate the lexeme to an existing inflectional paradigm (“take”) but also to treat discontinuity and order issues through simple and deterministic generation rules.

	== How to create a BF ==		== How to create a BF ==
	The BF is ~~the '''longest common denominator''' between all the possible variations of a lexeme. Then:~~		The BF is the same as the lemma, except in case of multi-word expressions that involve discontinuity or infixation, i.e., where variations cannot be generated by simple prefixation and/or suffixation rules. In these cases, the BF will correspond to the lemma of the '''longest common denominator''' between all the possible variations of the LRU.
	~~{\|align=center cellpadding=3 border=1~~
	~~!BF~~
	~~!inflections~~
	\|-
	~~\|lov~~
	~~\|e<br>es<br>ed<br>ing~~
	\|-
	~~\|book~~
	~~\|<code>Ø</code><br>s~~
	\|-
	~~\|small~~
	~~\|small~~
	\|-
	~~\|here~~
	~~\|here~~
	\|}






	the same as the ~~LRU~~, except in case of ~~multiword LRUs~~ that involve discontinuity or infixation, i.e., where variations cannot be generated by simple prefixation and/or suffixation rules. In these cases, the BF will correspond to the lemma of the '''longest common denominator''' between all the possible variations of the LRU.

	=== Examples ===		=== Examples ===
	*house (simple ~~LRU~~): BF=~~LRU~~<br>		*house (simple word): BF=lemma="house"<br>
	*mouse (simple ~~LRU~~ with infixation: "mouse">"mice"): BF=~~LRU~~<br>		*mouse (simple word with infixation: "mouse">"mice"): BF=lemma="mouse"<br>
	*coffee house (~~multiword LRU~~ without infixation: "coffee house">"coffee houses"): BF=~~LRU~~<br>		*coffee house (multi-word expression without infixation: "coffee house">"coffee houses"): BF=lemma="coffee house"<br>
	*give in (~~multiword LRU~~ with infixation: "give in">"gave in"): BF="give" ~~LRU~~="give in"<br>		*give in (multi-word expression with infixation: "give in">"gave in"): BF="give" <code>&ne</code> lemma="give in"<br>
	*behind <someone's> back (discontinuous multiword LRU without infixation: "behind my back", "behind his back", etc): BF="behind" LRU="behind back"<br>		*behind <someone's> back (discontinuous multiword LRU without infixation: "behind my back", "behind his back", etc): BF="behind" LRU="behind back"<br>
	*take <something> into account (discontinuous multiword LRU with infixaiton: "take it into account", "took that into account"): BF="take" and LRU="take into account"		*take <something> into account (discontinuous multiword LRU with infixaiton: "take it into account", "took that into account"): BF="take" and LRU="take into account"

imported>Admin at 10:42, 26 January 2010

2010-01-26T10:42:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:42, 26 January 2010
Line 4:		Line 4:

	== How to create a BF ==		== How to create a BF ==
	The BF is the ''longest common denominator''' between all the possible variations of a lexeme. Then:		The BF is the '''longest common denominator''' between all the possible variations of a lexeme. Then:
	{\|align=center cellpadding=3 border=1		{\|align=center cellpadding=3 border=1
	!BF		!BF