• Alexin, Z., Gyimóthy, T., Hatvani, C., Tihanyi, L., Csirik, J., Bibok, K., et al. (2003). Manually annotated hungarian corpus. InProceedings of the tenth conference on European chapter of the association for computational linguistics (EACL’03) (pp. 53–56).

• Arhar, Š., & Gorjanc, V. (2007). Korpus FidaPLUS: Nova generacija slovenskega referenčnega korpusa (the FidaPLUS corpus: A new generation of the Slovene reference corpus).Jezik in slovstvo, 52(2), 95–110.

  Google Scholar 

• Buchholz, S., & Marsi, E. (2006). CoNLL-X shared task on multilingual dependency parsing. InProceedings of the tenth conference on computational natural language learning (CoNLL-X) (pp. 149–164). Morristown, NJ, USA: ACL.

• Chiarcos, C., & Erjavec, T. (2011) OWL/DL formalization of the MULTEXT-East morphosyntactic specifications. InProceedings of the 5th linguistics annotation workshop (LAW-V), ACL.

• Derzhanski, I. A., & Kotsyba, N. (2009). Towards a consistent morphological tagset for Slavic languages: Extending MULTEXT-East for Polish, Ukrainian and Belarusian. InProceedings of the Mondilex third open workshop: Metalanguage and encoding scheme design for digital lexicography (pp. 9–26). Bratislava, Slovakia: Ľ. Štúr Institute of Linguistic, Slovak Academy of Sciences.

• Dimitrova, L., & Rashkov, P. (2009). A new version for Bulgarian MTE morphosyntactic specifications for some verbal forms. InProceedings of the Mondilex second open workshop: Organization and development of digital lexical eesources (pp. 30–37). Kyiv, Ukraine: Dovira Publishing House.

• Dimitrova, L., Erjavec, T., Ide, N., Kaalep, H. J., Petkevič, V., & Tufiş, D. (1998). MULTEXT-East: Parallel and comparable corpora and lexicons for six Central and Eastern European languages. In Proceedings of the COLING-ACL’98 (pp. 315–319). Montréal, QC, Canada: ACL.

• Džeroski, S., Erjavec, T., Ledinek, N., Pajas, P., Žabokrtsky, Z., & Žele, A. (2006).Towards a Slovene dependency treebank. In Proceedings of the fifth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’06), Genoa.

• EAGLES. (1996).Expert advisory group on language engineering standards.http://www.ilc.pi.cnr.it/EAGLES/home.html.

• Erjavec, T. (2004). MULTEXT-East version 3: Multilingual morphosyntactic specifications, lexicons and corpora. In Proceedings of the fourth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’06), Lisbon.

• Erjavec, T. (2010) MULTEXT-East version 4: Multilingual morphosyntactic specifications, lexicons and Corpora. InProceedings of the seventh international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’06), Valetta.

• Erjavec, T., & Džeroski, S. (2004). Machine learning of language structure: Lemmatising unknown Slovene words.Applied Artificial Intelligence,18(1), 17–41.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Erjavec, T., Fišer, D., Krek, S., & Ledinek, N. (2010).The JOS linguistically tagged corpus of Slovene. In Proceedings of the seventh international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’10), Valetta.

• Farrar, S., & Langendoen, D. T. (2003). A linguistic ontology for the semantic web.GLOT International,7(3), 97–100.

  Google Scholar 

• Feldman, A., & Hana, J. (2010).A resource-light approach to morpho–syntactic tagging. Language and computers: Studies in practical linguistics (Vol. 70). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

• Garabík, R., & Gianitsová-Ološtiaková, L. (2005). Manual morphological annotation of the Slovak translation of Orwell’s novel 1984: Methods and findings. InProceedings of the Slovko conference “computer treatment of Slavic and East European languages”. Bratislava: Veda.

• Garabík, R., Majchráková, D., & Dimitrova, L. (2009). Comparing Bulgarian and Slovak MULTEXT-East morphology tagset. InProceedings of the Mondilex second open workshop: Organization and development of digital lexical resources (pp. 38–46). Kyiv, Ukraine: Dovira Publishing House.

• Hajič, J. (2000). Morphological tagging: Data versus dictionaries. InProceedings of the ANLP/NAACL 2000 (pp. 94–101). Seattle.

• Hajič, J. (2002).Disambiguation of rich inflection (computational morphology of Czech) (Vol. 1). Prague: Karolinum Charles University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Horák, A., Gianitsová, L., Šimková, M., Šmotlák, M., & Garabík, R. (2004). Slovak national corpus. InProceedings of the text speech and dialogue conference (TSD’04), Brno.

• Ide, N. (1998). Corpus encoding standard: SGML guidelines for encoding linguistic corpora. InProceedings of the first international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’98) (pp. 463–470). Granada.

• Ide, N. (2000). Cross-lingual sense determination: Can it work?Computers and the Humanities, 34, 223–234.

  Article  Google Scholar 

• Ide, N., & Véronis, J. (1994). Multext (multilingual tools and corpora). InProceedings of the 15th international conference on computational linguistics (CoLing’94) (pp. 90–96). Kyoto.

• Ivanovska, A., Zdravkova, K., Džeroski, S., & Erjavec, T. (2005). Learning rules for morphological analysis and synthesis of Macedonian nouns. InProceedings of the 8th international conference information society, IS 2005. Ljubljana: Jožef Stefan Institute.

• Kemps-Snijders, M., Windhouwer, M., Wittenburg, P., & Wright, S. E. (2008). ISOcat: Corralling data categories in the wild. In Proceedings of the sixth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’08), Marrakech.

• Kopotev, M., & Mustajoki, A. (2003)Principy sozdanija Hel’sinkskogo annotirovannogo korpusa russkih tekstov (HANCO) v seti internet. Naučno-tehničeskaja informacija (Ser. 2, pp. 33–37) (in Russian).

• Kotsyba, N., Radziszewski, A., & Derzhanski, I. (2009). Integrating the Polish language into the MULTEXT-East family. InProceedings of the Mondilex fifth open workshop:Research infrastructure for digital lexicography. Ljubljana, Slovenia: Jožef Stefan Institute.

• Krek, S., Stabej, M., Gorjanc, V., Erjavec, T., Romih, M., & Holozan, P. (1998) FIDA:A corpus of the Slovene language.http://www.fida.net/.

• Krstev, C., Vitas, D., & Erjavec, T. (2004). MULTEXT-East resources for Serbian. InProceedings B of the 7th international multiconference information society: Language technologies (pp. 108–114). Ljubljana: Jožef Stefan Institutue.

• Martin, J., Mihalcea, R., & Pedersen, T. (2005). Word alignment for languages with scarce resources. InProceedings of the ACL workshop on building and using parallel texts (pp. 65–74). Ann Arbor.

• Petrovski, A. (2004). Morphological processing of nouns in Macedonian language. In Proceedings of the 7th intex/nooj workshop, Tours.

• Piasecki, M. (2007). Polish tagger TaKIPI: Rule based construction and optimisation.Task Quarterly, 11, 151–167.

  Google Scholar 

• Prószéky, G. (1995). Humor: A morphological system for corpus analysis. InProceedings of the first European TELRI seminar: Language resources for language technology (pp. 149–158). Tihany, Hungary.

• Prószéky, G., & Kis, B. (1999). A unification-based approach to morpho-syntactic parsing of agglutinative and other (highly) inflectional languages. InProceedings of the 37th ACL, association for computational linguistics (pp. 261–268).

• Przepiórkowski, A. (2006). The potential of the IPI PAN corpus.Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 41, 31–48.

  Google Scholar 

• Przepiórkowski, A., & Woliński, M. (2003). A flexemic tagset for Polish. InProceedings of the EACL workshop on morphological processing of Slavic languages. ACL.

• QasemiZadeh, B., & Rahimi, S. (2006) Persian in MULTEXT-East framework. In Proceedings of the 5th international conference on natural language processing (FinTAL’06) (pp. 541–551). Turku, Finland.

• Rosen, A. (2010). Morphological tags in parallel corpora. In F. Čermák, A. Klégr, & P. Corness (Eds.),InterCorp:Exploring a Multilingual corpus. Praha: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny.

• Schmid, H. (1994). Probabilistic part-of-speech tagging using decision trees. InProceedings of the international conference on new methods in language processing (pp. 44–49).

• Sharoff, S. (2005). Methods and tools for development of the Russian reference corpus. In D. Archer, A. Wilson, & P. Rayson (Eds.),Corpus linguistics around the world (pp. 167–180). Amsterdam: Rodopi.

  Google Scholar 

• Sharoff, S., Kopotev, M., Erjavec, T., Feldman, A., & Divjak, D. (2008). Designing and evaluating a Russian tagset. InProceedings of the sixth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’08). Marrakech.

• Silberztein, M. (1999). Text Indexing with INTEX. In: Computers and the humanities (vol. 33(3)). Kluwer Academic Publishers.

• Simov, K., Popova, G., & Osenova, P. (2002). HPSG-based syntactic treebank of Bulgarian (BulTreeBank). In A. Wilson, P. Rayson, & T. McEnery (Eds.),A rainbow of corpora: Corpus linguistics and the languages of the world (pp. 135–142). Munich: Lincom-Europa.

• Slavcheva, M. (1997).A comparative representation of two Bulgarian morphosyntactic tagsets and the EAGLES encoding standard. Technical Report TELRI (Trans European Language Resources Infrastructure).

• Sperberg-McQueen, C. M., & Burnard, L. (Eds.). (1994).Guidelines for electronic text encoding and interchange P3. Chicago and Oxford: Association for Computers and the Humanities/Association for Computational Linguistics/Association for Literary and Linguistic Computing.

• Steenwijk, H. (1992).The Slovene Dialect of Resia San Giorgio. Amsterdam-Atlanta: Rodopi.

  Google Scholar 

• Stolić, M., & Zdravkova, K. (2010). Resources for machine translation of the Macedonian language. InProceedings of the ICT innovations conference, Ohrid.

• Tadić, M. (2002). Building the Croatian national corpus. InProceedings of the third international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’02) (pp. 441–446). Las Palmas.

• Tadić, M. (2003). Building the Croatian morphological lexicon. InProceedings of the EACL workshop on morphological processing of Slavic languages, ACL.

• TEI Consortium. (2007).TEI P5: Guidelines for electronic text encoding and interchange. TEI Consortium, URL:http://www.tei-c.org/Guidelines/P5/.

• Toutanova, K., & Cherry, C. (2009). A global model for joint lemmatization and part-of-speech prediction. InProceedings of the 47th annual meeting of the ACL (ACL’09) (pp. 486–494). Singapore.

• Tufiş, D. (1999). Tiered tagging and combined language model classifiers. In F. Jelinek & E. Noth (Eds.),Text, speech and dialogue no. 1692 in lecture notes in artificial intelligence (pp. 28–33). Berlin: Springer.

• Tufiş, D. (2002). A cheap and fast way to build useful translation lexicons. InProceedings of the 19th annual meeting of the ACL (ACL’02). Association for Computational Linguistics.

• Tufiş, D., Cristea, D., & Stamou, S. (2004). BalkaNet: Aims, methods, results and perspectives: A general overview.Romanian Journal of Information Science and Technology,7(1–2), 9–43.

  Google Scholar 

• Vitas, D., & Krstev, C. (2001). Intex and slavonic morphology. In4es Journées INTEX. Bordeaux.

• Vojnovski, V., Džeroski, S., & Erjavec, T. (2005). Learning PoS tagging from a tagged Macedonian text corpus. InProceedings of the 8th international conference information society, IS 2005. Ljubljana: Jožef Stefan Institute.

• Zampolli, A. (1997). The PAROLE project. InProceedings of the second European TELRI seminar:Language applications for multilingual Europe (pp. 185–210). Kaunas, Lithuania.

• Zdravkova, K., & Petrovski, A. (2007). Derivation of Macedonian verbal adjectives. InProceedings of international conference“recent advances in natural language processing” (RANLP’07) (pp. 661–665).

Download references