This article presents a comparative analysis of four different syntactic typological approaches applied to 20 different languages. We compared three specific quantitative methods, using parallel CoNLL-U corpora, to the classification obtained via syntactic features provided by a typological database (lang2vec). First, we analyzed the Marsagram linear approach which consists of extracting the frequency word-order patterns regarding the position of components inside syntactic nodes. The second approach considers the relative position of heads and dependents, and the third is based simply on the relative position of verbs and objects. From the results, it was possible to observe that each method provides different language clusters which can be compared to the classic genealogical classification (the lang2vec and the head and dependent methods being the closest). As different word-order phenomena are considered in these specific typological strategies, each one provides a different angle of analysis to be applied according to the precise needs of the researchers.

This article presents a comparative analysis of dependency parsing results for a set of 16 languages, coming from a large variety of linguistic families and genera, whose parallel corpora were used to train a deep-learning tool. Results are analyzed in comparison to an innovative way of classifying languages concerning the head directionality parameter used to perform a quantitative syntactic typological classification of languages. It has been shown that, despite using parallel corpora, there is a large discrepancy in terms of LAS results. The obtained results show that this heterogeneity is mainly due to differences in the syntactic structure of the selected languages, where Indo-European ones, especially Romance languages, have the best scores. It has been observed that the differences in the size of the representation of each language in the language model used by the deep-learning tool also play a major role in the dependency parsing efficacy. Other factors, such as the number of dependency parsing labels may also have an influence on results with more complex labeling systems such as the Polish language.

This article presents the strategy for developing a platform containing Language Processing Chains for European Union languages, consisting of Tokenization to Parsing, also including Named Entity recognition and with addition of Sentiment Analysis. These chains are part of the first step of an event-centric knowledge processing pipeline whose aim is to process multilingual media information about major events that can cause an impact in Europe and the rest of the world. Due to the differences in terms of availability of language resources for each language, we have built this strategy in three steps, starting with processing chains for the well-resourced languages and finishing with the development of new modules for the under-resourced ones. In order to classify all European Union official languages in terms of resources, we have analysed the size of annotated corpora as well as the existence of pre-trained models in mainstream Language Processing tools, and we have combined this information with the proposed classification published at META-NET whitepaper series.

This article presents the results of the evaluation campaign of language tools available for fifteen EU-official under-resourced languages. The evaluation was conducted within the MSC ITN CLEOPATRA action that aims at building the cross-lingual event-centric knowledge processing on top of the application of linguistic processing chains (LPCs) for at least 24 EU-official languages. In this campaign, we concentrated on three existing NLP platforms (Stanford CoreNLP, NLP Cube, UDPipe) that all provide models for under-resourced languages and in this first run we covered 15 under-resourced languages for which the models were available. We present the design of the evaluation campaign and present the results as well as discuss them. We considered the difference between reported and our tested results within a single percentage point as being within the limits of acceptable tolerance and thus consider this result as reproducible. However, for a number of languages, the results are below what was reported in the literature, and in some cases, our testing results are even better than the ones reported previously. Particularly problematic was the evaluation of NERC systems. One of the reasons is the absence of universally or cross-lingually applicable named entities classification scheme that would serve the NERC task in different languages analogous to the Universal Dependency scheme in parsing task. To build such a scheme has become one of our the future research directions.