The Taxonomy of Writing Systems: How to Measure How Logographic a System Is

IF 3.7 2区 计算机科学 Q2 COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Computational Linguistics Pub Date : 2021-06-30 DOI:10.1162/coli_a_00409
R. Sproat, Alexander Gutkin
{"title":"The Taxonomy of Writing Systems: How to Measure How Logographic a System Is","authors":"R. Sproat, Alexander Gutkin","doi":"10.1162/coli_a_00409","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Taxonomies of writing systems since Gelb (1952) have classified systems based on what the written symbols represent: if they represent words or morphemes, they are logographic; if syllables, syllabic; if segments, alphabetic; and so forth. Sproat (2000) and Rogers (2005) broke with tradition by splitting the logographic and phonographic aspects into two dimensions, with logography being graded rather than a categorical distinction. A system could be syllabic, and highly logographic; or alphabetic, and mostly non-logographic. This accords better with how writing systems actually work, but neither author proposed a method for measuring logography. In this article we propose a novel measure of the degree of logography that uses an attention-based sequence-to-sequence model trained to predict the spelling of a token from its pronunciation in context. In an ideal phonographic system, the model should need to attend to only the current token in order to compute how to spell it, and this would show in the attention matrix activations. In contrast, with a logographic system, where a given pronunciation might correspond to several different spellings, the model would need to attend to a broader context. The ratio of the activation outside the token and the total activation forms the basis of our measure. We compare this with a simple lexical measure, and an entropic measure, as well as several other neural models, and argue that on balance our attention-based measure accords best with intuition about how logographic various systems are. Our work provides the first quantifiable measure of the notion of logography that accords with linguistic intuition and, we argue, provides better insight into what this notion means.","PeriodicalId":55229,"journal":{"name":"Computational Linguistics","volume":"47 1","pages":"1-52"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computational Linguistics","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00409","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Taxonomies of writing systems since Gelb (1952) have classified systems based on what the written symbols represent: if they represent words or morphemes, they are logographic; if syllables, syllabic; if segments, alphabetic; and so forth. Sproat (2000) and Rogers (2005) broke with tradition by splitting the logographic and phonographic aspects into two dimensions, with logography being graded rather than a categorical distinction. A system could be syllabic, and highly logographic; or alphabetic, and mostly non-logographic. This accords better with how writing systems actually work, but neither author proposed a method for measuring logography. In this article we propose a novel measure of the degree of logography that uses an attention-based sequence-to-sequence model trained to predict the spelling of a token from its pronunciation in context. In an ideal phonographic system, the model should need to attend to only the current token in order to compute how to spell it, and this would show in the attention matrix activations. In contrast, with a logographic system, where a given pronunciation might correspond to several different spellings, the model would need to attend to a broader context. The ratio of the activation outside the token and the total activation forms the basis of our measure. We compare this with a simple lexical measure, and an entropic measure, as well as several other neural models, and argue that on balance our attention-based measure accords best with intuition about how logographic various systems are. Our work provides the first quantifiable measure of the notion of logography that accords with linguistic intuition and, we argue, provides better insight into what this notion means.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
书写系统的分类学:如何衡量一个系统的语源性
自Gelb(1952)以来,书写系统的分类法基于书写符号所代表的内容对系统进行了分类:如果它们代表单词或语素,它们是语域的;若音节,则音节;如果分段,按字母顺序;等等。spproat(2000)和Rogers(2005)打破了传统,将音标学和音标学分成两个维度,音标学被分级而不是分类区分。一个系统可以是音节式的,并且是高度符号化的;或者是按字母顺序排列的,而且大部分都是非按符号排列的。这更符合书写系统的实际工作方式,但两位作者都没有提出衡量文字的方法。在这篇文章中,我们提出了一种新的标记程度测量方法,该方法使用基于注意力的序列到序列模型来训练,从上下文中的发音来预测标记的拼写。在理想的留声机系统中,模型应该只需要关注当前的符号,以便计算如何拼写它,这将在注意矩阵激活中显示出来。相比之下,对于一个给定的发音可能对应于几个不同的拼写的符号系统,该模型将需要关注更广泛的上下文。令牌外的激活与总激活的比率构成了我们测量的基础。我们将其与简单的词汇测量、熵测量以及其他几个神经模型进行了比较,并认为,总的来说,我们基于注意力的测量最符合直觉对不同系统的表征。我们的工作提供了符合语言学直觉的第一个可量化的符号概念测量,我们认为,它提供了更好的洞察这个概念的含义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Computational Linguistics
Computational Linguistics 工程技术-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
15.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Computational Linguistics, the longest-running publication dedicated solely to the computational and mathematical aspects of language and the design of natural language processing systems, provides university and industry linguists, computational linguists, AI and machine learning researchers, cognitive scientists, speech specialists, and philosophers with the latest insights into the computational aspects of language research.
期刊最新文献
Generation and Polynomial Parsing of Graph Languages with Non-Structural Reentrancies Languages through the Looking Glass of BPE Compression Capturing Fine-Grained Regional Differences in Language Use through Voting Precinct Embeddings Machine Learning for Ancient Languages: A Survey Statistical Methods for Annotation Analysis by Silviu Paun, Ron Artstein, and Massimo Poesio
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1