Conference article

Hungarian Copula Constructions in Dependency Syntax and Parsing

Katalin Ilona Simkó
University of Szeged, Institute of Informatics, Department of General Linguistics, Hungary

Veronika Vincze
University of Szeged, Institute of Informatics, MTA-SZTE ,Research Group on Artificial Intelligence, Hungary

Download article

Published in: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Dependency Linguistics (Depling 2017), September 18-20, 2017, Università di Pisa, Italy

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 139:27, s. 240-247

Show more +

Published: 2017-09-13

ISBN: 978-91-7685-467-9

ISSN: 1650-3686 (print), 1650-3740 (online)


Copula constructions are problematic in the syntax of most languages. The paper describes three different dependency syntactic methods for handling copula constructions: function head, content head and complex label analysis. Furthermore, we also propose a POS-based approach to copula detection. We evaluate the impact of these approaches in computational parsing, in two parsing experiments for Hungarian.


No keywords available


Bernd Bohnet. 2010. Top accuracy and fast dependency parsing is not a contradiction. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics (Coling 2010), pages 89–97.

Timothy Jowan Curnow. 2000. Towards a Cross-Linguistic Typology of Copula Constructions. In John Henderson, editor, Proceedings of the 1999 Conference of the Australian Linguistic Society, pages 1–9.

Mary Dalrymple, Helge Dyvik, and Tracy H. King. 2004. Copular Complements: Closed or Open? In Proceedings of the LFG ’04 Conference, pages 188–198, New Zealand. University of Canterbury.

Marcel Den Dikken. 2006. Relators and Linkers: The Syntax of Predication, Predicate Inversion, and Copulas. MIT Press.

Katalin É. Kiss. 2002. The Syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge Syntax Guides. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Tibor Laczkó. 2012. On the (Un)Bearable Lightness of Being an LFG Style Copula in Hungarian. In The Proceedings of the LFG12 Conference, pages 341–361, Stanford. CSLI Publications.

Joakim Nivre, Johan Hall, Sandra Kübler, Ryan Mc-Donald, Jens Nilsson, Sebastian Riedel, and Deniz Yuret. 2007. The CoNLL 2007 Shared Task on Dependency Parsing. In Proceedings of the CoNLL Shared Task Session of EMNLP-CoNLL 2007, pages 915–932.

Joakim Nivre, 2015. Towards a Universal Grammar for Natural Language Processing, pages 3–16. Springer International Publishing, Cham.

Barbara Partee. 1998. Copular Inversion Puzzles in English and Russian. In Katarzyna Dziwirek, Herbert Coats, and Cynthia Vakareliyska, editors, Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics, pages 361–395.

Alain Polguère and Igor Aleksandrovic Mel’cuk, editors. 2009. Dependency in Linguistic Description. Studies in language companion series. Amsterdam Philadelphia, Pa. J. Benjamins.

Wolfgang Seeker, Richárd Farkas, Bernd Bohnet, Helmut Schmid, and Jonas Kuhn. 2012. Data-driven dependency parsing with empty heads. In Proceedings of COLING 2012: Posters, pages 1081–1090, Mumbai, India, December. The COLING 2012 Organizing Committee.

Veronika Vincze, Dóra Szauter, Attila Almási, György Móra, Zoltán Alexin, and János Csirik. 2010. Hungarian Dependency Treebank. In Proceedings of LREC 2010, Valletta, Malta, May. ELRA.

Veronika Vincze, Richárd Farkas, Katalin Ilona Simkó, Zsolt Szántó, and Viktor Varga. 2015. Univerzális dependencia és morfológia magyar nyelvre. In XII. Magyar Számítógépes Nyelvészeti Konferencia, pages 322–329, Szeged.

Veronika Vincze, Katalin Simkó, Zsolt Szántó, and Richárd Farkas. 2017. Universal Dependencies and Morphology for Hungarian - and on the Price of Universality. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 1, Long Papers, pages 356–365, Valencia, Spain, April. Association for Computational Linguistics.

Citations in Crossref