Proceedings of the icgL12 - fu-berlin.de

Proceedings of the icgL12Πρακτικα του icgL12

thanasis georgakopoulos theodossia-soula Pavlidou Miltos Pechlivanos Artemis Alexiadou Jannis Androutsopoulos Alexis Kalokairinos stavros skopeteas Katerina stathi (eds)

Proceedings of the 12th internAtionAL conference on greeK Linguistics

Πρακτικα του 12ου συνεδριου ελληνικησ γλωσσολογιασ

vol 1

copy 2017 Edition RomiosiniCeMoG Freie Universitaumlt Berlin Alle Rechte vorbehaltenvertrieb und Gesamtherstellung Epubli (wwwepublide)Satz und layout Rea Papamichail Center fuumlr Digitale Systeme Freie Universitaumlt BerlinGesetzt aus Minion ProUmschlaggestaltung Thanasis Georgiou Yorgos KonstantinouUmschlagillustration Yorgos Konstantinou

ISBN 978-3-946142-34-8Printed in Germany

online-Bibliothek der Edition Romiosiniwwwedition-romiosinide

Στη μνήμη του Gaberell Drachman (dagger1092014) και της Αγγελικής Μαλικούτη-Drachman (dagger452015)

για την τεράστια προσφορά τους στην ελληνική γλωσσολογία και την αγάπη τους για την ελληνική γλώσσα

ΣΗΜΕΙΩΜΑ ΕΚΔΟΤΩΝ

Το 12ο Διεθνές Συνέδριο Ελληνικής Γλωσσολογίας (International Conference on Greek linguisticsICGl12) πραγματοποιήθηκε στο Κέντρο Νέου Ελληνισμού του Ελεύθερου Πανεπιστημίου του Βερολίνου (Centrum Modernes Griechenland Freie Universitaumlt Berlin) στις 16-19 Σεπτεμβρίου 2015 με τη συμμετοχή περίπου τετρακοσί-ων συνέδρων απrsquo όλον τον κόσμο

Την Επιστημονική Επιτροπή του ICGl12 στελέχωσαν οι Θανάσης Γεωργακόπου-λος Θεοδοσία-Σούλα Παυλίδου Μίλτος Πεχλιβάνος Άρτεμις Αλεξιάδου Δώρα Αλεξοπούλου Γιάννης Ανδρουτσόπουλος Αμαλία Αρβανίτη Σταύρος Ασημακόπου-λος Αλεξάνδρα Γεωργακοπούλου Κλεάνθης Γκρώμαν Σαβίνα Ιατρίδου Mark Janse Brian Joseph Αλέξης Καλοκαιρινός Ναπολέων Κάτσος Ευαγγελία Κορδώνη Αμα-λία Μόζερ Ελένη Μπουτουλούση Κική Νικηφορίδου Αγγελική Ράλλη Άννα Ρούσ-σου Αθηνά Σιούπη Σταύρος Σκοπετέας Κατερίνα Στάθη Μελίτα Σταύρου Αρχόντω Τερζή Νίνα Τοπιντζή Ιάνθη Τσιμπλή και Σταυρούλα Τσιπλάκου

Την Οργανωτική Επιτροπή του ICGl12 στελέχωσαν οι Θανάσης Γεωργακόπουλος Αλέξης Καλοκαιρινός Κώστας Κοσμάς Θεοδοσία-Σούλα Παυλίδου και Μίλτος Πε-χλιβάνος

Οι δύο τόμοι των πρακτικών του συνεδρίου είναι προϊόν της εργασίας της Εκδο-τικής Επιτροπής στην οποία συμμετείχαν οι Θανάσης Γεωργακόπουλος Θεοδοσία-Σούλα Παυλίδου Μίλτος Πεχλιβάνος Άρτεμις Αλεξιάδου Γιάννης Ανδρουτσόπου-λος Αλέξης Καλοκαιρινός Σταύρος Σκοπετέας και Κατερίνα Στάθη

Παρότι στο συνέδριο οι ανακοινώσεις είχαν ταξινομηθεί σύμφωνα με θεματικούς άξονες τα κείμενα των ανακοινώσεων παρατίθενται σε αλφαβητική σειρά σύμφωνα με το λατινικό αλφάβητο εξαίρεση αποτελούν οι εναρκτήριες ομιλίες οι οποίες βρί-σκονται στην αρχή του πρώτου τόμου

Η Οργανωτική Επιτροπή του ICGl12

ΠΕΡΙΕχΟΜΕΝΑ

Σημείωμα εκδοτών 7

Περιεχόμενα 9

Peter MackridgeSome literary representations of spoken Greek before nationalism(1750-1801) 17

Μαρία ΣηφιανούΗ έννοια της ευγένειας στα Eλληνικά 45

Σπυριδούλα Βαρλοκώστα Syntactic comprehension in aphasia and its relationship to working memory deficits 75

Ευαγγελία Αχλάδη Αγγελική Δούρη Ευγενία Μαλικούτη amp χρυσάνθη Παρασχάκη-ΜπαράνΓλωσσικά λάθη τουρκόφωνων μαθητών της Ελληνικής ως ξένηςδεύτερης γλώσσας Ανάλυση και διδακτική αξιοποίηση 109

Κατερίνα ΑλεξανδρήΗ μορφή και η σημασία της διαβάθμισης στα επίθετα που δηλώνουν χρώμα 125

Eva Anastasi Ageliki logotheti Stavri Panayiotou Marilena Serafim amp Charalambos Themistocleous A Study of Standard Modern Greek and Cypriot Greek Stop Consonants Preliminary Findings 141

Anna Anastassiadis-Symeonidis Elisavet Kiourti amp Maria MitsiakiInflectional Morphology at the service of Lexicography ΚΟΜOΛεξ A Cypriot Mοrphological Dictionary 157

Γεωργία Ανδρέου amp Ματίνα ΤασιούδηΗ ανάπτυξη του λεξιλογίου σε παιδιά με Σύνδρομο Απνοιών στον Ύπνο 175

Ανθούλα- Ελευθερία Ανδρεσάκη Ιατρικές μεταφορές στον δημοσιογραφικό λόγο της κρίσης Η οπτική γωνία των Γερμανών 187

Μαρία ΑνδριάΠροσεγγίζοντας θέματα Διαγλωσσικής Επίδρασης μέσα από το πλαίσιο της Γνωσιακής Γλωσσολογίας ένα παράδειγμα από την κατάκτηση της Ελληνικής ως Γ2 199

Spyros Armostis amp Kakia PetinouMastering word-initial syllable onsets by Cypriot Greek toddlers with and without early language delay 215

Julia Bacskai-AtkariAmbiguity and the Internal Structure of Comparative Complements in Greek 231

Costas CanakisTalking about same-sex parenthood in contemporary Greece Dynamic categorization and indexicality 243

Michael ChiouThe pragmatics of future tense in Greek 257

Maria Chondrogianni The Pragmatics of the Modern Greek Segmental Μarkers 269

Katerina Christopoulou George J Xydopoulos ampAnastasios TsangalidisGrammatical gender and offensiveness in Modern Greek slang vocabulary 291

Aggeliki Fotopoulou vasiliki Foufi Tita Kyriacopoulou amp Claude Martineau Extraction of complex text segments in Modern Greek 307

Aγγελική Φωτοπούλου amp Βούλα ΓιούληΑπό την laquoΈκφρασηraquo στο laquoΠολύτροποraquo σχεδιασμός και οργάνωση ενός εννοιολογικού λεξικού 327

Marianthi Georgalidou Sofia lampropoulou Maria Gasouka Apostolos Kostas amp Xan-thippi FoulidildquoLearn grammarrdquo Sexist language and ideology in a corpus of Greek Public Documents 341

Maria Giagkou Giorgos Fragkakis Dimitris Pappas amp Harris PapageorgiouFeature extraction and analysis in Greek L2 texts in view of automatic labeling for proficiency levels 357

Dionysis Goutsos Georgia Fragaki Irene Florou vasiliki Kakousi amp Paraskevi SavvidouThe Diachronic Corpus of Greek of the 20th century Design and compilation 369

Kleanthes K Grohmann amp Maria KambanarosBilectalism Comparative Bilingualism and theGradience of Multilingualism A View from Cyprus 383

Guumlnther S Henrich bdquoΓεωγραφία νεωτερικήldquo στο Λίβιστρος και Ροδάμνη μετατόπιση ονομάτων βαλτικών χωρών προς την Ανατολή 397

Noriyo Hoozawa-Arkenau amp Christos KarvounisVergleichende Diglossie - Aspekte im Japanischen und Neugriechischen Verietaumlten - Interferenz 405

Μαρία Ιακώβου Ηριάννα Βασιλειάδη-Λιναρδάκη Φλώρα Βλάχου Όλγα Δήμα Μαρία Καββαδία Τατιάνα Κατσίνα Μαρίνα Κουτσουμπού Σοφία-Νεφέλη Κύτρου χριστίνα Κωστάκου Φρόσω Παππά amp Σταυριαλένα ΠερρέαΣΕΠΑΜΕ2 Μια καινούρια πηγή αναφοράς για την Ελληνική ως Γ2 419

Μαρία Ιακώβου amp Θωμαΐς ΡουσουλιώτηΒασικές αρχές σχεδιασμού και ανάπτυξης του νέου μοντέλου αναλυτικών προγραμμάτων για τη διδασκαλία της Eλληνικής ως δεύτερηςξένης γλώσσας 433

Μαρία Καμηλάκη laquoΜαζί μου ασχολείσαι πόσο μαλάκας είσαιraquo Λέξεις-ταμπού και κοινωνιογλωσσικές ταυτότητες στο σύγχρονο ελληνόφωνο τραγούδι 449

Μαρία Καμηλάκη Γεωργία Κατσούδα amp Μαρία Βραχιονίδου Η εννοιολογική μεταφορά σε λέξεις-ταμπού της ΝΕΚ και των νεοελληνικών διαλέκτων 465

Eleni Karantzola Georgios Mikros amp Anastassios Papaioannou Lexico-grammatical variation and stylometric profile of autograph texts in Early Modern Greek 479

Sviatlana Karpava Maria Kambanaros amp Kleanthes K GrohmannNarrative Abilities MAINing RussianndashGreek Bilingual Children in Cyprus 493

χρήστος Καρβούνης Γλωσσικός εξαρχαϊσμός και laquoιδεολογικήraquo νόρμα Ζητήματα γλωσσικής διαχείρισης στη νέα ελληνική 507

Demetra Katis amp Kiki Nikiforidou Spatial prepositions in early child GreekImplications for acquisition polysemy and historical change 525

Γεωργία Κατσούδα Το επίθημα -ούνα στη ΝΕΚ και στις νεοελληνικές διαλέκτους και ιδιώματα 539

George Kotzoglou Sub-extraction from subjects in Greek Its existence its locus and an open issue 555

veranna KypriotiNarrative identity and age the case of the bilingual in Greek and Turkish Muslim community of Rhodes Greece 571

χριστίνα Λύκου Η Ελλάδα στην Ευρώπη της κρίσης Αναπαραστάσεις στον ελληνικό δημοσιογραφικό λόγο 583

Nikos liosis Systems in disruption Propontis Tsakonian 599

Katerina Magdou Sam Featherston Resumptive Pronouns can be more acceptable than gaps Experimental evidence from Greek 613

Maria Margarita Makri Opos identity comparatives in Greek an experimental investigation 629

2ος Τόμος


vasiliki Makri Gender assignment to Romance loans in Katoitalioacutetika a case study of contact morphology 659

Evgenia Malikouti Usage Labels of Turkish Loanwords in three Modern Greek Dictionaries 675

Persephone Mamoukari amp Penelope Kambakis-vougiouklis Frequency and Effectiveness of Strategy Use in SILL questionnaire using an Innovative Electronic Application 693

Georgia Maniati voula Gotsoulia amp Stella Markantonatou Contrasting the Conceptual Lexicon of ILSP (CL-ILSP) with major lexicographic examples 709

Γεώργιος Μαρκόπουλος amp Αθανάσιος Καρασίμος Πολυεπίπεδη επισημείωση του Ελληνικού Σώματος Κειμένων Αφασικού Λόγου 725

Πωλίνα Μεσηνιώτη Κατερίνα Πούλιου amp χριστόφορος Σουγανίδης Μορφοσυντακτικά λάθη μαθητών Τάξεων Υποδοχής που διδάσκονται την Ελληνική ως Γ2 741

Stamatia Michalopoulou Third Language Acquisition The Pro-Drop-Parameter in the Interlanguage of Greek students of German 759

vicky Nanousi amp Arhonto Terzi Non-canonical sentences in agrammatism the case of Greek passives 773

Καλομοίρα Νικολού Μαρία Ξεφτέρη amp Νίτσα Παραχεράκη Τo φαινόμενο της σύνθεσης λέξεων στην κυκλαδοκρητική διαλεκτική ομάδα 789

Ελένη Παπαδάμου amp Δώρης Κ Κυριαζής Μορφές διαβαθμιστικής αναδίπλωσης στην ελληνική και στις άλλες βαλκανικές γλώσσες 807

Γεράσιμος Σοφοκλής Παπαδόπουλος Το δίπολο laquoΕμείς και οι Άλλοιraquo σε σχόλια αναγνωστών της Lifo σχετικά με τη Χρυσή Αυγή 823

Ελένη Παπαδοπούλου Η συνδυαστικότητα υποκοριστικών επιθημάτων με β συνθετικό το επίθημα -άκι στον διαλεκτικό λόγο 839

Στέλιος Πιπερίδης Πένυ Λαμπροπούλου amp Μαρία Γαβριηλίδου clarinel Υποδομή τεκμηρίωσης διαμοιρασμού και επεξεργασίας γλωσσικών δεδομένων 851

Maria Pontiki Opinion Mining and Target Extraction in Greek Review Texts 871

Anna Roussou The duality of mipos 885

Stathis Selimis amp Demetra Katis Reference to static space in Greek A cross-linguistic and developmental perspective of poster descriptions 897

Evi Sifaki amp George Tsoulas XP-V orders in Greek 911

Konstantinos Sipitanos On desiderative constructions in Naousa dialect 923

Eleni Staraki Future in Greek A Degree Expression 935

χριστίνα Τακούδα amp Ευανθία Παπαευθυμίου Συγκριτικές διδακτικές πρακτικές στη διδασκαλία της ελληνικής ως Γ2 από την κριτική παρατήρηση στην αναπλαισίωση 945

Alexandros Tantos Giorgos Chatziioannidis Katerina lykou Meropi Papatheohari Antonia Samara amp Kostas vlachos Corpus C58 and the interface between intra- and inter-sentential linguistic information 961

Arhonto Terzi amp vina TsakaliΤhe contribution of Greek SE in the development of locatives 977

Paraskevi ThomouConceptual and lexical aspects influencing metaphor realization in Modern Greek 993

Nina Topintzi amp Stuart Davis Features and Asymmetries of Edge Geminates 1007

liana Tronci At the lexicon-syntax interface Ancient Greek constructions with ἔχειν and psychological nouns 1021

Βίλλυ Τσάκωνα laquoΔημοκρατία είναι 4 λύκοι και 1 πρόβατο να ψηφίζουν για φαγητόraquoΑναλύοντας τα ανέκδοτα για τουςτις πολιτικούς στην οικονομική κρίση 1035

Ειρήνη Τσαμαδού- Jacoberger amp Μαρία ΖέρβαΕκμάθηση ελληνικών στο Πανεπιστήμιο Στρασβούργου κίνητρα και αναπαραστάσεις 1051

Stavroula Tsiplakou amp Spyros Armostis Do dialect variants (mis)behave Evidence from the Cypriot Greek koine 1065

Αγγελική Τσόκογλου amp Σύλα Κλειδή Συζητώντας τις δομές σε -οντας 1077

Αλεξιάννα Τσότσου Η μεθοδολογική προσέγγιση της εικόνας της Γερμανίας στις ελληνικές εφημερίδες 1095

Anastasia Tzilinis Begruumlndendes Handeln im neugriechischen Wissenschaftlichen Artikel Die Situierung des eigenen Beitrags im Forschungszusammenhang 1109

Kυριακούλα Τζωρτζάτου Aργύρης Αρχάκης Άννα Ιορδανίδου amp Γιώργος Ι Ξυδόπουλος Στάσεις απέναντι στην ορθογραφία της Κοινής Νέας Ελληνικής Ζητήματα ερευνητικού σχεδιασμού 1123

Nicole vassalou Dimitris Papazachariou amp Mark Janse The Vowel System of Mišoacutetika Cappadocian 1139

Marina vassiliou Angelos Georgaras Prokopis Prokopidis amp Haris Papageorgiou Co-referring or not co-referring Answer the question 1155

Jeroen vis The acquisition of Ancient Greek vocabulary 1171

Christos vlachos Mod(aliti)es of lifting wh-questions 1187

Ευαγγελία Βλάχου amp Κατερίνα Φραντζή Μελέτη της χρήσης των ποσοδεικτών λίγο-λιγάκι σε κείμενα πολιτικού λόγου 1201

Madeleine voga Τι μας διδάσκουν τα ρήματα της ΝΕ σχετικά με την επεξεργασία της μορφολογίας 1213

Werner voigtlaquoΣεληνάκι μου λαμπρό φέγγε μου να περπατώ hellipraquo oder warum es in dem bekannten lied nicht so sondern eben φεγγαράκι heiszligt und ngr φεγγάρι 1227

Μαρία Βραχιονίδου Υποκοριστικά επιρρήματα σε νεοελληνικές διαλέκτους και ιδιώματα 1241

Jeroen van de Weijer amp Marina TzakostaThe Status of Complex in Greek 1259

Theodoros Xioufis The pattern of the metaphor within metonymy in the figurative language of romantic love in modern Greek 1275

FEATURE EXTRACTIoN AND ANAlYSIS IN GREEK | 357

FEATURE EXTR ACTIoN AND ANAlYSIS IN GREEK l2 TEXT S IN vIEW oF AUToMATIC l ABElING FoR

PRoFICIENCY lEvElSMaria Giagkou1 Giorgos Fragkakis Dimitris Pappas1 amp Harris Papageorgiou1

1Institute for language and Speech Processing RC ATHENAmgiagkouilspgr fragakisschgr dpappasilspgr xarisilspgr

Περίληψη

Στο άρθρο διερευνάται ένα σύνολο γλωσσικών χαρακτηριστικών κειμένων που απευθύνο-νται σε μαθητές της Ελληνικής ως Γ2 και εξετάζεται η σχέση των εν λόγω χαρακτηριστικών με το επίπεδο γλωσσομάθειας για το οποίο θεωρούνται κατάλληλα τα κείμενα αυτά Στόχος είναι να διερευνηθεί ποια χαρακτηριστικά παρουσιάζουν επαρκή διακριτική ικανότητα μετα-ξύ των επιπέδων ώστε να αξιοποιηθούν σε μια προσέγγιση αυτόματης κατηγοριοποίησης σε επίπεδα γλωσσομάθειας Προς αυτό το σκοπό αξιοποιείται ένα σώμα κειμένων που συγκρο-τήθηκε από εγχειρίδια της Ελληνικής ως Γ2 Τα αποτελέσματα αναδεικνύουν τη σημαντική επίδραση μεταξύ άλλων χαρακτηριστικών που ποσοτικοποιούν την περιπλοκότητα των συντακτικών δέντρων εξαρτήσεων της γενικής πτώσης και των επιθετικών προσδιορισμών

Keywords L2 reading text complexity linguistic features proficiency levels automatic label-ling

1 introduction

The last two decades have seen increasing interest in modelling text difficulty ie read-ability Automatic readability estimation systems are intended to assess whether a text retrieved from a large collection such as a repository or the web is appropriate for a given group of readers according to their abilities in l1 or by taking into account the

358 | GIAGKoU ET Al

readersrsquo special needs (eg learning difficulties) Readability estimation is particularly relevant for second language (l2) learners as well From the l2 perspective the aim is to automatically identify or retrieve a text given the proficiency level of the learner or group of learners

To this end recent studies attempt to grade l2 texts according to proficiency levels in order to facilitate reading in l2 or as an aid to the selection of assessment material (eg Centre for the Greek language 2013 Tzimokas and Tantos 2014 Franccedilois and Fairon 2012 ott and Meurers 2010 Pilaacuten et al 2014 vajjala and Meurers 2012) In a similar approach the development of productive skills in l2 (mainly writing) is investigated in view of an automated evaluation of l2 writing (eg lu 2010 2011 vyatkina 2012 Giagkou et al 2015)

The long tradition of l1 readability assessment dating back to the early 20th cen-tury (see DuBay 2006) has bequeathed readability formulas (eg Flesch Reading Ease Score Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level Fog index SMOG etc) that assign a difficulty grade or level to a text by relying on surface linguistic features such as sentence and word length as simple proxies for syntactic complexity and vocabulary burden re-spectively More recently advances in NlP have boosted readability research That is new resources (electronically available texts) and new tools (taggers parsers semantic treebanks etc) have made it feasible to apply machine learning techniques in large training corpora and to quantify more thorough and linguistically sound text features Semantic and discourse features are investigated eg named entities (Barzilay amp lapa-ta 2008) and lexical cohesion (Pitler amp Nenkova 2008) Shallow syntactic complexity indicators such as average sentence length are combined with the height of syntactic trees (see also Heilman et al 2008) Instead of simple proxies of vocabulary burden N-gram language Models (lM) are used for predicting the grade level of texts (Callan and Eskenazi 2007 Petersen amp ostendorf 2009 Schwarm and ostendorf 2005)

In this paper we present an investigation of linguistic features of texts addressed to learners of Greek as a second language (l2) The goal of this study is to identify the textual properties that indicate the development of reading skills in Greek l2 with the aim of employing these properties as parameters for automatic proficiency level labelling The set of features investigated in the current study draws on the traditional readability research combined with NlP-enabled features and machine learning tech-niques for text classification as this merging was found to result in performance gain (Franccedilois amp Miltsakaki 2012)


The paper is organized as follows Section 2 provides information on the corpus used and the features identified selected and computed in order to form the dataset for the analysis In Section 3 the analysis applied on the features is presented and the results are analyzed We conclude with a summary of the main findings and their implications to the directions of future work in view of automatic proficiency level classification for Greek l2

2 datasets

21 Corpus

For the purposes of this investigation a Greek l2 text set that is labelled for proficiency levels in an objective and qualified way and can thus be considered as gold-standard deemed necessary Such dataset was retrieved from the Greek l2 textbooks published by the Centre of Intercultural and Migration Studies (EDIAMME) and freely avail-able online These textbooks are addressed to Greek migrants living abroad from pre-schoolers (aged 6) to 18 year-olds learning Greek as a second or foreign language EDIAMME employs five proficiency levels aligned to the Greek educational system grades and to CEFR levels (Council of Europe 2001) as presented in Table 1

Age school grade ediAMMe level

Language content

cefr level alignment

6 Preschool1 Pre-reading

reading A17 18 29 3

2Speaking and writing consolidation

A210 4

11 53

Further practice in speaking and writing

B112 6

13 74 Independent

writing B2 amp C114 815 9

360 | GIAGKoU ET Al

Table 1 | EDIAMME proficiency levels (Damanakis 2004 76) and their alignment to CEFR levels (EDIAMME 2014)

only prose texts were extracted from the textbooks while poems lyrics exercises and guidelines to the exercises were excluded The selected texts belong to different gen-res (mainly narrative descriptive expository and procedural) and types (letters an-nouncements instructions diary entry etc) Dialogues were also included as they are very frequently used as educational material in l2 textbooks though the rolename of the speaker was removed

The final corpus employed in this investigation comprises 753 texts and a total of 112169 tokens (Table 2) Each individual text inherited the proficiency level assigned to the textbook it was retrieved from eg a text drawn from a textbook labeled as level 5 was considered as addressed to level 5 learners1

grouped levels

ediAMMe levels

texts sentences tokens

1 (CEFR A1-A2)

1 24 136 720

2 295 4552 33636

2 (CEFR B1-C1)

3 108 1263 8780

4 147 2305 19272

3 (CEFR C2) 5 179 3356 49761totals 753 11612 112169

Table 2 | Corpus description

1 It should be noted that this decision imposes a degree of ldquonoiserdquo to the data as although a low level textbook is not expected to include a text addressed to higher levels the reverse is not equally unlikely Eg certain texts retrieved from a level 5 textbook can actually address lower level learners

16 105 Greek language

and literature C217 1118 12


The texts were automatically annotated for morphological types syntactic dependen-cies and phrase structure using the Institute for language and Speech Processing NlP tools pipeline (Prokopidis et al 2011 Prokopidis and Papageorgiou 2014)

22 Feature selection and computation

The set of features investigated as indices of the proficiency level was selected on the basis of previous research on l1 and l2 readability assessment as well as on second language acquisition and development These features capture morphological syntac-tic lexicalsemantic and other attributes of the text that are salient to the target profi-ciency level discrimination and prediction task

In total 303 text features were identified and computed These fall grossly into the following categories

a) surface features word and sentence length (eg average word length) num-ber of characters punctuation marks numbers etc

b) Lexicalsemantic lexical density (ie content to functional words) lexical var-iation (eg typetoken ratio hapaxdis-legomena) including noun and verb variation measures text entropy lexical richness etc

c) Morphological frequencies and ratios of the different parts of speech includ-ing their forms eg ratio of passive verbs to verbs ratio of nouns in the geni-tive case to nouns ratio of 1st person personal pronouns to pronouns etc

d) syntactic frequencies and ratios of the different syntactic roles (eg subjects to verbs ratio) measures of the dependency trees (eg depth and height of syn-tactic trees) phrase structure (eg length of noun verb and adjectival phras-es) subordination and apposition (eg average number of coordinating and subordinating conjunctions per sentence) etc

e) discourse-based features eg use of relative pronouns as an index of the degree of anaphora density frequency of present and past tenses as indices of temporality and narrativity etc

The defined features were computed with a specialized software the IlSP FeatExt tool developed in Python The input of FeatExt is any corpus of Greek texts automatically annotated for Part of Speech syntactic dependencies and phrase structure It calcu-lates the values of raw surface features (frequencies of words sentences nouns verbs

362 | GIAGKoU ET Al

etc) and computes their standardized values (ie meaningful ratios) In order to cater for zero values MinMaxScaler transformation is applied to all raw features The output is a table of extracted feature values preferably in CSv format Settings can be modi-fied through an optional configuration file to define among others the set of features to be computed the corpus location or additional feature-relevant data such as a list of words to be counted (eg functional words basic vocabulary for a specific proficiency level or topic etc)

3 Analysis and results

In order to investigate the underlying associations of text features with the profi-ciency level correlation analysis was applied between all the extracted features and the grouped proficiency levels Table 3 reports the twenty features that exhibited the highest absolute values of Spearmanrsquo s rho correlation coefficient in descending order (plt005)

Among the best performing features the average number of noun phrases in the genitive case per sentence was found to exhibit the highest correlation coefficient (rho=0542) The association of the genitive case with the textrsquo s level is also evidenced by the performance of two more features ie the average number of adjectival phras-es in the genitive case per sentence (rho=0473) and the average length of adjectival phrases in the gen case (rho=0448) Complementing and looking at these results from a different angle the influence of phrase structure especially of the length and relative frequency of nominal phrases is apparent out of the 20 best performing features six are indices of phrase structure (features in ranks 1 6 8 12 15 and 16 in Table 3) The frequency of use of modifiers namely of adjectives also seems to be highly correlated to the proficiency level the more adjectives used in a text the more likely it is that the text is addressed to higher level learners This is evidenced by the average number of adjectival phrases and of adjectives per sentence

Another important finding is highlighted by the performance of features that at-tempt to quantify syntactic dependencies These include the width and height of de-pendency trees (rho=0495 and 0486 respectively) as well as the number of leafs and governor nodes (rho=0490 and 0485 respectively) Their emergence in the top ranks of Table 3 qualifies them as key predictors of the proficiency level


Table 3 | Top-20 features highly correlated with EDIAMME grouped levels and post hoc multiple comparisons between level-pairs

feature spearmanrsquo s rho

ediAMMe grouped level-pairs1vs2 2vs3 1vs3

1 Av of Noun Phrases in gen case per sentence

0542

2 Av Width of dependency trees 0495

3 Av of leafs in dependency trees 0490

4 Av Height of dependency trees 0486

5 Av Sentence length 0485

6 Av of Adjectival Phrases per sentence 0485

7 Av of governor nodes in dependency trees 0485

8 Av of Noun Phrases per sentence 0480

9 of sentences with lengthgt20 words 0477

10 Av of Adjectives per sentence 0474

11 Av Word length 0474

12 Av of Adjectival Phrases in gen case per sentence

0473


14 Terminal punctuation to total characters ratio

-0461

15 Av length of adjectival phrases in gen case

0448

16 Av of Adjectival Phrases in acc case per sentence

0446


18 Av of Passive verbs per sentence 0442

19 Relative pronouns to Pronouns ratio 0439

20 Av of prepositions per sentence 0438

364 | GIAGKoU ET Al

Different aspects of syntactic complexity are also highlighted by the average number of passive verbs and prepositions per sentence As expected passive constructions are rarely used in lower levels while learners encounter them more and more frequently in textbooks as their reading skills develop The same is true for prepositions a feature that indicates that higher proficiency level texts employ more complex-compound sentences

The statistically significant correlation performed by the ratio of relative pronouns to pronouns (rho=0439) signifies the role of anaphora As anaphora resolution is considered a linguistically and cognitively demanding task during reading anaphoric structures are rare in lower levels but significantly more frequent in upper levels As a result the use of relative pronouns can be considered as a successful discriminator of proficiency levels

The list of the best performing features also includes some more ldquotraditionalrdquo indices of text complexity such as word and sentence length The average sentence length ap-pears in rank 5 in Table 3 (rho=0485) while relevant features that quantify sentence length from a different perspective are also present (the percentage of sentences with more than 10 20 and 30 words) Additionally the presence of the ratio of terminal punctuation to total characters should be also interpreted as an inverse to sentence length Regarding lexical features it is noticeable that among the various features in-vestigated (lexical diversity density etc) only the average word length is present in the top performers (rho=0474)

A more thorough investigation of the above features employed one-way ANovA for means comparison across levels which resulted in statistically significant main effects for all of the 20 features Since however this type of analysis cannot determine whether the mean values of a feature are statistically different between all possible level pairs post-hoc multiple comparisons (Bonferroni tests) were also applied The results are presented in Table 3 statistically different means for each feature are indicated for each level combination separately These comparisons indicate that all features can successfully discriminate group 3 (ie EDIAMME level 5 CEFR C2) from lower levels (both from group 2 and group 1) However some of the features were not as successful in discriminating group 1 (ie EDIAMME levels 1 and 2 CEFR A1 A2) from group 2 (ie EDIAMME levels 3 4 CEFR B1-C1) Poor performers in discriminating levels group 1 from group 2 were all the features relevant to sentence length with the excep-tion of the proportion of sentences with more than 20 words This implies that a group 1 text is unlikely to include lengthier sentences thus imposing a possible threshold for the transition from CEFR A2 to B1 level


4 conclusions and discussion

The current investigation highlighted a number of textual features automatically ex-tracted from a morphologically and syntactically annotated Greek l2 corpus With the aim of identifying indices of text difficulty that are directly associated with the proficiency level we employed statistical analysis and put forward the best perform-ing features These can be regarded as potential predictors of the proficiency level of a previously unseen text in an automatic labellingclassification approach

The results highlight the influence of syntactic features on the characterization of proficiency level with the exception of average word length the rest of the best per-forming features are directly or indirectly related to syntactic complexity This finding is in line with previous research where syntax-related features consistently appear in the best-performing prediction models (eg Pitler and Nenkova 2008 Schwarm and ostendorf 2005 Callan and Eskenazi 2007 Kate et al 2010 Kotani et al 2008) The frequencies of the genitive case of adjectives and prepositions were additionally iden-tified as successful discriminators Surface features used in traditional readability for-mulas such as sentence and word length were found to be significantly correlated to proficiency levels Similar recent research in Greek has also highlighted the influence of such surface features on proficiency level classification (Tzimokas and Tantos 2014) It is interesting to notice that some of the features put forward by Georgatou (2016) as the most informative ie sentence length passive verbs and adjectives are confirmed by the current study as well thus qualifying them as reliable of indices of Greek texts difficulty level

When the best performing features were tested for their discriminatory power be-tween all possible level pairs they proved to be highly discriminative of the upper proficiency level This finding implies a significant shift in l2 reading skills during the transition from C1 to C2 level and this shift can successfully be measured by the fea-tures investigated herein on the contrary the transition from A2 to B1 seems to go in hand with the acquisition of language skills not depicted in the features that emerged from the current analysis

It is true that the current investigation is subject to limitations imposed by the corpus at hand which comprised texts drawn from textbooks of a single publisher As such the findings may be influenced by the publisherrsquo s choices regarding the types and top-ics of texts and the linguistic descriptors of proficiency levels the editor has adopted To cater for this limitation the work described herein is continued and expanded in

366 | GIAGKoU ET Al

order to exploit a larger corpus of Greek l2 texts from different publishers Proficiency level labelling for this expanded corpus does not rely exclusively on the publisherrsquo s labelling Rather three independent experts in Greek l2 teaching have judged each text to determine the CEFR proficiency level The expertrsquo s judgements is treated as the dependent variable in a machine learning approach for the automatic labelling of previously unseen texts which has already yielded significant results

Reading comprehension is a key skill in l2 development and reading is an inte-gral part of l2 instruction and assessment In this view an automated approach to matching l2 learners to texts suitable for their proficiency level is expected to facilitate selection of reading material both for learners and teachers It is at the same time an anticipated aid in assessment procedures by providing an objective measurement for the estimation of level-appropriateness of items included in diagnostic placement or achievement language tests

references

Barzilay Regina and Mirella lapata 2008 ldquoModeling local Coherence An Entity-based Approachrdquo Computational Linguistics 34(1)1ndash34

Centre for the Greek language 2013 ldquologismiko Anagnosimotitasrdquo Accessed March 1 2017 httpwwwgreek-languagegrcertificationreadabi-lity

Council of Europe 2001 Common European Framework of Reference for Languages Learning Teaching Assessment (CEFR) wwwcoeintlang-CEFR

Damanakis Michalis ed 2004 Theoritiko Plaisio kai Programmata Spoudon gia tin Elli-noglossi Ekpaideusi sti Diaspora Rethymno EDIAMME httpwwwediammeedcuocgrdiaspora2indexphpid=23650010

DuBay William H 2006 The Classic Readability Studies Impact Information Costa Mesa California

EDIAMME 2014 Epipeda Glossomatheias kai Ekpaideutiko Yliko httpwwwediammeedcuocgrellinoglossiindexphpelekp-yliko-kepa

Franccedilois Thomas and Ceacutedrick Fairon 2012 ldquoAn ldquoAI readabilityrdquo Formula for French as a Foreign languagerdquo In Proceedings of the 2012 Joint Con-


ference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Computational Natural Language Learning 466ndash477 Association for Computational linguistics

Franccedilois Thomas and Eleni Miltsakaki 2012 ldquoDo NlP and Machine learning Im-prove Traditional Readability Formulasrdquo In Proceedings of the First Workshop on Predicting and improving text readabil-ity for target reader populations 49ndash57 Montreacuteal

Georgatou Spyridoula 2016 ldquoApproaching Readability Features in Greek School Booksrdquo Master thesis University of Tuumlbingen

Giagkou Maria Kantzou vicky Stamouli Spyridoula and Maria Tzevelekou 2015 ldquoDiscriminating CEFR levels in Greek l2 A Corpus-based Study of Young learnersrsquo Written Narrativesrdquo Bergen Lan-guage and Linguistics Studies 6153ndash169

Heilman Michael Kevyn Collins-Thompson and Maxine Eskenazi 2008 ldquoAn Ana-lysis of Statistical Models and Features for Reading Difficulty Predictionrdquo In The Third Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for building Educational Applications Proceedings of the Work-shop 71ndash79 ACl

Callan Jamie and Maxine Eskenazi 2007 ldquoCombining lexical and Grammati-cal Features to Improve Readability Measures for First and Second language Textsrdquo In Proceedings of HLT-NAACLrsquo07 460ndash467 Association for Computational linguistics

lu Xiaofei 2010 ldquoAutomatic Analysis of Syntactic Complexity in Second lan-guage Writingrdquo International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 15(4)474ndash496

lu Xiaofei 2011 ldquoA Corpus-Based Evaluation of Syntactic Complexity Measures as Indices of College-level ESl Writersrsquo language Develop-mentrdquo TESOL Quarterly 45(1)36ndash62

ott Niels and Detmar Meurers 2010 ldquoInformation Retrieval for Education Making Search Engines language Awarerdquo Themes in Science and Tech-nology Education 3(1ndash2)9ndash30

Petersen Sarah E and Mari ostendorf 2009 ldquoA Machine learning Approach to Reading level Assessmentrdquo Computer Speech and Language 23(1)89ndash106

Pilaacuten Ildikoacute volodina Elena and Richard Johansson 2014 ldquoRule-Based and Ma-chine learning Approaches for Second language Sentence-level Readabilityrdquo In Proceedings of the Ninth Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications 174ndash184 Association for Computational linguistics

Pitler Emily and Ani Nenkova 2008 ldquoRevisiting Readability A Unified Framework

368 | GIAGKoU ET Al

for Predicting Text Qualityrdquo In Proceedings of the 2008 Con-ference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing 186ndash195 Honolulu ACl

Prokopidis Prokopis and Harris Papageorgiou 2014 ldquoExperiments for Dependency Parsing of Greekrdquo In Proceedings of the First Joint Workshop on Statistical Parsing of Morphologically Rich Languages and Syntactic Analysis of Non-Canonical Languages 90ndash96 Dub-lin Ireland

Prokopidis Prokopis Georgantopoulos Byron and Harris Papageorgiou 2011 ldquoA suite of NlP tools for Greekrdquo In The 10 th International Confer-ence of Greek Linguistics 373ndash383 Komotini Greece

Schwarm Sarah E and Mari ostendorf 2005 ldquoReading level Assessment Using Sup port vector Machines and Statistical language Modelsrdquo In Proceed-ings of the 43 rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computa-tional Linguistics (ACLrsquo05) 523ndash530 Ann Arbor Michigan

Tzimokas Dimitrios and Sotirios Tantos 2014 ldquologismiko Anagnosimotitas Ellinikon Keimenon Ena Neo Ergaleio gia ti Didaskalia tis Ellinikis os KsenisDeuteris Glossas kai tin Pistopoiisi Ellinomatheiasrdquo Paper presented at Diethnes Synedrio gia ti Didaskalia kai tin Pistopoiisi tis Ellinikis os KsenisDeuteris Glossas Thessaloniki october 25 httpspeakgreekgrelimagespdftzimwkaspdf

vajjala Sowmya and Detmar Meurers 2012 ldquoon Improving the Accuracy of Reada-bility Classification Using Insights from Second language Ac-quisitionrdquo In Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Building Educational Applications Using NLP 163ndash173 Association for Computational linguistics

vyatkina Nina 2012 ldquoThe Development of Second language Writing Complexity in Groups and Individuals A longitudinal learner Corpus Studyrdquo The Modern Language Journal 96(4)576ndash598

thanasis georgakopoulos theodossia-soula Pavlidou Miltos Pechlivanos Artemis Alexiadou Jannis Androutsopoulos Alexis Kalokairinos stavros skopeteas Katerina stathi (eds)

Proceedings of the 12th internAtionAL conference on greeK Linguistics

Πρακτικα του 12ου συνεδριου ελληνικησ γλωσσολογιασ

vol 1























































2ος Τόμος
















































Περίληψη



1 introduction


358 | GIAGKoU ET Al







2 datasets

21 Corpus



Language content



reading A17 18 29 3


A210 4

11 53


B112 6

13 74 Independent


360 | GIAGKoU ET Al




grouped levels

ediAMMe levels


1 (CEFR A1-A2)

1 24 136 720

2 295 4552 33636

2 (CEFR B1-C1)

3 108 1263 8780

4 147 2305 19272

3 (CEFR C2) 5 179 3356 49761totals 753 11612 112169
















362 | GIAGKoU ET Al











0542












0473



-0461


0448


0446





364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al






























































2ος Τόμος
















































Περίληψη



1 introduction


358 | GIAGKoU ET Al







2 datasets

21 Corpus



Language content



reading A17 18 29 3


A210 4

11 53


B112 6

13 74 Independent


360 | GIAGKoU ET Al




grouped levels

ediAMMe levels


1 (CEFR A1-A2)

1 24 136 720

2 295 4552 33636

2 (CEFR B1-C1)

3 108 1263 8780

4 147 2305 19272

3 (CEFR C2) 5 179 3356 49761totals 753 11612 112169
















362 | GIAGKoU ET Al











0542












0473



-0461


0448


0446





364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al



















































Περίληψη



1 introduction


358 | GIAGKoU ET Al







2 datasets

21 Corpus



Language content



reading A17 18 29 3


A210 4

11 53


B112 6

13 74 Independent


360 | GIAGKoU ET Al




grouped levels

ediAMMe levels


1 (CEFR A1-A2)

1 24 136 720

2 295 4552 33636

2 (CEFR B1-C1)

3 108 1263 8780

4 147 2305 19272

3 (CEFR C2) 5 179 3356 49761totals 753 11612 112169
















362 | GIAGKoU ET Al











0542












0473



-0461


0448


0446





364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al








358 | GIAGKoU ET Al







2 datasets

21 Corpus



Language content



reading A17 18 29 3


A210 4

11 53


B112 6

13 74 Independent


360 | GIAGKoU ET Al




grouped levels

ediAMMe levels


1 (CEFR A1-A2)

1 24 136 720

2 295 4552 33636

2 (CEFR B1-C1)

3 108 1263 8780

4 147 2305 19272

3 (CEFR C2) 5 179 3356 49761totals 753 11612 112169
















362 | GIAGKoU ET Al











0542












0473



-0461


0448


0446





364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al










2 datasets

21 Corpus



Language content



reading A17 18 29 3


A210 4

11 53


B112 6

13 74 Independent


360 | GIAGKoU ET Al




grouped levels

ediAMMe levels


1 (CEFR A1-A2)

1 24 136 720

2 295 4552 33636

2 (CEFR B1-C1)

3 108 1263 8780

4 147 2305 19272

3 (CEFR C2) 5 179 3356 49761totals 753 11612 112169
















362 | GIAGKoU ET Al











0542












0473



-0461


0448


0446





364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al








360 | GIAGKoU ET Al




grouped levels

ediAMMe levels


1 (CEFR A1-A2)

1 24 136 720

2 295 4552 33636

2 (CEFR B1-C1)

3 108 1263 8780

4 147 2305 19272

3 (CEFR C2) 5 179 3356 49761totals 753 11612 112169
















362 | GIAGKoU ET Al











0542












0473



-0461


0448


0446





364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al



















362 | GIAGKoU ET Al











0542












0473



-0461


0448


0446





364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al













0542












0473



-0461


0448


0446





364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al








364 | GIAGKoU ET Al











366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al














366 | GIAGKoU ET Al



references





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al





















368 | GIAGKoU ET Al








Proceedings of the icgL12 - fu-berlin.de

Documents

Transcript of Proceedings of the icgL12 - fu-berlin.de