Detecting inappropriate language in online platforms is vital for maintaining a safe and respectful digital environment, especially in the context of hate speech prevention. However, defining what constitutes inappropriate language can be highly subjective and context-dependent, varying from person to person. This study presents the outcomes of a comprehensive examination of the subjectivity involved in assessing inappropriateness within conversational contexts. Different annotation methods, including expert annotation, crowd annotation, ChatGPT-generated annotation, and lexicon-based annotation, were applied to English Reddit conversations. The analysis revealed a high level of agreement across these annotation methods, with most disagreements arising from subjective interpretations of inappropriate language. This emphasizes the importance of implementing content moderation systems that not only recognize inappropriate content but also understand and adapt to diverse user perspectives and contexts. The study contributes to the evolving field of hate speech annotation by providing a detailed analysis of annotation differences in relation to the subjective task of judging inappropriate words in conversations.

In this paper, we discuss an interpretable framework to integrate toxic language annotations. Most data sets address only one aspect of the complex relationship in toxic communication and are inconsistent with each other. Enriching annotations with more details and information is however of great importance in order to develop high-performing and comprehensive explainable language models. Such systems should recognize and interpret both expressions that are toxic as well as expressions that make reference to specific targets to combat toxic language. We therefore created a crowd-annotation task to mark the spans of words that refer to target communities as an extension of the HateXplain data set. We present a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the annotations. We also fine-tuned RoBERTa-base on our data and experimented with different data thresholds to measure their effect on the classification. The F1-score of our best model on the test set is 79%. The annotations are freely available and can be combined with the existing HateXplain annotation to build richer and more complete models.

In this paper we present the Vaccination Corpus, a corpus of texts related to the online vaccination debate that has been annotated with three layers of information about perspectives: attribution, claims and opinions. Additionally, events related to the vaccination debate are also annotated. The corpus contains 294 documents from the Internet which reflect different views on vaccinations. It has been compiled to study the language of online debates, with the final goal of experimenting with methodologies to extract and contrast perspectives in the framework of the vaccination debate.

Complexity of event data in texts makes it difficult to assess its content, especially when considering larger collections in which different sources report on the same or similar situations. We present a system that makes it possible to visually analyze complex event and emotion data extracted from texts. We show that we can abstract from different data models for events and emotions to a single data model that can show the complex relations in four dimensions. The visualization has been applied to analyze 1) dynamic developments in how people both conceive and express emotions in theater plays and 2) how stories are told from the perspectyive of their sources based on rich event data extracted from news or biographies.

This paper presents a framework and methodology for the annotation of perspectives in text. In the last decade, different aspects of linguistic encoding of perspectives have been targeted as separated phenomena through different annotation initiatives. We propose an annotation scheme that integrates these different phenomena. We use a multilayered annotation approach, splitting the annotation of different aspects of perspectives into small subsequent subtasks in order to reduce the complexity of the task and to better monitor interactions between layers. Currently, we have included four layers of perspective annotation: events, attribution, factuality and opinion. The annotations are integrated in a formal model called GRaSP, which provides the means to represent instances (e.g. events, entities) and propositions in the (real or assumed) world in relation to their mentions in text. Then, the relation between the source and target of a perspective is characterized by means of perspective annotations. This enables us to place alternative perspectives on the same entity, event or proposition next to each other.

In this paper we focus on the creation of general-purpose (as opposed to domain-specific) polarity lexicons in five languages: French, Italian, Dutch, English and Spanish using WordNet propagation. WordNet propagation is a commonly used method to generate these lexicons as it gives high coverage of general purpose language and the semantically rich WordNets where concepts are organised in synonym , antonym and hyperonym/hyponym structures seem to be well suited to the identification of positive and negative words. However, WordNets of different languages may vary in many ways such as the way they are compiled, the number of synsets, number of synonyms and number of semantic relations they include. In this study we investigate whether this variability translates into differences of performance when these WordNets are used for polarity propagation. Although many variants of the propagation method are developed for English, little is known about how they perform with WordNets of other languages. We implemented a propagation algorithm and designed a method to obtain seed lists similar with respect to quality and size, for each of the five languages. We evaluated the results against gold standards also developed according to a common method in order to achieve as less variance as possible between the different languages.

In this paper we propose a method to build fine-grained subjectivity lexicons including nouns, verbs and adjectives. The method, which is applied for Dutch, is based on the comparison of word frequencies of three corpora: Wikipedia, News and News comments. Comparison of the corpora is carried out with two measures: log-likelihood ratio and a percentage difference calculation. The first step of the method involves subjectivity identification, i.e. determining if a word is subjective or not. The second step aims at the identification of more fine-grained subjectivity which is the distinction between actor subjectivity and speaker / writer subjectivity. The results suggest that this approach can be usefully applied producing subjectivity lexicons of high quality.

Many techniques are developed to derive automatically lexical resources for opinion mining. In this paper we present a gold standard for Dutch adjectives developed for the evaluation of these techniques. In the first part of the paper we introduce our annotation guidelines. They are based upon guidelines recently developed for English which annotate subjectivity and polarity at word sense level. In addition to subjectivity and polarity we propose a third annotation category: that of the attitude holder. The identity of the attitude holder is partly implied by the word itself and may provide useful information for opinion mining systems. In the second part of paper we present the criteria adopted for the selection of items which should be included in this gold standard. Our design is aimed at an equal representation of all dimensions of the lexicon , like frequency and polysemy, in order to create a gold standard which can be used not only for benchmarking purposes but also may help to improve in a systematic way, the methods which derive the word lists. Finally we present the results of the annotation task including annotator agreement rates and disagreement analysis.

Cornetto is a two-year Stevin project (project number STE05039) in which a lexical semantic database is built that combines Wordnet with Framenet-like information for Dutch. The combination of the two lexical resources (the Dutch Wordnet and the Referentie Bestand Nederlands) will result in a much richer relational database that may improve natural language processing (NLP) technologies, such as word sense-disambiguation, and language-generation systems. In addition to merging the Dutch lexicons, the database is also mapped to a formal ontology to provide a more solid semantic backbone. Since the database represents different traditions and perspectives of semantic organization, a key issue in the project is the alignment of concepts across the resources. This paper discusses our methodology to first automatically align the word meanings and secondly to manually revise the most critical cases.

The goal of this paper is to describe how adjectives are encoded in Cornetto, a semantic lexical database for Dutch. Cornetto combines two existing lexical resources with different semantic organisation, i.e. Dutch Wordnet (DWN) with a synset organisation and Referentie Bestand Nederlands (RBN) with an organisation in Lexical Units. Both resources will be aligned and mapped on the formal ontology SUMO. In this paper, we will first present details of the description of adjectives in each of the the two resources. We will then address the problems that are encountered during alignment to the SUMO ontology which are greatly due to the fact that SUMO has never been tested for its adequacy with respect to adjectives. We contrasted SUMO with an existing semantic classification which resulted in a further refined and extended SUMO geared for the description of adjectives.

The Dutch HLT agency for language and speech technology (known as TST-centrale) at the Institute for Dutch Lexicology is responsible for the maintenance, distribution and accessibility of (Dutch) digital language resources. In this paper we present a project which aims to standardise the format of a set of bilingual lexicons in order to make them available to potential users, to facilitate the exchange of data (among the resources and with other (monolingual) resources) and to enable reuse of these lexicons for NLP applications like machine translation and multilingual information retrieval. We pay special attention to the methods and tools we used and to some of the problematic issues we encountered during the conversion process. As these problems are mainly caused by the fact that the standard LMF model fails in representing the detailed semantic and pragmatic distinctions made in our bilingual data, we propose some modifications to the standard. In general, we think that a standard for lexicons should provide a model for bilingual lexicons that is able to represent all detailed and fine-grained translation information which is generally found in these types of lexicons.

Results are presented of an ongoing project of the Dutch TST-centre for language and speech technology aiming at linking of various lexical databases. The project involves four Dutch monolingual lexicons: WlNT05, e-Lex, RBN and RBBN. These databases differ in organisational structure and content. To enable linkage between these lexicons, we developed a common feature value set and a common organisational structure. Both are based upon existing standards for the creation and reusability of lexicons: the Lexical Markup Framework and the EAGLES standard. Examples of the content and structure of each of the lexical databases are presented in their original form. Also, the structure and content is shown when mapped onto the common framework and feature value set. Thus, the commonalities and the complementarity of the lexical databases are more readily apparent. Besides, this elaboration of the databases opens up the opportunity for mutual enrichment.