Constraints in Free-input Question-Answering Drills

Lene Antonsen
University of Tromsø, Norway

Ladda ner artikel

Ingår i: Proceedings of the second workshop on NLP for computer-assisted language learning at NODALIDA 2013; May 22-24; Oslo; Norway. NEALT Proceedings Series 17

Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings 86:2, s. 11-26

NEALT Proceedings Series 17:2, s. 11-26

Visa mer +

Publicerad: 2013-05-17

ISBN: 978-91-7519-588-9

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


This article describes a set of question-answer drills for language learning for a richly inflected language. The drills have been in actual use for some time. They allow for free input and make use of a constraint-grammar-based system; which anticipates a number of grammatical errors and common misspellings and gives certain response types. The interactions between student and computer are recorded; and the log reveals that the free-input approach comes at a price: students tend to avoid complex constructions. In order to force the student to answer with more complex constructions; while still keeping the free-input approach; we implemented a solution with more constraints for the input. The exercise items are generated and each template gives rise to a huge numbers of exercises. Constraint grammar makes it easy to control for both grammar errors and adherence to the constraints given in the task. The evaluation on authentic learner data shows that constraining the user’s input with the question itself; makes it possible to analyse the student’s free input; with very good precision and recall. But parsing the input is only a part of the challenge of designing real-life ICALL systems. The article discusses other design issues related to question-answering drills.


Constraint Grammar; ICALL; Grammar Exercises; Syntax


Amaral; L. A. and Meurers; D. (2011). On using intelligent computer-assisted language learning in real-life foreign language teaching and learning. ReCALL; 23(1):4–24.

Antonsen; L. (2012). Improving feedback on L2 misspellings – an FST approach. In NLP for computer assisted language learning; SLTC 2012; volume 80 of Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings; Linköping; Sweden.

Antonsen; L.; Huhmarniemi; S.; and Trosterud; T. (2009). Constraint grammar in dialogue systems. In Proceedings of the 17th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics; volume 8 of NEALT Proceeding Series; pages 13–21; Odense; Denmark.

Antonsen; L.; Johnson; R.; Trosterud; T.; and Uibo; H. (2013). Generating modular grammar exercises with finite-state transducers. In 2nd workshop on NLP for computer-assisted language learning; NoDaLiDa 2013; volume 85 of Linköping Electronic Conference Proceedings; Linköping; Sweden.

Antonsen; L.; Trosterud; T.; and Wiechetek; L. (2010). Reusing grammatical resources for new languages. In Proceedings of LREC-2010; Valetta; Malta. ELRA.

Arppe; A. (2000). Developing a grammar checker for Swedish. In Proceedings of the 12th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics; NoDLiDa 1999; pages 13–27.

Beesley; K. R. and Karttunen; L. (2003). Finite State Morphology. CSLI publications in Computational Linguistics; USA.

Bick; E. (2005). Live use of corpus data and corpus annotation tools in CALL: Some new developments in VISL. In Holmboe; H.; editor; Nordic Language Technology; Årbog for Nordisk Sprogteknologisk Forskningsprogram 2000-2004; pages 171–185. Museum Tusculanums Forlag; København.

Bick; E. (2006). A constraint grammar based spellchecker for Danish with a special focus on dyslexics. In Suominen; M. e. a.; editor; A Man of Measure – Festschrift in Honour of Fred Karlsson; volume 19; pages 387–396. The Linguistic Association of Finland; Turku.

Birn; J. (2000). Detecting grammar errors with Lingsoft’s Swedish grammar checker. In Proceedings of the 13th Nordic Conference of Computational Linguistics; NoDLiDa 1999; pages 28–40.

DeKeyser; R. (1995). Learning second language grammar rules: an experiment with a miniature linguistic system. Studies in Second Language Acquisition; 17:379–410.

DeKeyser; R. M. (2000). The robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition; 22:499–533.

Heift; T. (2001). Intelligent language tutoring systems for grammar practice. Zeitschrift fur Interkulturellen Fremdsprachenunterricht; 6(2).

Heift; T. (2010). Developing an intelligent language tutor. CALICO Journal; 27:443–459.

Heift; T. and Schulze; M. (2007). Errors and Intelligence in Computer-Assisted Language Learning. Parsers and Pedagogues. Routledge; New York and London.

Johannessen; J. B.; Hagen; K.; and Lane; P. (2002). The performance of a grammar checker with deviant language input. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Computational Linguistics; pages 1223–1227; Taipei; Taiwan.

Karlsson; F.; Voutilainen; A.; Heikkilä; J.; and Anttila; A. (1995). Constraint Grammar. A Language-Independent System for Parsing Unrestricted Text. Mouton de Gruyter; Berlin and New York.

Long; M. H. (1991). Focus on Form: A design feature in language teaching. In Foreign Language Research in Cross-cultural Perspective. John Benjamis publishing company; Amsterdam – Philadelphia.

Nagata; N. (2002). BANZAI: An application of natural language processing to web based language learning. CALICO Journal; 19(3):583–599.

Norris; J. M. and Ortega; L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning; 50(3):417.

Uria; L.; Arrieta; B.; de Ilarraza; A. D.; Maritxalar; M.; and Oronoz; M. (2009). Determiner errors in Basque: Analysis and automatic detection. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural; 43:41–48.

VISL-group (2008). Constraint grammar. http://beta.visl.sdu.dk/constraint_ grammar.html.

Wiechetek; L. (2012). Constraint grammar based correction of grammatical errors for North Sámi. In Proceedings of theWorkshop on Language Technology for Normalisation of Less-Resourced Languages (SaLTMil 8 – AfLaT2012); pages 35–40.

Citeringar i Crossref