@inproceedings{celikkol-zhao-2026-lexical,
title = "How Do Lexical Senses Correspond Between Spoken {G}erman and {G}erman {S}ign {L}anguage?",
author = "{\c{C}}elikkol, Melis and
Zhao, Wei",
editor = "Baez Santamaria, Selene and
Somayajula, Sai Ashish and
Yamaguchi, Atsuki",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the 19th Conference of the {E}uropean Chapter of the {A}ssociation for {C}omputational {L}inguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop)",
month = mar,
year = "2026",
address = "Rabat, Morocco",
publisher = "Association for Computational Linguistics",
url = "https://aclanthology.org/2026.eacl-srw.54/",
pages = "735--746",
ISBN = "979-8-89176-383-8",
abstract = {Sign language lexicographers construct bilingual dictionaries by establishing word-to-sign mappings, where polysemous and homonymous words corresponding to different signs across contexts are often underrepresented. A usage-based approach examining how word senses map to signs can identify such novel mappings absent from current dictionaries, enriching lexicographic resources.We address this by analyzing German and German Sign Language (Deutsche Geb{\"a}rdensprache, DGS), manually annotating 1,404 word use{--}to{--}sign ID mappings derived from 32 words from the German Word Usage Graph (D-WUG) and 49 signs from the Digital Dictionary of German Sign Language (DW-DGS). We identify three correspondence types: Type 1 (one-to-many), Type 2 (many-to-one), and Type 3 (one-to-one), plus No Match cases. We evaluate computational methods: Exact Match (EM) and Semantic Similarity (SS) using SBERT embeddings. SS substantially outperforms EM overall 88.52{\%} vs. 71.31{\%}), with dramatic gains for Type 1 (+52.1 pp). Our work establishes the first annotated dataset for cross-modal sense correspondence and reveals which correspondence patterns are computationally tractable.Our code and dataset are made publicly available}
}<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="celikkol-zhao-2026-lexical">
<titleInfo>
<title>How Do Lexical Senses Correspond Between Spoken German and German Sign Language?</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Melis</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Çelikkol</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Wei</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Zhao</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2026-03</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the 19th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop)</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Selene</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Baez Santamaria</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Sai</namePart>
<namePart type="given">Ashish</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Somayajula</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Atsuki</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Yamaguchi</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>Association for Computational Linguistics</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Rabat, Morocco</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
<identifier type="isbn">979-8-89176-383-8</identifier>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>Sign language lexicographers construct bilingual dictionaries by establishing word-to-sign mappings, where polysemous and homonymous words corresponding to different signs across contexts are often underrepresented. A usage-based approach examining how word senses map to signs can identify such novel mappings absent from current dictionaries, enriching lexicographic resources.We address this by analyzing German and German Sign Language (Deutsche Gebärdensprache, DGS), manually annotating 1,404 word use–to–sign ID mappings derived from 32 words from the German Word Usage Graph (D-WUG) and 49 signs from the Digital Dictionary of German Sign Language (DW-DGS). We identify three correspondence types: Type 1 (one-to-many), Type 2 (many-to-one), and Type 3 (one-to-one), plus No Match cases. We evaluate computational methods: Exact Match (EM) and Semantic Similarity (SS) using SBERT embeddings. SS substantially outperforms EM overall 88.52% vs. 71.31%), with dramatic gains for Type 1 (+52.1 pp). Our work establishes the first annotated dataset for cross-modal sense correspondence and reveals which correspondence patterns are computationally tractable.Our code and dataset are made publicly available</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">celikkol-zhao-2026-lexical</identifier>
<location>
<url>https://aclanthology.org/2026.eacl-srw.54/</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2026-03</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>735</start>
<end>746</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T How Do Lexical Senses Correspond Between Spoken German and German Sign Language?
%A Çelikkol, Melis
%A Zhao, Wei
%Y Baez Santamaria, Selene
%Y Somayajula, Sai Ashish
%Y Yamaguchi, Atsuki
%S Proceedings of the 19th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 4: Student Research Workshop)
%D 2026
%8 March
%I Association for Computational Linguistics
%C Rabat, Morocco
%@ 979-8-89176-383-8
%F celikkol-zhao-2026-lexical
%X Sign language lexicographers construct bilingual dictionaries by establishing word-to-sign mappings, where polysemous and homonymous words corresponding to different signs across contexts are often underrepresented. A usage-based approach examining how word senses map to signs can identify such novel mappings absent from current dictionaries, enriching lexicographic resources.We address this by analyzing German and German Sign Language (Deutsche Gebärdensprache, DGS), manually annotating 1,404 word use–to–sign ID mappings derived from 32 words from the German Word Usage Graph (D-WUG) and 49 signs from the Digital Dictionary of German Sign Language (DW-DGS). We identify three correspondence types: Type 1 (one-to-many), Type 2 (many-to-one), and Type 3 (one-to-one), plus No Match cases. We evaluate computational methods: Exact Match (EM) and Semantic Similarity (SS) using SBERT embeddings. SS substantially outperforms EM overall 88.52% vs. 71.31%), with dramatic gains for Type 1 (+52.1 pp). Our work establishes the first annotated dataset for cross-modal sense correspondence and reveals which correspondence patterns are computationally tractable.Our code and dataset are made publicly available
%U https://aclanthology.org/2026.eacl-srw.54/
%P 735-746
Markdown (Informal)
[How Do Lexical Senses Correspond Between Spoken German and German Sign Language?](https://aclanthology.org/2026.eacl-srw.54/) (Çelikkol & Zhao, EACL 2026)
ACL