For most of the world’s languages, no primary data are available, even as many languages are disappearing. Throughout the last two decades, however, language documentation projects have produced substantial amounts of primary data from a wide variety of endangered languages. These resources are still in the early days of their exploration. One of the factors that makes them hard to use is a relative lack of standardized annotation conventions. In this paper, we will describe common practices in existing corpora in order to facilitate their future processing. After a brief introduction of the main formats used for annotation files, we will focus on commonly used tiers in the widespread ELAN and Toolbox formats. Minimally, corpora from language documentation contain a transcription tier and an aligned translation tier, which means they constitute parallel corpora. Additional common annotations include named references, morpheme separation, morpheme-by-morpheme glosses, part-of-speech tags and notes.

Primary data from small, low-resource languages of Oceania have only recently become available through language documentation. In our study, we explore corpus data of five Oceanic languages of Melanesia which are known to be mood-prominent (in the sense of Bhat, 1999). In order to find out more about tense, aspect, modality, and polarity, we tagged these categories in a subset of our corpora. For the category of modality, we developed a novel tag set (MelaTAMP, 2017), which categorizes clauses into factual, possible, and counterfactual. Based on an analysis of the inter-annotator consistency, we argue that our tag set for the modal domain is efficient for our subject languages and might be useful for other languages and purposes.

We evaluate corpus-based measures of linguistic complexity obtained using Universal Dependencies (UD) treebanks. We propose a method of estimating robustness of the complexity values obtained using a given measure and a given treebank. The results indicate that measures of syntactic complexity might be on average less robust than those of morphological complexity. We also estimate the validity of complexity measures by comparing the results for very similar languages and checking for unexpected differences. We show that some of those differences that arise can be diminished by using parallel treebanks and, more importantly from the practical point of view, by harmonizing the language-specific solutions in the UD annotation.