语言类型学中鲁棒复杂性指标研究

IF 0.5 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Y. Oh, F. Pellegrino
{"title":"语言类型学中鲁棒复杂性指标研究","authors":"Y. Oh, F. Pellegrino","doi":"10.1075/sl.22034.oh","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThere is high hope that corpus-based approaches to language complexity will contribute to explaining linguistic diversity. Several complexity indices have consequently been proposed to compare different aspects among languages, especially in phonology and morphology. However, their robustness against changes in corpus size and content hasn’t been systematically assessed, thus impeding comparability between studies. Here, we systematically test the robustness of four complexity indices estimated from raw texts and either routinely utilized in crosslinguistic studies (Type-Token Ratio and word-level Entropy) or more recently proposed (Word Information Density and Lexical Diversity). Our results on 47 languages strongly suggest that traditional indices are more prone to fluctuation than the newer ones. Additionally, we confirm with Word Information Density the existence of a cross-linguistic trade-off between word-internal and across-word distributions of information. Finally, we implement a proof of concept suggesting that modern deep-learning language models can improve the comparability across languages with non-parallel datasets.","PeriodicalId":46377,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Language","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Towards robust complexity indices in linguistic typology\",\"authors\":\"Y. Oh, F. Pellegrino\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/sl.22034.oh\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThere is high hope that corpus-based approaches to language complexity will contribute to explaining linguistic diversity. Several complexity indices have consequently been proposed to compare different aspects among languages, especially in phonology and morphology. However, their robustness against changes in corpus size and content hasn’t been systematically assessed, thus impeding comparability between studies. Here, we systematically test the robustness of four complexity indices estimated from raw texts and either routinely utilized in crosslinguistic studies (Type-Token Ratio and word-level Entropy) or more recently proposed (Word Information Density and Lexical Diversity). Our results on 47 languages strongly suggest that traditional indices are more prone to fluctuation than the newer ones. Additionally, we confirm with Word Information Density the existence of a cross-linguistic trade-off between word-internal and across-word distributions of information. Finally, we implement a proof of concept suggesting that modern deep-learning language models can improve the comparability across languages with non-parallel datasets.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46377,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studies in Language\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studies in Language\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.22034.oh\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Language","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.22034.oh","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基于语料库的语言复杂性研究方法有望有助于解释语言多样性。因此,人们提出了一些复杂性指数来比较语言之间的不同方面,特别是在音韵学和形态学方面。然而,它们对语料库大小和内容变化的稳健性尚未得到系统评估,从而阻碍了研究之间的可比性。在这里,我们系统地测试了从原始文本估计的四个复杂性指标的稳健性,这些指标通常用于跨语言研究(类型-标记比和词级熵)或最近提出的(词信息密度和词汇多样性)。我们对47种语言的研究结果强烈表明,传统指数比新指数更容易波动。此外,我们用单词信息密度证实了单词内部和跨单词信息分布之间存在跨语言权衡。最后,我们实现了一个概念证明,表明现代深度学习语言模型可以提高非并行数据集跨语言的可比性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Towards robust complexity indices in linguistic typology
There is high hope that corpus-based approaches to language complexity will contribute to explaining linguistic diversity. Several complexity indices have consequently been proposed to compare different aspects among languages, especially in phonology and morphology. However, their robustness against changes in corpus size and content hasn’t been systematically assessed, thus impeding comparability between studies. Here, we systematically test the robustness of four complexity indices estimated from raw texts and either routinely utilized in crosslinguistic studies (Type-Token Ratio and word-level Entropy) or more recently proposed (Word Information Density and Lexical Diversity). Our results on 47 languages strongly suggest that traditional indices are more prone to fluctuation than the newer ones. Additionally, we confirm with Word Information Density the existence of a cross-linguistic trade-off between word-internal and across-word distributions of information. Finally, we implement a proof of concept suggesting that modern deep-learning language models can improve the comparability across languages with non-parallel datasets.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Studies in Language provides a forum for the discussion of issues in contemporary linguistics from discourse-pragmatic, functional, and typological perspectives. Areas of central concern are: discourse grammar; syntactic, morphological and semantic universals; pragmatics; grammaticalization and grammaticalization theory; and the description of problems in individual languages from a discourse-pragmatic, functional, and typological perspective. Special emphasis is placed on works which contribute to the development of discourse-pragmatic, functional, and typological theory and which explore the application of empirical methodology to the analysis of grammar.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信