
In this work, we summarize an in-depth quantitative and qualitative analysis of three dependency schemes for English, in order to acquire and document contrastive insights into how these schemes relate to each other. We demon- strate how a simple quantitative method can reveal salient structural properties of individual schemes, as well as uncover systematic correspondences between pairs of schemes. We use this method to estimate and compare the expressiveness of three dependency schemes and we identifiy several linguistic phenomena that have a different syntactic analysis in two of these schemes.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. 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). | 0 | |
| 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. | Average | |
| 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 |
