Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics

Editor-in-Chief: Dziubalska-Kolaczyk, Katarzyna

4 Issues per year

IMPACT FACTOR 2017: 0.250
5-year IMPACT FACTOR: 0.259

CiteScore 2017: 0.36

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.151
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.485

See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 45, Issue 4


Chinese Syntactic and Typological Properties Based on Dependency Syntactic Treebanks

Haitao Liu / Yiyi Zhao / Wenwen Li
Published Online: 2010-01-13 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10010-009-0025-3

Chinese Syntactic and Typological Properties Based on Dependency Syntactic Treebanks

This paper offers a quantitative analysis of the syntactic and typological properties of Chinese based on five Chinese dependency treebanks. The study shows that mean dependency distance of Chinese is 2.84; 40-50% dependencies are between non-adjacent words; Chinese is a mixed language with a governor-final and SV-VO-AdjN preference; the mean dependency distance of governor-initial dependencies is greater than that of governor-final ones. Methodologically, the paper adopts five treebanks with different text genres and annotation schemes as a resource to study syntactic features of a language. This method avoids corpus influences on results so that the conclusions can be more reliable and robust. If suitable treebanks are available, it will be an easy task to apply our method to other languages. In this way, the method has a broad theoretical and cross-linguistic perspective.

Keywords: Chinese; dependency distance; dependency direction; dependency treebank; linguistic typology

  • Abeillé A. (ed.). 2003. Treebank: Building and using parsed corpora. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar

  • Best, K.-H. 2006. Quantitative Linguistik: Eine Annaeherung. (3rd ed.) Göttingen: Peust & Gutschmidt.Google Scholar

  • Bod, R., J. Hay and S. Jannedy (eds.). 2003. Probabilistic linguistics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

  • Buch-Kromann, M. 2006. Discontinuous Grammar. A dependency-based model of human parsing and language acquisition. (Unpublished PhD dissertation, Copenhagen Business School.)Google Scholar

  • Chen, K.-J. et al. 2003. "Sinica treebank: Design criteria, representational issues and implementation". In: Abeillé A. (ed.). 231-248.Google Scholar

  • Collins, M. 1996. "A new statistical parser based on bigram lexical dependencies". Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Santa Cruz, CA. 184-191.Google Scholar

  • Cowan, N. 2005. Working memory capacity. Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar

  • De Smedt, K., J. Hajič and S. Kübler (eds.). 2007. Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories. December 7-8, 2007. Bergen, Norway.Google Scholar

  • Gries, S.Th. 2009. Quantitative corpus linguistics with R: A practical introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

  • Haspelmath, M., M. Dryer, D. Gil and B. Comrie (eds.). 2005. The world atlas of language structures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Hudson, R. 1995. Measuring Syntactic Difficulty. http://www.phon.ucl.ac.uk/home/dick/difficulty.htm

  • Hudson, R. 2007. Language networks. The new word grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Kakkonen, T. 2005. "Dependency treebanks: Methods, annotation schemes and tools". Proceedings of the 15th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics (NODALIDA 2005), Joensuu, Finland. 94-104.Google Scholar

  • Köhler, R. and G. Altmann. 2000. "Probability distributions of syntactic units and properties". Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 7(3). 189-200.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Köhler, R., G. Altmann, and R.G. Piotrowski (eds.). 2005. Quantitative Linguistik. Ein internationales Handbuch [Quantitative linguistics. An international handbook]. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar

  • Kühler, S., R. McDonald and J. Nivre. 2009. Dependency parsing. San Rafael, CA: Morgan and Claypool.Google Scholar

  • Liu, H. 2007a. "Probability distribution of dependency distance". Glottometrics 15. 1-12.Google Scholar

  • Liu, H. 2007b. "Building and using a Chinese dependency treebank". Grkg/Humankybernetik, 48(1). 3-14.Google Scholar

  • Liu, H. 2008. "Dependency distance as a metric of language comprehension difficulty". Journal of Cognitive Science 9(2). 159-191.Google Scholar

  • Liu, H. 2009a. "Probability distribution of dependencies based on Chinese Dependency Treebank". Journal of Quantitative Linguistics 16 (3). 256-273.CrossrefWeb of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Liu, H. 2009b. Dependency grammar: From theory to practice. Beijing: Science Press.Google Scholar

  • Liu, H. In press. "Dependency direction as a means of word-order typology: A method based on dependency treebanks". Lingua. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2009.10.001.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • Liu, H., R. Hudson and Zh. Feng 2009. "Using a Chinese treebank to measure dependency distance". Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 5(2). 161-174.Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • Ma, J. 2007. Research on Chinese dependency parsing based on statistical methods. (Unpublished PhD thesis, Harbin Technology University.)Google Scholar

  • Marcus, M., B. Santorini and M.A. Marcinkiewicz. 1993. "Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank". Computational Linguistics 19(2). 313-330.Google Scholar

  • Mel'čuk, I.A. 1988. Dependency syntax: Theory and practice. Albany: State University Press of New York.Google Scholar

  • Miller, G. 1956. "The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information". Psychological Review 63. 81-97.Google Scholar

  • Ninio, A. 2006. Language and the learning curve: A new theory of syntactic development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

  • Tesnière, L. 1959. Eléments de la syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar

  • Xue, N., F. Xia, F.-D. Chiou and M. Palmer 2005. "The Penn Chinese TreeBank: Phrase structure annotation of a large corpus". Natural Language Engineering 11(2). 207-238.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2010-01-13

Published in Print: 2009-12-01

Citation Information: Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, Volume 45, Issue 4, Pages 509–523, ISSN (Online) 1897-7499, ISSN (Print) 0137-2459, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/v10010-009-0025-3.

Export Citation

This content is open access.

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

Yaqin Wang and Haitao Liu
Language Sciences, 2017, Volume 59, Page 135
Jin Cong and Haitao Liu
Physics of Life Reviews, 2014, Volume 11, Number 4, Page 598
Lin Wang and Haitao Liu
Lingua, 2013, Volume 123, Page 58

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in