Word Manager. A System for the Definition, Access and
Maintenance of Lexical Databases
Marc DOMENIG
I n s t i t u t ffir Informatik
Universitt~t Zfirich-Irchel
CH-8057 Zfirich
Swi~erland
Abstract
This paper describes Word Manager, a system which
is c u r r e n t l y the object of a r e s e a r c h project at the
University of Zfirich C o m p u t e r Science D e p a r t m e n t .
Word M a n a g e r s u p p o r t s the definition, access a n d
m a i n t e n a n c e of lexical d a t a b a s e s . It c o m p r i s e s a
f o r m a l l a n g u a g e for t h e i m p l e m e n a t i o n
of
morphological knowledge. This formal l a n g u a g e is
i n t e g r a t e d i n a g r a p h i c s - o r i e n t e d , high-level u s e r
Interface a n d is language independent. The project is
n o w i n the p r o t o t y p i n g p h a s e where p a r t s of the
software are pretty far a d v a n c e d (the u s e r interface)
a n d . o t h e r s are s t i l l r u d i m e n t a r y
(the r u l e
c o m p i l c r / r u n t i m e system). The design of the system
was s t r o n g l y i n f l u e n c e d b y K o s k e n n i e m i ' s two-level
model / K o s k e n n i e m i 1 9 8 3 / , its s u c c e s s o r s / B e a r
1986/, /Black 1986/, /Borin 1986/, /Darymple
1987/, the ANSI-SPARC 3 - S c h e m a Concept /ANSIX3-SPARC 1 9 7 5 / a n d visual p r o g r a m m i n g t e c h n i q u e s
/ B o c k e r 1 9 8 6 / , / M y e r s 1 9 8 6 / : We will focus the
d i s c u s s i o n on one aspect: the user interfacing for the
construction of the lexlcal data base.
I. Introduction
As i have argued elsewhere / D o m e n i g 1986, 1987a,
1 9 8 7 b / , a dedicated s y s t e m yields m a n y a d v a n t a g e s
for the i m p l e m e n t a t i o n , u s e a n d m a i n t e n a n c e of
lexical d a t a b a s e s . The f u n c t i o n a l i t y of g e n e r a l
p u r p o s e d a t a b a s e m a n a g e m e n t s y s t e m s - e.g.
relational ones - ls too limited for lexlcal d a t a b a s e s
b e c a u s e they are n o t t u n e d to the t a s k at h a n d ; In
particular, they do n o t provide for a formalism which
is s u i t e d to d e s c r i b e linguistic k n o w l e d g e . The
reason wily we would like to have s u c h a formalism is
t h a t it allows u s to take a d v a n t a g e of a c o m p u t e r ' s
p r o c e s s i n g abilities, i.e. we m a y c o n s t r u c t a lexieal
d a t a b a s e w h i c h is n o t only a collection of p u r e l y
'static' i n f o r m a t i o n - a set of e n t r i e s - b u t h a s
' d y n a m i c ~ capabilities. For instance, the latter m i g h t
be t h a t it c a n a n a l y s e a n d g e n e r a t e inflected or
composed word forms. "What would be the advantage
of that?" one might ask. "It is n o problem to add on
these capabilities to a p u r e l y 'static' set of e n t r i e s
stored w i t h i n a c o m m e r c i a l l y a v a i l a b l e database
m a n a g e m e n t system by writing programs i n the host
language to this systemI"
The a n s w e r is: there are a lot of advantages a n d
I hope to clarify some of t h e m i n this paper. A
dedicated s y s t e m s u p p o r t s the construction, u s e a n d
m a i n t e n a n c e of lexical d a t a b a s e s m u c h more directly
t h a n a general p u r p o s e d a t a b a s e m a n a g e m e n t system
in c o n j u n c t i o n with a c o n v e n t i o n a l p r o g r a m m i n g
154
language interface. Word Manager was designed as
s u c h a s y s t e m , w h e r e a s Word Manager does not
n e c e s s a r i l y m a n a g e all the i n f o r m a t i o n stored i n a
lexical d a t a b a s e . At this stage of the project, it
m a n a g e s only morphological knowledge, i.e. it would
be quite feasible to use it as a front-end to a database
m a n a g e d by a general purpose system.
2. Overview of the user interfacing
Word M a n a g e r d i s t i n g u i s h e s two q u i t e different
Interfaces for the c o n s t r u c t i o n a n d m a i n t e n a n c e of
lexical d a t a b a s e s : one for the specification of w h a t I
term conceptual knowledge (linguist interface) a n d
one for t h e s p e c i f i c a t i o n of w h a t I call n o n conceptual knowledge (lexicographer interface). The
former is the place where the kind of morphological
knowledge is defined which can be typically found In
g r a m m a r s , the latter is a dialogue-oriented interface
for the entering of the b u l k of the data.
The r e l a t i o n s h i p between the two Interfaces is
one of a s t r o n g d e p e n d e n c y , i.e. the lexicographer
interface d e p e n d s very m u c h o n the specifications In
t h e l i n g u i s t i n t e r f a c e . M u c h of the m a c h i n e lexicographer dialogue c a n be inferred a u t o m a t i c a l l y
from t h e s e specifications. The formalism employed
in the linguist interface was designed to be powerful
e n o u g h to i m p l e m e n t m o r p h o l o g i c a l knowledge of
s e v e r a l n a t u r a l l a n g u a g e s o n the one h a n d , yet
dedicated e n o u g h to be easy to h a n d l e for linguists.
Moreover, it provides the o p p o r t u n i t y to e x p e r i m e n t
with different conceptual approaches within a
c e r t a i n framework. The following section will oufline
it.
3. The specification of morphological knowledge in
the linguist interface
The l i n g u i s t i n t e r f a c e is conceived as a h i g h l y
controlled e n v i r o n m e n t which takes advantage of the
latest hard- a n d software technology. This m e a n s that
the u s e r does n o t c o m m u n i c a t e with the c o m p u t e r
on the level of its operating s y s t e m except for w h e n
the a p p l i c a t i o n is s t a r t e d . O n t h e level of t h e
operating system, each morphological knowledge
specification is r e p r e s e n t e d by a so-called document
/con (the two rightmost icons in Fig. 1 are d o c u m e n t
icons). By m o u s i n g s u c h a n icon, the u s e r m a y start
the a p p l i c a t i o n a n d load the specification stored in
the d o c u m e n t . Alternatively, he could s t a r t it b y
m o u s i n g the a p p l i c a t i o n Icon (the leftmost icon In
Fig. I is the application icon). Within the application
environment,
each document
(morphological
k n o w l e d g e specification) is r e p r e s e n t e d by a so-
Fig. I: The level of the operating system
@
Fi|e Compile
Fig. 2: The top level of the l i n ~ i s t interface application
called tool-window w h i c h c o n t a i n s eight labelled
c h e c k - b o n e s (see Fig. 2). E a c h of t h e s e c h e c k - b o x e s
r e p r e s e n t s a w i n d o w , t h e n a m e a n d p u r p o s e of
wh i ch is indicated by the labeh
The w i n d o w surface character set provides for
t h e definition of th e c h a r a c t e r set o u t of w h i c h socalled surface strings are built. Surfhce strings are
u s e d for the s u r f a c e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of word forms.
T h e w i n d o w is g r a p h i c s - o r i e n t e d , i.e. m o s t of t h e
definitions are done with mo u s e- and m e n u
c o m m a n d s (see Fig. 3).
T h e w i n d o w lexlcal character set provides for
t h e definition of th e c h a r a c t e r s e t o u t of w h i c h so~
called lexical stzlngs are built. Lexical s tr i n g s are
used to define linguistically motivated a b s t r a c t i o n s of
surface strings. The set is u s u a l l y defined to include
characters denoting morpheme boundaries and/or
m o r p h o p h o n e m e s . T h e window is ve~T similar to the
surface c h a r a c t e r set window.
T h e w i n d o w feature domains provides for the
d o m a i n s p e c i f i c a t i o n s of t h e attrlbute-value pairs
w h i c h a r e u s e d in t h e r u l e - a n d c o n s t i t u e n t
s p e c i f i c a t i o n s (see below). The w i n d o w is a textoriented editor. An examp~.e specification is sh ow n in
v~g. 4.
Cat;
Case
Genciar
hbn
(N V A ]? Q)
(NCH G%IN DAT ACC)
(M F N)
(S~ PL)
~lg. 4: E x a m p l e d e f i n i t i o n in windowjkature domains
The w i n d o w feature dependencies
provides
for the definition of d e p e n d e n c i e s b e t w e e n features.
/~m example specification is stiown in Fig. 5.
(Cat N)
demands
G~nder
Fig. 5: F~ample deflui¢ion in window feature
dependencies
155
.....
-0
0 i
2 8
,'< ,i,',.'iGorman:surface character set
4
5
7 8 9 A
8
P
specie/characters
C D E F
B
ti
p
""A O a q
B
R b
r
C
S c
s
character sort order
,___I~A.A a ~ B b C c O d IEo[~>{~[]
D T d t
E
U e
F
D f
I¢[
v
G Wg
A E A ae ~
OE 0 oe
ssB
w
H X
h
x
I
Y
i
y
J IZ
j
z
K
k
L
I
M
m
N
n
0
o
Ol
I I I~II
x
c
@
T h e G e r m a n surface ,,, --
i
.
v
I0~
comment
Ii°i°ol, r ,
¢
-----
UE 0 ue 0
i~
IIII ]r
.
,
ligature sort order
u
.
b
j
.
I.~ii
°l",I
o o o
k
m
,
:
.
........I l ill
Fig. 3: The window s u r f a c e c h a r a c t e r s e t
The w i n d o w two-level rules provides for the
d e f i n i t i o n of m o r p h o p h o n e m i c r u l e s which r e a l i z e
the m a p p i n g f u n c t i o n b e t w e e n the s u r f a c e - a n d
lexical strings. The rules specified here are similar to
those i n DKIMMO/TWOL / D a r y m p l e 1 9 8 7 / . T h e
w i n d o w is a t e x t - - o r i e n t e d e d i t o r . A n e x a m p l e
specification is s h o w n in Fig. 6 (the two rules h a n d l e
n o u n genitive [e]s: the first one replaces "+" by "e" as
in S t r a u s s e s , Reflexes, Reizes, the s e c o n d o n e
d u p l i c a t e s "s" as i n VerhtHtnisses, Verht~ngnisses,
Erschwernisses).
The window f u n c t i o n s
p r o v i d e s for t h e
d e t i n i t i o n of r u l e s for t h e k i n d of s t r i n g m a n i p u l a t i o n s which should n o t be realized with twolevel rules (because their power would be excessive
or they would imply the i n t r o d u c t i o n of linguistically
u n m o t i v a t e d m o r p h o p h o n e m e s ) . The w i n d o w is a
t e x t - o r i e n t e d editor. A n e x a m p l e s p e c i f i c a t i o n is
s h o w n in Fig. 7 (ReCap recapitalizes prefixed n o u n s ) .
ReCap
" (.*)A(.*)/\la\2"
" (.*) B (. *)/\Ib\2" value
..o
" (.*) Z (.*)/\iz\2" value
"^a(.*)/A\I"
"^z (.*)/Z\I" value
Fig. 7: Example definition in windowfunct/ons
'"'
(ICat N-ENDING)
".*"
"nis/niss" (ICat N-~qgING)
"+s/es"
"+s/es"
Fig. 6: Example definition in window two-level r u l e s
156
value
"^b (.*)/B\I" value
"o* [SXZ] " (ICat N-ROC~f)
{ICat N-ROOT)
value
(Case GEN)
(Case (~lq)
German:inflection
I
I
q|
~(IRule ÷[EIS/+E)
L~
(IRuie UMLAUT)
I
('""__'e
]
. . . . . .
,
I(c.t N)
i(ICat
i
u)
]
l(cot A)
l
I!
]
]
(Cat
N-SUFFIX)
Fig. 8: The window i~IjIeetion
c o n s t i t u e n t s for G e r m a n n o u n Inflection (only the top
b r a n c h (IRule UMLAUT) ls e x p a n d e d down to the
t e r m i n a l nodes). The t e r m i n a l n o d e s of the tree
c o n t a i n either r u l e s or c o n s t i t u e n t s . By m o u s i n g
t h e m , t h e u s e r m a y o p e n t e x t - o r i e n t e d editor
windows. An example of a rule is s h o w n in Fig. 9: it
consists of m a t c h i n g c o n s t r a i n t s (realized by feature
sets) on the c o n s t i t u e n t s a n d specifies a set of lemma
forms a n d a set of word forms. In the example, the
set of l e m m a forms - specified below the kcyword
'lemma' - is a single word form (nominative singular;
The: w i n d o w inflection
p r o v i d e s for the
definition of word classes with their inflectional rules
a n d p a r a d i g m s . This w i n d o w is a g r a p h i c a l tree
editor w h i c h allows the interactive c o n s t r u c t i o n of
a n n - a r y tree. This tree is u s e d to s t r u c t u r e the rules
a n d c o n s t i t u e n t s which define the word classes. The
s t r u c t u r i n g criteria are features
(attribute value
pairs) a n d the s t r u c t u r e h a s the following semantics:
the rule:; specified i n a s u b t r e e o p e r a t e on the
c o n s t i t u e a t s specified within the same subtree. Fig. 8
shows a subtree which contains rules and
i[,
.............. German:inflecUon:(Cat
N)(IRule UMLAUT.+[E]S/+E)
'"::P]-
i@llllllk
(IC~ UklLAUT.II-HOO1}[Num SG)
( ICel UMLAUT.N-ENDINGl(flum SG)
(iCaJt H-SUFFIX)[Num $G)( ICalt SG+[ElS)(C:sse NOM}
( IC~: UMLAUT.N-lENDINGI(Num SG)
(ICIt UMLAUT.N-ENDING)(Hum PL)
{ICat N-~SUFFIX)(NumSG)( ICat SG-~E]S)
(ICat N-,SUFFIX)(Num PL)(ICM PL~E)
plrldigm
{l(:ll Ukf.AUT.N-I~OOTj{Num SG)
(IC~t UhiLAUT.N-ROOT)(NumPL)
ixulple~1:
AslI, Sch~iluch
IPlg. ~. Ezmnple ~ U o n ~
rule wiudow
157
the p a t t e r n of feature sets identifies exactly one form
which is p u t together b y the c o n c a t e n a t i o n of three
c o n s t i t u e n t s ) . The set of word forms - specified
below the keyword ' p a r a d i g m ' - c o n s i s t s of eight
e l e m e n t s (the case p a r a d i g m ; the two p a t t e r n s of
f e a t u r e sets identify exactly eight forms, each of
which is p u t together by the c o n c a t e n a t i o n of three
c o n s t i t u e n t s ) . The c o n s t i t u e n t w i n d o w s specify
either so-called hard-coded constituents
or
constituent types. The former are feature sets which
are associated with 'hard-coded' lexical strings (see
Fig. 10); they are typically used to specify inflectional
eO~ German:inflection:(Cat N)(ICot N-SUFFIX.SG+[EIS)(NumSG) ~ilJl~
c o n s t i t u e n t s arc s t r u c t u r e d by features which qualify
them. The r u l e s i n the t e r m i n a l nodes (see Fig. 12)
define n e w potential word entries by specifying how
c o n s t i t u e n t s of existing e n t r i e s are c o m b i n e d with
I O ~ German:compo$1tion:(CRuie T0-N.N-I'0-N,PREFIII)
Source
I
(CCa[ PREFIX)
(IRulo ?x)
2
3
4
S
(Case NOM)
=+[e]s=
(Case GEN)
(Case DAT)
'°~£[e]"
=. "
(Case ACCI
(ICat H-ROOD (Num SG)
(ICat N-ENDING) (Hum SG)
(lest N-ROOT) (Num PL)
(ICat N-ENDING) (Hum PL)
~rget
(m.le ?x)
%°
Lim~
(ReCap (~ I 2))
3
~I
I !
I
[
]
I
I
i
I
I
]
1
I
t
I I
(ICat N=ROOT) (~um SG)
I I
(ICat N-ENDING) (Hum SG) | :
(ReCap (+ 1 4))
(ICat N-ROOT) (Hum PL)
5
(Ieat N-ENDING)(N.m PL)
examples
Liliputl-o~raat,MinisendeL Riesewischlauch
|
]
[
[__
Fig. I0: E x a m p l e w i n d o w w i t h hard-coded
constituents
affixes. T h e l a t t e r are f e a t u r e s e t s w h e r e the
associated s t r i n g s are r e p r e s e n t e d by place holders,
i.e. the s t r i n g s are n o t specified yet b u t will be
entered later, either via the lexicographer interface
or by the firing of compositional rules (see Fig. 1 1).
~0- German:inflectlon:(Cat N)(ICat N-STEM.UMLAUT)-~
(ICat
(ICat
(ICat
(ICat
1
2
3
4
N-ROOT) (Num SG)
N-ENDING) (Num SG)
N-ROOT) (Num PL)
N-ENDING) (Num PL)
entered
entered
(Umlaut 1)
(Copy 2)
examples
Ast, Schiauch
Fig. I I: E x ~ p l e
w i n d o w wlth c o n g t i t u e n t ty~e~
They are typically u s e d to specify word roots. From
what h a s b e e n said so far, we m a y infer how a n entry
into the d a t a b a s e is m a d e a n d w h a t it will generate:
t h e s p e c i f i c a t i o n of a n e n t r y r e q u i r e s t h e
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a n i n f l e c t i o n a l r u l e a n d t h e
s p e c i f i c a t i o n of t h e lexical s t r i n g s w h i c h are
r e p r e s e n t e d as place h o l d e r s i n the c o n s t i t u e n t s
m a t c h e d by the rule. Usually, this m e a n s t h a t one or
two strings have to be entered. From this, the system
m a y generate the entire inflectional p a r a d i g m of the
word. Notice t h a t the u s e r of the l i n g u i s t interface
defines with his specification w h a t a word is (viz, a
set of l e m m a forms a n d a set of word forms).
Moreover, Word M a n a g e r i m p o s e s the c o n v e n t i o n
t h a t only entire words - a n d no isolated word forms m a y be entered into the database.
The w i n d o w c o m p o s i t i o n
provides for the
d e f i n i t i o n of c o m p o s i t i o n a l r u l e s a n d c o n s t i t u e n t s
(affixes). This w i n d o w is a g r a p h i c a l tree editor
similar to the window inflection where the rules a n d
].58
each o t h e r a n d with c o n s t i t u e n t s defined in the
w i n d o w c o m p o s i t i o n (dertvatlonal affixes). T h e s e
r u l e s are u s u a l l y n o t a p p l i e d g e n e r a t i v e l y b u t
analytically, b e c a u s e a generative application is likely
to overgenerate (theoretically, the u s e r m a y specify
a n a r b i t r a r y n u m b e r of f e a t u r e s w h i c h r e s t r i c t
excessive g e n e r a t i o n , b u t I believe t h a t t h i s is
u n p r a c t i c a l in most cases, b e c a u s e it implles that the
lexicographer h a s to specify a h o s t of features for
each entry)~ The p u r p o s e of the r u l e s is t h a t all
derived a n d c o m p o u n d words m a y be e n t e r e d Into
the d a t a b a s e via the triggering of such l~les. This has
the a d v a n t a g e thai: the system (automatically) keeps
t r a c k of the derivational h i s t o r y a n d therefore the
morphological s~_xucturing of each entry.
40 The lexicographer interface
Given a compiled specification of the c o n c e p t u a l
morphological knowledge defined within the l i n g u i s t
interface, Word M a n a g e r m a y g e n e r a t e a dialogue
w h i c h g u i d e s the l e x i c o g r a p h e r t o w a r d s t h e
Identification of the i n f l e c t i o n a l / c o m p o s i t i o n a l rules
t h a t m u s t be triggered i n order to add a n e n t r y to
the database. In the case of n o n - c o m p o s e d words, for
example, Word Mm]ager m a y simply navigate in the
tree which s t r u c t u r e s the Inflectional rules (specified
in the window inflection),
posing questions
according to the s t r u c t u r i n g criteria.
In the case of composed words, Word Manager
m a y apply the compositional rules in analytical mode,
provided t h a t the 'initial' i n f b r m a t i o n c o n s i s t s of a
word string, S u c h a n a n a l y t i c a l a p p l i c a t i o n of the
rules is u s u a l l y n o t very overgeneratlng - In c o n t r a s t
to a generative application-, i.e. the s y s t e m will be
able to p r e s e n t a r e a s o n a b l y limited n u m b e r of
selection choices.
50 C o n c l ~ i o n
The a d v a n t a g e s of a d e d i c a t e d s y s t e m like Word
Manager for the m m l a g e m e n t of lexical d a t a b a s e s are
m a n i f o l d . In t h i s p a p e r , we have r e s t r i c t e d the
d i s c u s s i o n to the a d v a n t a g e s yielded d u r i n g the
c o n s t r u c t i o n of the database. These are by no m e a n s
the only ones: the dedication also Implies t h a t the
o v e r h e a d of n o n - d e d i c a t e d s y s t e m s (e.g. general
p u r p o s e DBMS i n c o n j u n c t i o n with c o n v e n t i o n a l
programming languagesL Le. the featt~res which are
s u p e r f l u o n s for lexical databases, is avoided. On the
othex' hanc;i, Word l~Aanager provides features which a
g e n e r a l pltrpose s y s t e m will n e v e r have, viz. the
s p e c i a l t ' o r m a l i s ~ to i m p l e m e n t m o r p h o l o g i c a l
knowledge, "~his is not only beneficial from the point
of view of the i n t e r f a c i n g to the d a t a b a s e b u t also
from the point of view of the software design: in the
dedicated :~ystem, the morphological knowledge is a
p a r t of ttL~ conceptual d a t a b a s e .~chem~ (in the
terminoloKy of d a t a b a s e theory) a n d t h u s belongs to
the kernel of the sysi~cm, as: it were. When a general
p u r p o s e d a t a b a s e m a n a g e m e n t system in conjunction
with a conventional programming language is used to
i m p l e m e n t the same kind of knowledge, it has to be
h n p l e m e n t e d w i t h i n the external schemata to the
d a t a b a s e a n d t h u s repeatedly fox' each of them. The
soocalted code factoring is i:hcretbre m u c h better in
a d e d i c a l c d s y s t e m : t h e k n o w l e d g e is m o r e
centralizecz, a n d I m p l e m e n t e d with a m i n i m u m of
x'eduncancy.
/Domenlg 19871)/
Domenlg
M. : "On
the
F o r m a l l s a t l o n of Dictionaries." in: Sprache
und Datenverarbeitung, 1/1987.
/ K o s k e n n i e m i 1983/ K o s k e n n i e m i K.: Two-Level
Morphology: A General Computational
Model ,for Word-Form Recognition and
Production. Dissertation at the University of
Helsinki,
Department
of
General
Linguistics, Publications No. 11, 1983.
/Myers 1986/
Myers B.A.: "Visual Programming,
P r o g r a m m i n g by E x a m p l e , a n d P r o g r a m
V i s u a l i z a t i o n , a T a x o n o m y . " in: H u m a n
Factors In Computing Systems, CHI'86
C o n f e r e n c e Proceedings (Special I s s u e of
the SIGCHI Bulletin), Boston, April 13-17.
1986.
/ANSI-X3.~Pt~RC t 9 7 5 /
ANSI/X3/SPARC S t u d y
G~'oup on Data Base M a n a g e m e n t Systems:
"lntcrh~J. l t e p o i t 75-02-08," I,'DT (Bull, of
the ACIvl 31GMOD) 7. 1975.
/B~.a~• 198~3/
Bear
J. :
"A
Morphological
Reeogi.dzer with Syntaciic a n d Phonological
R u l e s . " in: Proceedings of the 1 ittt
btternational Conj~:rence on Computational
Linguistic.~, Bonn, A u g u s t 25-29~ 1986.
/Black 19116/
Black A.W~, et al.: "A Dictionmy and
Morpl-mlogical A n a l y s e r for English." in:
Proceedings oj the i l th Intet~national
Conference on Co~wutationul Li~tyui.~:ttc~J,
I~onn, August 25-29, 19t~tl.
/B0cker i[986/ B o c k e r
H. ] ).,
et
al. : "The
E n h a n c e m e n t of U n d e r s t a n d i n g T h r o u g h
Visual Representations." in: Human Factors
(n Computing Systems, CI-II'86 Conference
Pcoceedinga (Special i s s u e of tbc SIGCHI
Bulletin), Bosi:on, April 13-17, 1986.
/ B o r i n 19116/
B o r i n L,: "What is a Lexical
l~epresentation?" in: Papers for the Fifth
Scandinavian Con]e~nce qf Computational
Linguistics, H e l s i n k i , D e c e m b e r 1 1-12,
1985. University of Helsinki, D e p a r t m e n t of
G e n e r a l IAnguistics, P u b l i c a t i o n s No. 15,
i[986.
/DarympI(,. 1987/
Dah'ymple
M.,
et
al. :
DKIMMO/TWOL:
A
Development
Environment .['or Morphological .Analysis, in
K a p l a n R., K a r t t u n e n L.: " C o m p u t a t i o n a l
IVtorphol0gy." C o u r s e Script LI283, 1987
L l n g u l s t l c I n s t i t u t e , S t a n f o r d University,
J~Lme 29oAuguat 7. I,¢~7.
/Domenlg 1986/
D o m e n i g M., S h a n n P.:
'"t'owards a Dedicated Database M a n a g e m e n t
System for Dictionaries." in: Proceedings of
the l l t h International Conference on
Computational Linguistics, Bonn, A u g u s t
25-29, 1986.
D o m e n i g M.: E n t w u r f eines
dedizierten Datenbanksystems f~r Lexika.
P r o b l e m a n a l y s e und S o f t w a r e - E n t w m f
anhand eine~.; Projektes J h r maschinelle
Sprach~bersetzung.
N i e m e y e r Verlag,
/Domenig 1987a/
Ttibingen, Retbe "Spraehe tu~d Inlbrmatlon"
lid. 17, 1987.
[59