Search results

ESIC (Europarl Simultaneous Interpreting Corpus) is a corpus of 370 speeches (10 hours) in English, with manual transcripts, transcribed simultaneous interpreting into Czech and German, and parallel translations. The corpus contains source English videos and audios. The interpreters' voices are not published within the corpus, but there is a tool that downloads them from the web of European Parliament, where they are publicly avaiable. The transcripts are equipped with metadata (disfluencies, mixing voices and languages, read or spontaneous speech, etc.), punctuated, and with word-level timestamps. The speeches in the corpus come from the European Parliament plenary sessions, from the period 2008-11. Most of the speakers are MEP, both native and non-native speakers of English. The corpus contains metadata about the speakers (name, surname, id, fraction) and about the speech (date, topic, read or spontaneous). The current version of ESIC is v1.0. It has validation and evaluation parts.

The collection consists of: Thirty million words of monolingual written data (Gujarati, Tamil, Hindi, Punjabi-news website articles); 600,000 words of monolingual spoken data (Hindi, Urdu, Punjabi, Bengali, Gujarati-radio broadcasts); 120,000 words of parallel data in each of English, Hindi, Urdu, Punjabi, Bengali and Gujarati (U.K. government leaflets).

While reading academic papers and books on political regimes in Central Europe, one can become aware of an interesting and remarkable fact: these regimes (forms of government) are classified rather differently. Whereas some scholars tend to approach them as parliamentary regimes, others classify them as semi-presidential ones. The major dividing line between these two perspectives runs between a large group of English-writing scholars based outside Central Europe and those from Central Europe itself. Having reviewed a large number of relevant studies in this field, the authors of this article argue that the key reason for the different assessments of Central European regimes resides mainly in a different theoretical (but also methodological) approach, which has important implications when considering how these regimes are treated in various studies. Whereas the group of English-writing scholars tends to adopt a minimalist institutional definition suggested by Robert Elgie, most Central European scholars prefer an approach (inspired by Duverger or Sartori) that emphasizes presidential powers, which are irrelevant to Elgie's definition. ; While reading academic papers and books on political regimes in Central Europe, one can become aware of an interesting and remarkable fact: these regimes (forms of government) are classified rather differently. Whereas some scholars tend to approach them as parliamentary regimes, others classify them as semi-presidential ones. The major dividing line between these two perspectives runs between a large group of English-writing scholars based outside Central Europe and those from Central Europe itself. Having reviewed a large number of relevant studies in this field, the authors of this article argue that the key reason for the different assessments of Central European regimes resides mainly in a different theoretical (but also methodological) approach, which has important implications when considering how these regimes are treated in various studies. Whereas the group of ...

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1388. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project.