On Tue, Jul 05, 2011 at 01:04:40PM +0100, Jimmy O'Regan wrote: > 2011/7/5 Keld Jørn Simonsen <k...@keldix.com>: > > On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 10:21:55PM +0100, Jimmy O'Regan wrote: > >> 2011/7/3 Keld Jørn Simonsen <k...@keldix.com>: > >> > So that person actually understood what I meant the first time - good to > >> > know that there is at least one person (plus my mother) that understands > >> > me - although the understanding may crumble over time. > >> > >> Context is wonderful. I did say it wouldn't be done in a hurry, and > >> nobody else has expressed an interest in it since then. If you want to > >> try yourself, take a look at TaggerWord::discardOnAmbiguity in > >> tagger_word.cc, otherwise you'll have to continue waiting. > > > > Yes, you said: > > > >> Without retraining the tagger, there's no way to do that. There are > >> preference rules, but those only filter on tags. I think it might be > >> useful to extend the tagger to have a mechanism to make certain tag > >> choices for specific lemmas, and not too difficult to implement, based > >> on the existing preference rules, but it's not going to be done in a > >> hurry. > > > > I put emphasis on "not to difficult to implement". What are your > > thoughts? Then I could have a look. I was actually thinking of some more > > complex things also, and if they would be almost as easy to implement, > > then I would go for the full monty. > > > > My further ideas were: > > - discardOnAmbiguity based on allowed grammatical rules > > - discardOnAmbiguity based on number of appearances > > - discardOnAmbiguity based on shortest distance for a wordnet like graph > > for the surrounding say 10 words. > > You've taken what was meant to be a simple idea and made it extremely > complicated. There are a handful of people on this list who use CG, > maybe you should talk to one of them. It might do what you want.
OK, who are you thinking of? Best regards keld ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2 _______________________________________________ Apertium-stuff mailing list Apertium-stuff@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/apertium-stuff
