Difference between revisions of "Navajo/Disambiguation"

From LING073
Jump to: navigation, search
(Ambiguity in Possession)
(Evaluation)
 
(9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
==Potential ambiguity==
+
== Evaluation ==
 +
Initial Evaluation: 99.92%
  
We were able to identify a few sources of potential ambiguity in Navajo. The first is both the px1dpl and px2dpl forms of nouns. This is because they share the same possessive subject prefix and to disambiguate them would rely heavily on semantics. The second is much the same the px3sp form of verbs. Naturally, being singular or plural, a noun possessed with this form could either refer to a singular third person entity possessing an object or a plural one. Once again, the only solution to disambiguating these forms would be through a semantic analysis. Further, 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. Finally, because nouns are not inflected for number in Navajo, they is naturally ambiguity in their number. We propose that nouns that act as subjects of sentences may be disambiguated by looking at the person number within the verb. However, because of the complexity of verbs in Navajo and our rather limited in scope verb coverage, we are unable to test this fully or write a concrete rule for it.
+
Final Evaluation: 99.95%
 
 
===Ambiguity in Possession===
 
  
 +
==Potential ambiguity==
  
====PX1DPL and PX2DPL====
+
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.
  
It appears that the possessive subject prefix is the same for the two, which would lead to ambiguity. Consider the following examples:
+
===Example Sentences===
  
1.) Our hands are dirty
+
1.) Gohwééh shibéézh. ("The coffee is brewed.")
  
2.) Your hands are dirty.  
+
^Gohwééh<n>$ ^béézh<v><iv><perf><p3><sg>$^..<sent>$
  
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:
+
2.) Kodi shibéézh hólǫ́. ("Here is my knife")*
  
1.) nihílaʼ (are dirty)
+
^Kodi<adv>$ ^béésh<n><px1sg>$ ^hólǫ́<v>$^:<sent>$^..<sent>$
  
2.) nihílaʼ (are dirty)
+
* Example 2 was self-constructed using vocabulary we had available to illustrate the difference from example 1
  
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.
 
  
===PX3SP===
 
  
The same ambiguity problem arises within the third person possessed forms of nouns. Because the third person possessive subject prefix is both singular and plural, it is not possible to disambiguate the two sheerly based on syntax and morphology. 
 
  
 
[[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