<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="C88-2101">
  <Title>amp;quot;:t C/'1 o Ii' - ~ o C/ eedback of Correcting :~librmafion ~u I osteditmg h~ a Machhte Translath~n 8ys{;em</Title>
  <Section position="3" start_page="0" end_page="476" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
L Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> Iv_ recent years, studies of machine translation have becn rapidly developed and tend to be put to practical use in various specific fields. (0 However, it is expected that the output sentences from machine translation systems need post-editing, more or less, over a long years for practical use as seen in the report on the praeeical experience of the Systrau Machine Translation system and the posteditors' experience. 0)-0) As can be easily seen, feedback of correcting information given by posteditors to the original MT system undoubtedly will bring a remarkable improvement of the translation proficiency to the system itselfi IIowever, it does not seem that adequate discussion about feedback of the information for improving of the MT system has been done so far. One of the main reasons will be that it is difficult to identify the part to be corrected in the MT system only by using brief correctins intbrmation.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> This paper presents an attempt to identify the responsible parts of a machine translation system in the case of Japanese to English translation. The part to be corrected in the MT system is identified by applying an English-Japanese Machine Translation system to the postedited output in the reverse direction to the orlginal translation. Tire English-aapauese MT system is assumed here to be capable of mmlyzing and comprehending the postedited output at least by using the fnndamentM and the general linguistic knowledge of the ~arget language. Associated with the assumption,  many of erroneous patterns arise due to lack of infbrm~-tion about specific usages of words rather tha.u h~(:k of general linguistic informationdeg Accordingly, such kind of correcting information given by posteditors can be understood from the general linguistic information.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> PEOOF(abbreviation of a PostEditing COrrecting inforrnation Feedback system) analyzes the correcting information by using the English-aapaxtese MT ~ystem and tries to perform feedback of it to tim MT systems.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> In the following sections~ the basic idea and the con..</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> struction of PECOF axe described in some details mid correcting of typical error patterns is illustrated with  Let us assume that the MT system is constructed based on a trm, sfer system. As shown in Fig.l, the orlginal machine translation system MTo parses a block of source language sentences So, constructs the intermediate expression or form SIo,transforms it to the tin-get language intermediate fornr TIol and Tlo2 by word and structure transfer and finally generates a block of the tat'get sentences To.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> In order to identify the kind of corrections given in ~ ta~rget lax~guage expression, PECOF needs ~z ~imple t',y'atactic mid lexical mmlyzer of the target language ~d least. If a part of the target sentences is corrected trod yet Tlo2 remains unchanged except ibr some syntactic term expressions, a syntactic rule corresponding to ~omc specific word usages of the tat'get language is checked~ the inappropriate paact of syntactic rules is identified and modified according to the correctioil given by po~.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> editor~.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> If the correction spread~ all over the par~ of the oraL. pat sentences or is nmde by entire replacement~ a p~xs.. i~g system of the target language is needed. Furtherdeg ~nox'e, if t.ome wrong trmisfers axe made over several transt~r stages, an MT system which works in the reverse db:ection is much required to identify them. It is called the reverse MT system briefly mid denoted with MTr.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="8"> In ~imilar to the original MT system, the reverse MT system p~rses the corrected target language expression ':Cr, const,:ucts the intermediate form Tit2 and TIrl, ~ransfortu,q Tit1 to the intermediate form Sir of the source lmlguage and generates the source language expressiox~ Sr which should be almost the same as the original :~ouree language expression So. The order of word trmmfer and structure transfer in the reverse MT systeru is reverse to that of the original MT system.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="9"> The relation between both the MT systems is illustrated in Fig.1. The ease system, the semantic category system and *;he intermediate form in the reverse MT system are the same as those of the original MT system.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="10"> The intermediate form in both the systems consists of several p,firs of a case label attd a term having the semantic .~nd the syntactic category name in option.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="11"> P~COF analyzes post-edited output by using the reverse ~\[T system and searches for the first transfer stage in which the intermediate form of the corrected output obtained by the reverse MT system differs from that of the original MT system.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="12"> After identifying the word block to be corrected mid PShe kind of correction PECOF tries to correct the corresponding part of the word dictionary and the transfer xules. Various methods from documentation to automatic correction can be considered. From a practicM point of view, it will be efficient to give various error parmesans through the intermediate forms and correspo,dingly to provide the correcting procedure of the database of the original MT .~y.ql.em, If unknown error patterns occur, PECOF only classifies the patterns to ask the posteditors about the correcting method.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="13"> AKer processing the wrong parts in the current transfer ~tage, PECOF updates the intermediate forms of the following stages of the original MT system output based on the corrections performed in the current stage. When some discrepancies still remain between ~:he interlnediate forms of the original output and those o |the postedited output , PECOF applies the same correcting procedures to the following transfer stages repeatedly.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="14"> The typical error patterns are classified into three classes. They are related to syntactic structure of target language, structure transfer and word transfer. In section 4, some types of the error patterns mid the corresponding correcting procedures arc described.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="15"> $o System construction and correcting information feedback In tMs section, the construction and the function of P~COF as well as those of both the MT systems are dezc:cibC/~'d in some detailsdeg ~0:~.o Ovt:rvlew of the MT sysiems iFigul'e 2 shows a schematic construction of our MT systems and the database. The systems belong to a kinds of trmlsfcr systems. (s) The body part of the processing, MAPTRAN, is divided into parsing, transfer mid generation. Three kinds of dictionaries are implemented for word transfer, rewriting rules and structure transfer.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
  <Section position="4" start_page="476" end_page="479" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
MAPTRAN
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> parallel bottom-up parsing word and structure transfer target sentence generation database a word-transfer dictionary a rewrltlng-rule dictionary a structure transfer dictionary a semantic category table Fig.2 Construction of the MT systems and tile datable Both the MT system from Japanese to English and that of the reverse direction use the same processing system MAPTRAN. (7) It is constructed on a hierarchical module basis and can be expanded into some computer languages such as C and LISP. (s) It parses the input sentences in a parallel bottom-up manner. The word transfer dictionary used here is constructed by combining an original word transfer dictionaxy with a source language word dictionary for analysis and a target language word diction~y for generation. The data structure of the dictionary can be semi-automatically transformed to an appropriate form corrcspondlng to the change of the programming language.</Paragraph>
    <Section position="1" start_page="476" end_page="479" type="sub_section">
      <SectionTitle>
3.2. Designation of correction
</SectionTitle>
      <Paragraph position="0"> In order to designate the location to be corrected, a number is attached to each word in the output sere tences. A word and a word sequence ca~l be designated by a number or by a pair of the first word number ul and the last word number n2 like nl-n2. Replacement of words is designated as follows: replace ~ ~2-~ by &amp;quot; ~t new word sequence &amp;quot; (1) Insertion and deletion can be indicated in a similar manner.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="1"> Movement of a word group ranging from the word nmnber nl to n2 to the front of the word of the nmnber n3 is designated as follows: move nl-n2 to n3. (2) For a given correction, it will be not sometimes easy for PECOF to identify the key item to be corrected in the dictionary when the original MT system does not have the sufficient linguistic knowledge and has a lot of possible reasons for correction. In such cases, it will be effective that PECOF is informed of the key information of correction by posteditors.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="2"> However, detailed descriptions are laborious for post-editors and hard for PECOF to comprehend. One way to solve this problem is to indicate one or two words that conflict with the words to be corrected in the output sentences or phrases. Besides, it is sometimes desirable to add some words that stand for the kind of correction. The designation is given in a form where the reason is added to correction in option. For exam.pie, the reasoning for (1) is written as follows: where it (nl or nl-n2) conflicts with n3 in terms of ~RI&amp;quot; In the above the underlined parts are words to be given by a posteditor. R1 stands for a kind of correction like  TENSE conflict and SEMantic CATegory conflict.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="3"> Similarly, the posteditor can add a syntactic symbol such as a part of speech a technical term a compound and an idiom to a word group involved in the given new word sequence if necessary.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="4"> 3.3. Correction by PECOF Figure 3 shows the main functions of PECOF.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="5">  (I) Analysis of the corrected parts by using the reverse MT system PECOF (2) Identification of the part to be corrected in the database (3) Correction of the part of database or documentation of the corrected patterns which cannot be completely identified Fig.3 The main functions of PECOF 3.3.1. Installation  In order to keep lexical information of the words appearing in the source language sentences till the end of correcting, PECOF needs some record type database. The current dictionaries are constructed there by copying the parts of the dictionary in the file and modification of the dictionary are performed on the database. The reverse MT system needs the fundamental rewriting rules to be implemented based on the case grammar to parse and comprehend the target language * degutput modified by posteditors. Most of parsing systems based on a case grammar will be available with some modification.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="6">  First, PECOF makes the reverse MT system to analyze the postedited output and construct the intermediate forms. When the postedited output involves some words which are not contained in the word dictionary and also in the syntactic information given by the postcditor, PECOF tries to identify the syntactic information and the equivalents ef the unknown words by referring to the information of the related words in both the target and the source language expressions or by asking the posteditor about them later.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="7"> After constructing the intermediate form, PECOF compares it with that of the original MT system. If there are some differences between them, PECOF makes the reverse MT system to further transfer the intermediate form in the reverse direction. If the reverse MT system has sufficient capability of translation, it will be able to yield almost the same intermediate form as the original MT system at a certain transfer stage though the same form might be able to be obtained only in the given source language sentential expressions. Furthermore, if the original MT system can parse and normalize the source language sentences correctly, both the intermediate forms coincides with each other by the end of the word transfer stage of the reverse MT system at the latest.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="8"> If the same intermediate form is obtained, PECOF stops the transfer by the reverse MT system and begins to backtrack. Then PECOF tries to remove the difference between the next-stage intermediate form of the original MT system and that of the reverse MT system.  More precisely, PECOF identifies the irrelevant part of the intermediate form of the original MT system by comparing it with that of the corrected results given by the reverse MT system and corrects the data and the applied conditions in the database according to the procedures determined from the difference patterns. If the reasoning of corrections is given in a form of the conflicting words and the associated information as mentioned in section 3.2, PECOF examines the data to be corrected mid the irrelevant applied conditions by referring to the syntactic and semantic attributes of the conflicting words, and corrects the data and the applied condition to be more relevant by refining unifying or replacing the old conditions.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="9"> Some databases such as word dictionaries omits detailed items like the applied conditions of a word if they are generally held. These deficit items are implicitly designated by a general condition table impleo mented for each category of words. In such cases, if a specific equivalent is designated together with the reasoning by a posteditor, the applied conditions of the equivalent derived from the reasoning are written in the corresponding part of the record of the current word dictionary directly or through a pointer.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="10"> If the correction in postediting lacks detailed information about wrong translation and confident reasons necessary for correcting the database, PECOF arranges the related parts of corrections of the corresponding original target and source expressions, classifies them by some attributes of the error patterns and adds them to a document of error patterns. Then PECOF urges the users to formulate the correcting procedures of the part of database corresponding to the error patterns.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="11">  4. Miscellaneous correction information in posteditlng 4.1. Syntactic structure correction  Every part of the translated output is required to meet syntactic patterns of the target language even by modifying and complementing the given source language sentences. The occurrence of some syntactic errors and their corrections in the target language expressions can be detected when some parts of the target language expressions are corrected though the intermediate forms are the same as those of the corrected expressions except for some syntactic term expressionsdeg 4.1ol. Word expressions Let us describe the rewriting rules of a noun phrase as follows:</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="13"> The above expressions are useful for transformation between sentences and the intermediate expressions in parsing and generation of sentences, In the rewriting rule expressions, ni(i-l,2) and v are a noun term and a verb term respectively, nl{v} means that nl is a noun term derived from a verb term.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="14"> &lt;:NP(t)&gt; and &lt;INF(t)&gt; denote the non-ternfinal sym~ bolz of ~z noun phrase and an infinitive phrase correspondirq~ to a term expression o1' an intermediate form t. The symbol * denotes the term prefixed to a frame which includes and modifies the symbol *. In this ease, it stands for nl{v}. PRED and OB3 denote a PREDicate case label and art OBject ease label respectively. K1 and K2 stand for some case labels. The term ekpresslons of the left side hand of the rewriting rule (3)d describe that nl{v} is modified by n2 which depends on a predicative noun nl as the objective term.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="15"> In usual cases, the preposition used for modifying a noun by a noun is the preposition &amp;quot;of&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;of&amp;quot; is taken for the dcfidt value of the preposition. If a specific preposition &amp;quot;prep&amp;quot; is indicated to the noun term nl{vt} by a posteditor, PECOF records &amp;quot;prep&amp;quot; in the preposi-I;ion item of the noun word nl of the word dictionary together with the applied rewriting rule as follows:</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="17"> where'a ~- b' means the replacement of %' by 'b'.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="18"> Corresponding to error corrections in postediting in the above, the recorded items of &amp;quot;prep&amp;quot; in the word dictionary are &amp;quot;into&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;on&amp;quot; in a form of (4) respectively. null The correcting information of the other kinds of syntactic errors can be fed back to the original MT system in a similar way.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="19"> 4.L2deg lhewrltlng rule eons~ructlon An MT system sometimes lacks some rewriting rules.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="20"> For example, technical papers oll.en devise and use a concise phra~e expression instead of a long complicated expression under ~lle condition that no ambiguity is brought.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="21"> Let u,~ consider the following rewriting rules of a noun phrase:</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="23"> where RLC and DET stand for RELative Clause and DETerminer respectively.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="24"> When an interinediate form</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="26"> is given~ a relative clause &amp;quot; a car that is driven by motor&amp;quot; (6.2) is generated by the rewriting rule (5.1) aud others. Now ~ suppose that the relative clause is replaced by a phrase &amp;quot;a motor driven tax&amp;quot; (7.1) in postediti~,g. PECOF infers the rewriting rule which wewrites (6.1) to the above corrected phrase and adds to (SA) an alternative rewriting rule</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="28"> Some words can be used only by a specific syntactic rule which belongs to a general syntactic rule. The sentences that include these words can be parsed and interpreted by the general rules which are not conditioned by various syntactic patterns in details. On the contrary, the generation of the sentences needs the information of the specific usages of the words. For example, the verb &amp;quot;doubt&amp;quot; conventionally takes the OBject term through WHETHER-CLAUSE in an affirmative sentence and THAT-CLAUSE in a negative sentence. The information is needed to generate the target sentence from the intermediate form TIo2 and is given by some rewriting rules or by complementing the rewriting rules hy means of adding the necessary information to the word dictionary as shown in Expr.(4).</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="29"> 4deg2. Transfer rule C/orrectlon  If the intermediate form TIol is the same as that of the postedited output Tlrl though TIo2 is different from TIr2, PECOF tries to search for some structure transfer rules to meet the corrections. Structure transfer is needed so that natural and conventional target language expressions can be generated corresponding to given source language expressions.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="30"> As well known, Japanese tends to avoid the use of non-animate subjects and also interpret an event as a change of a state due to some causes rather than action on some objects by an agent. A general structure transfer rule between state chauge and action is given as ibllows: STR:CRl(Structure Transfer Rule :Cause Result 1)</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="32"> where v2 and vl form a pair of verbs of 'cmtse and result' or 'action and state change'. The typical concrete instances of them are &amp;quot;cause to do&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;do&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;lead&amp;quot; and&amp;quot;reach&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;show&amp;quot; aald &amp;quot;be seen&amp;quot; mid others. The above fundamental rule (8.1) is implemented in the database of the original MT system as well as the reverse MT system in the structure transfer database.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="33"> The specific information of cause verb &amp;quot;v2&amp;quot; for a given result verb &amp;quot;vl&amp;quot; is sometimes recorded in the word dictionary together with the name of the applied transfer rule as follows: CAUSE-V:v2 STR:CR1 (8.2) When PECOF finds that an original output is pos,edited by the structure transfer of this type and by using a cause verb v2, PECOF records v2 in the vl item of the word dictionary according to the form (8.2).</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="34"> 4.2.2. Word transfer The word to be corrected in word transfer can be identified by using the information about replacement of fall words such as verbs adjectives and nouns. More precisely, it can be identified from a term of the target language intermediate form TIrl modified by a posteditot. Some patterns to bc corrected are shown in the following. null In a ease structure of a language, the semantic categories of a governor and the dependants are~ more or less, bounded. Furthermore, the conventional category boundary set of terms in a frame of the target language is not always the same as that of the source  language and sometimes structure transfer is needed.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="35"> The discrepancy between the semantic category boundary of a word and that of the equivalent is revealed when the word is linked with some dependants or the governor, ttence the equivalent must be chosen so that no conflict occurs on the semantic category conditions of the linked words in the target language.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="36"> Let us assume that a word tl of a source language can be represented by an equivalent tll' or t12' of the target language in the following condition: HEADWOItD: tl EQUIV:t Ii ' COND:(KI-Chtl, K2-C21,...), (9.1) EQUIV:t 12' COND:(KI-CI:tl, K2-C22,...), (9.2) where Ki and Ci (i=1,2,...) denote a case label and a semantic category nmne respectively and both t11' and t12' are the equivalents of tl under the condition that the term tl appears in the context of the case-category label of K1-C1 accompanied with a term of case-category label K2-C21 or K2-C22.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="37"> Furthermore, suppose that a postedltor replaces the equivalent tll' by t13' under a condition that the word tl is accompanied with a word t23 of a case-category label K2-C23 and C23 is a subcategory name of C21.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="38"> Then, the equivalent applied condition (9.1) of the word tl of the word dictionary are replaced as follows: HEADWORD:t 1 EQUIV:t 11 ', COND:(K1-CI:t 1,K2-{C21-C23},...), (9.3) EQUIV:tl3', COND:(KI-C l:t I,K2-C23,...), (9.4) If t13' is the same as t12', (9.4) and (9.2) are unified as follows: EQUIV:tl2', COND:(K1-Chtl,lC/2-{C22 ~C23},...), (9.5) where {Ci+-Cj) denotes the union or the difference set of the sets expressed by tim category names Ci and cj.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="39"> Example 2 Japanese represents emotional state expressions by using adjective verbs. They have the same form irrespective of the active or the passive type. On the other hand, English has a different expression depending on whether the object to be described is active or passive. For instance, they are &amp;quot;interesting&amp;quot; versus &amp;quot;interested&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;enjoyable&amp;quot; versus &amp;quot;enjoy oneself&amp;quot;, &amp;quot;exciting&amp;quot; versus &amp;quot;excited&amp;quot; and others. Let us take an example. It is assumed that the main part of the Japanese-English word dictionary of a word &amp;quot;TAIKUTSU-DE ARU&amp;quot; or &amp;quot; be boring&amp;quot; in English is given as follows:  ATTA&amp;quot; a modified sentence &amp;quot;I was (boring *--bored) in his lecture&amp;quot; is given by a posteditor. PECOF identifies the wrong expression and refines the corresponding items of the word dictionary by referring to the format  where * stands for the word &amp;quot;TAIKUTSU-DE ARU&amp;quot;. Example 3 A Japanese verb &amp;quot;oshieru&amp;quot; has several meanings, namely, &amp;quot;teach, tell, show, instruct and so forth&amp;quot;. The object case categories of &amp;quot;teach&amp;quot; and &amp;quot;tell&amp;quot; of English in this context are a school subject like mathematics and simple information like a way to a station respectively. The system MTo chooses the equivalents by examlno ing these category conditions. If the postediting results suggest that the system needs more precise conditions for equivalent selection, PECOF tries to refine the category conditions or to add the other case conditions. 4.3. Idlomatle expression transfer An idiomatic expression (including a compound) cow sists of several words and has a somewhat definite meaning when compared with a single word. Every language has various unique idiomatic expressions. It is considered that one of the most efficient and reliable methods in machine translation is to cover the main content to be translated with a frame of an appropriate idiomatic expression of the target language. Therefore, it will be necessary for a good MT system to have a large storage of various idiomatic expressions and to be capable of selecting an appropriate target idiomatic expression to cover the main part of a given source language expressions. PECOF helps gathering the idiomatic expressions given by posteditors.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="40"> At first, PECOF identifies an output part modified by a posteditor to be an idiomatic expressions. The information of identification is given by the postedltor or is inferred from a phrase form of the replaced part. PECOF selects a keyword among the words involved in the idiomatic expression and identifies the corresponddeg ing source language word by referring to the current word dictionary mentioned in section 3. Then PECOF records the corresponding source language idiomatic expressions &amp;quot;al t /~1&amp;quot; at the location labeled with the heading of the keyword &amp;quot;t&amp;quot; in the word dictionary so that the idiomatic expression can be applied with priority in the word transfer by the longest match method. If a similar heading idiomatic expression &amp;quot;a2 t f12&amp;quot; which has the same target expressions is already involved in the location, these heading expressions are unified as follows: ,,{~1,~2} t {~1,~2},, ,-- ,,~1 t ~r,, ,,~2 t ~2', The semantic and syntactic information necessary tbr the dependants and the governor are added to the idiomatic expressions.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="41">  Thi:~ ~c,:tion sho.m some illustrative examples of the modific~,tion of d{ctiomMez by posteditors ~ correcting inlbrmati~t, 'J/hey axe {;o bc tested by the experinmntal system PI~\]COF which is uttdcr construction.</Paragraph>
      <Paragraph position="42"> ~\]xample ~;~1 The inpn~ 3apanese sentence So mid tim output To of t;he original Mq.' system are given respectively aa lbl..</Paragraph>
    </Section>
  </Section>
  <Section position="5" start_page="479" end_page="479" type="metho">
    <SectionTitle>
\].OWS .'
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> To:The tC/.ol ha.s the ability which removc'~ heat fl:om the crit;ieal~cut-rmlge.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> The interr,mdiate form Tio2 of the above is</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> The output Tr corrected by a posteditor is 'rr:The tool has the ability to remove heat from the critical catting re'ca.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> The inte:.:n,ediate Ibrm Tit2 of the above is the same as Tio2 e)::cept Nr the technical term &amp;quot;critical cutting First~ PFATOI? find~ t, hat the intermediate form Tlol of the origimd ouLpnt is the same as that of the postedited ou~pu~ T\[:.:I if the word &amp;quot;critical~vuG~ang0&amp;quot; iS l'epl~ced by &amp;quot;crith:alocutting-area' ~ according to postedi~or's designation. PECOF corrects the word dictionary m~d ~he intermediate forms of the following tran.st~r stages bmsed on ~he replacement and finds that discrepmmies remain only in the target surNce expressions.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> PECOF examines the rewriting rules applied to Tlr2~ recognizes that the form to be ~applied to &amp;quot;ability&amp;quot; as a modifier is an il/finitive and adds the information to the MODifier item of the word dictionary as follows: HEADWORD: fl~?\]J (NOURYOKU) EQUIV:ability,.., MODifier:&lt;INF&gt;, RR:ADJP2 Bxample 5,2 The input Japmtese sentence So and the output To of the original MT system are given respectively as tbldeg low~: So: = C/)I,~)~tINJfV4:: * o:, ~c~C/)~Y ~ .. ~--Y- 4 Jto ttl')J ~q'4 6 tc Z,.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="6"> To: A phlrMity of outputs d variable duty ratio is obtai~,ed with this time division operation.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="7"> The intermediate form TIo2 of the above is  TIr2 cau be obtained by applying tim gexleral Structure '\]?rausfcr R.ule CR1 to Tit2 with the specification of CAUSI~:V being &amp;quot;provide&amp;quot; for RESULT-V of &amp;quot;obtain&amp;quot;, and then writes down the information in the corresponding item in the word dictionary a~s follows:  This research is still under the early stage and needs a lot of experimental investigation. This paper shows a nmthod of modification of the database for a comparatively definite error patterns. There will be left various kinds of indefinite error patterns which should be characterized chLssified and corrected by some formulated procedures. IIowever, the basic idea mM system presented here will be useful for improving the trmlslation quality of the MT system and collecting new technical words and idiomatic expressions. Furthermore, if both the original and the reverse MT systems have the posteditors feedback respectively and cooperate with each other, the integrated system will be very powerful and efficienPS C/o improve ~he tra~slatk)n tI*~Mity and capability in the bilingual translation.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>