Unni Cathrine Eiken February 2005

3.6 Evaluation of the data set
The data set created by the extraction process consisted of 195 elementary predicate-argument
structures in its raw form. The original EPAS list was not directly applicable for the next parts of
the project. Not all of the extracted structures on the list were suitable for further analysis. Some
of the EPAS were not given an optimal analysis (for my purposes) by the grammar, some were
irrelevant for the later analysis and some were not extracted correctly from the MRS by the Perl
script. The dataset was post-edited to achieve a set of EPAS that did not include erroneously
extracted or undesired structures. With such a small collection of structures as is the case in this
project, the inclusion of only a few incorrect structures would be likely to skew the subsequent
analysis and possibly produce false results.
In the following, I will briefly outline some of the reasons why the EPAS list included incorrect
structures and describe how the list was revised.
3.6.1 Errors from the grammar
Some of the undesired structures in the original EPAS list were directly caused by
characteristics in the NorGram grammar. In the original EPAS list, there were for instance
several structures of the type exemplified by (3-18):
(3- 18)
a. verbal predicate, nominal argument
b. preposition, verbal predicate, nominal argument
These structures should preferably have been combined into one EPAS. The example in (3-19)
below shows a concrete instance from the EPAS list and is analogous to several other instances:
(3- 19)
a. bo, Anne live, Anne
b. i, bo, studentkollektiv in, live, student housing
The structure is extracted from the following sentence from the text material:
52