Difference between revisions of "Navajo/Disambiguation"

From LING073
Jump to: navigation, search
(=Ambiguity in Possession)
(Evaluation)
 
(13 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Initial Evaluation of Disambiguity ==
+
== Evaluation ==
 +
Initial Evaluation: 99.92%
  
 +
Final Evaluation: 99.95%
  
 
==Potential ambiguity==
 
==Potential ambiguity==
  
===Ambiguity in Possession===
+
An example of ambiguity in Navajo is the word <code>shíbéézh</code>. In one reading, it serves as the first person possessed form of the noun "béésh" (knife, flint). In another reading, it acts as the 3rd person singular perfective form of the verb "béézh" (to boil). We are able to write a rule to disambiguate these readings, that is, between the verb and the noun, by selecting the noun in cases in which it is followed by a verb and selecting the verb reading if what follows it in the sentence is the end of the sentence, as verbs end all Navajo sentences. Another example is that different source list the word <code>ʼéí</code> with different functions. One lists it as a topic and focus marker, according with what a member of our group learned in Structure of Navajo at Swarthmore. However, it may have another function, that is, to work as a determiner meaning "that, those, far away and distant." Reviewing bilingual texts, we were not able to come up with a rule to differentiate the two, if there is a difference in usage at all. It may also be the case of two conflicting Navajo to English translations being the problem.
  
====PX1DPL and PX2DPL====
+
===Example Sentences===  
  
We were able to identify a few sources of potential ambiguity in Navajo. The first and likely the hardest to disambiguate would be both the px1dpl and px2dpl forms of nouns. It appears that the possessive subject prefix is the same for the two, which would lead to ambiguity. Consider the following examples:
+
1.) Gohwééh shibéézh. ("The coffee is brewed.")
  
1.) Our hands are dirty
+
^Gohwééh<n>$ ^béézh<v><iv><perf><p3><sg>$^..<sent>$
  
2.) Your hands are dirty.  
+
2.) Kodi shibéézh hólǫ́. ("Here is my knife")*
  
In English, it is immediately clear to whom the hands belong to because of the posessive determiner preceding the noun. However, in Navajo, the sentences would look something like this:
+
^Kodi<adv>$ ^béésh<n><px1sg>$ ^hólǫ́<v>$^:<sent>$^..<sent>$
 +
 
 +
* Example 2 was self-constructed using vocabulary we had available to illustrate the difference from example 1
  
1.) nihílaʼ (are dirty)
 
  
2.) nihílaʼ (are dirty)
 
  
If these sentences had not been given corresponding numbers, it would be syntactically and morphologically impossible to determine whose hands the speaker is referring to. This type of ambiguity can only be resolved by delving into semantics and probability, which we are unable to implement. 
 
  
 
[[Category:Sp22_Disambiguation]]
 
[[Category:Sp22_Disambiguation]]

Latest revision as of 13:40, 6 May 2022

Evaluation

Initial Evaluation: 99.92%

Final Evaluation: 99.95%

Potential ambiguity

An example of ambiguity in Navajo is the word shíbéézh. In one reading, it serves as the first person possessed form of the noun "béésh" (knife, flint). In another reading, it acts as the 3rd person singular perfective form of the verb "béézh" (to boil). We are able to write a rule to disambiguate these readings, that is, between the verb and the noun, by selecting the noun in cases in which it is followed by a verb and selecting the verb reading if what follows it in the sentence is the end of the sentence, as verbs end all Navajo sentences. Another example is that different source list the word ʼéí with different functions. One lists it as a topic and focus marker, according with what a member of our group learned in Structure of Navajo at Swarthmore. However, it may have another function, that is, to work as a determiner meaning "that, those, far away and distant." Reviewing bilingual texts, we were not able to come up with a rule to differentiate the two, if there is a difference in usage at all. It may also be the case of two conflicting Navajo to English translations being the problem.

Example Sentences

1.) Gohwééh shibéézh. ("The coffee is brewed.")

^Gohwééh<n>$ ^béézh<v><iv><perf><p3><sg>$^..<sent>$

2.) Kodi shibéézh hólǫ́. ("Here is my knife")*

^Kodi<adv>$ ^béésh<n><px1sg>$ ^hólǫ́<v>$^:<sent>$^..<sent>$

  • Example 2 was self-constructed using vocabulary we had available to illustrate the difference from example 1