
handle: 11572/447181
AbstractIn today’s multilingual lexical databases, the majority of the world’s languages are under-represented. Beyond a mere issue of resource incompleteness, we show that existing lexical databases have structural limitations that result in a reduced expressivity on culturally-specific words and in mapping them across languages. In particular, the lexical meaning space of dominant languages, such as English, is represented more accurately while linguistically or culturally diverse languages are mapped in an approximate manner. Our paper assesses state-of-the-art multilingual lexical databases and evaluates their strengths and limitations with respect to their expressivity on lexical phenomena of linguistic diversity.
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Computation and Language, I.2.4, Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence, I.2.7, Language diversity; Lexical semantics; Multilingual lexical database; Untranslatability, Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI), Computation and Language (cs.CL), I.2.4; I.2.7
FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Computation and Language, I.2.4, Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence, I.2.7, Language diversity; Lexical semantics; Multilingual lexical database; Untranslatability, Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI), Computation and Language (cs.CL), I.2.4; I.2.7
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 4 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
