Re: Why is NLP such a hard topic?

Matthew Purver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> Rod Davison wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 06 Nov 2003 09:24:17 +0100, Niki Estner wrote:
> > 
> > Question:  Why is NLP a hard topic?
> > Answer: Because natural language is a a rules based system where users
> > don't follow the rules.
> > 
> > Seems odd, but you have to understand that language is a social phenomena.
> 
> well, no, according to my rules, it's a social phenomenON. But as you so 
> rightly point out, users don't follow the rules :-D
> 
> actually, I think that's quite a good example: I could understand what you 
> meant no problem at all of course, but a machine programmed with strict 
> plural morphology rules would have problems.

Exactly.  Which is one reason I think it's a shame that NL parsing is
so focused on not overgenerating.

Almost the first thing most people do when developing a natural
language grammar is to lock down agreement, so that it's impossible to
generate or parse "He eat apples".  But even a child can understand
"He eat apples".

I can understand why this path is tempting.  Case agreement is one of
the first pieces of prescriptive grammar most people learn, and
handling case agreement immediately gives a grammar a superficial
Eliza-like appearance of polished correctness.  Nevertheless, I think
grammar proper is the wrong level to handle agreement on, except for
purely prescriptive agreement.

If I had to give the NLU community one piece of advice, it would be to
loosen up about grammar overgenerating.

-- 
Tom Breton at panix.com, username tehom.  http://www.panix.com/~tehom