Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-bt4hw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-29T21:32:02.383Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sentiment analysis in Turkish at different granularity levels

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2016

RAHIM DEHKHARGHANI ,
BERRIN YANIKOGLU ,
YUCEL SAYGIN  and
KEMAL OFLAZER
RAHIM DEHKHARGHANI
Affiliation:
University of Bonab, Bonab, Iran e-mail: rdehkharghani@bonabu.ac.ir
BERRIN YANIKOGLU
Affiliation:
Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Sabancı University, Istanbul, Turkey e-mails: berrin@sabanciuniv.edu, ysaygin@sabanciuniv.edu
YUCEL SAYGIN
Affiliation:
Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Sabancı University, Istanbul, Turkey e-mails: berrin@sabanciuniv.edu, ysaygin@sabanciuniv.edu
KEMAL OFLAZER
Affiliation:
Carnegie Mellon University – Qatar, Doha, Qatar e-mail: ko@cs.cmu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sentiment analysis has attracted a lot of research interest in recent years, especially in the context of social media. While most of this research has focused on English, there is ample data and interest in the topic for many other languages, as well. In this article, we propose a comprehensive sentiment analysis system for Turkish. We cover different levels of sentiment analysis such as aspect, sentence, and document levels as well as some linguistic issues such as conjunction and intensification in Turkish sentiment analysis. Our system is evaluated on Turkish movie reviews and the obtained accuracies range from sixty per cent to seventy-nine per cent in ternary and binary classification tasks at different levels of analysis.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Natural Language Engineering , Volume 23 , Issue 4 , July 2017 , pp. 535 - 559
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Akın, A. A., and Akın, M. D. 2006. Zemberek, an open source NLP framework for Turkic Languages. Available at http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.556.69&rep=rep1&type=pdf.Google Scholar
Bilgin, O., Çetinoğlu, Ö., and Oflazer, K., 2004. Building a wordnet for Turkish. Romanian Journal of Information Science and Technology 7 (1–2): 163–72.Google Scholar
Boynukalın, Z. 2012. Emotion analysis of Turkish texts by using machine learning methods. MSc Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.Google Scholar
Cambria, E., Hussain, A., Durrani, T., and Zhang, J. 2012. Towards a Chinese common and common-sense knowledge base for sentiment analysis. In Advanced Research in Applied Artificial Intelligence, pp. 437–46. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Cambria, E., Livingstone, A., and Hussain, A. 2012. The hourglass of emotions. In Cognitive Behavioural Systems, pp. 144–57. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
Cambria, E., Olsher, D., and Rajagopal, D., 2014. SenticNet 3: a common and common-sense knowledge base for cognition-driven sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of 28th AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Quebec, Canada, pp. 1515–21.Google Scholar
Davidov, D., Tsur, O., and Rappoport, A., 2010. Semi-supervised recognition of sarcastic sentences in Twitter and Amazon. In Proceedings of the 14th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning, Association for Computational Linguistics, Uppsala, Sweden, pp. 107–16.Google Scholar
Dehkharghani, R., Saygin, Y., Yanikoglu, B., and Oflazer, K., 2016. SentiTurkNet: a Turkish polarity lexicon for sentiment analysis. Language Resources and Evaluation 50 (3): 667–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dehkharghani, R., Yanikoglu, B., Tapucu, D., and Saygin, Y., 2012. Adaptation and use of subjectivity lexicons for domain dependent sentiment classification. In Proceedings of Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW) 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on, Bruksel, Belgium, pp. 669–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demiröz, G., Yanikoglu, B., Tapucu, D., and Saygin, Y. 2014. Learning domain-specific polarity lexicons. In Proceedings of Data Mining Workshops (ICDMW) 2012 IEEE 12th International Conference on, Bruksel, Belgium, (7) pp. 674–9.Google Scholar
Ding, X., Liu, B., and Yu, P. S. 2008. A holistic lexicon-based approach to opinion mining. In Najork, M., Broder, A. Z., and Chakrabarti, S. (eds.), Proceedings of WSDM, Palo Alto, California, USA: ACM, pp. 231–40.Google Scholar
Eroğul, U. 2012. Sentiment analysis in Turkish. MSc Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Turkey.Google Scholar
Eryiğit, G., 2014. ITU Turkish NLP web Service. In Proceedings of the Demonstrations at the 14th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Gothenburg, Sweden, pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
Estabrooks, A., Jo, T., and Japkowicz, N., 2004. A multiple resampling method for learning from imbalanced data sets. Computational Intelligence 20 (1): 18–36.Google Scholar
Esuli, A., and Sebastiani, F. 2006. SentiWordNet: a publicly available lexical resource for opinion mining. In Proceedings of LREC, Genoa, Italy, (6) pp. 417–22.Google Scholar
Gezici, G., Yanikoglu, B., Tapucu, D., and Saygin, Y. 2012. New features for sentiment analysis: do sentences matter? In Proceedings of SDAD 2012, The 1st International Workshop on Sentiment Discovery from Affective Data, Edinburgh, Scottland, p. 5.Google Scholar
Hatzivassiloglou, V., and McKeown, K. R., 1997. Predicting the semantic orientation of adjectives. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and 8th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Association for Computational Linguistics, Madrid, Spain, pp. 174–81.Google Scholar
Havasi, C., Speer, R., and Alonso, J., 2007. ConceptNet 3: a flexible, multilingual semantic network for common sense knowledge. In Proceedings of Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing, Borovets, Bulgaria, pp. 27–9.Google Scholar
Hosmer, D. Jr, and Lemeshow, S., 2014. Applied Logistic Regression. New Jersey, USA: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Hu, M., and Liu, B., 2004. Mining and summarizing customer reviews. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Seattle, WA, USA, pp. 168–77.Google Scholar
Jia, L., Yu, C., and Meng, W., 2009. The effect of negation on sentiment analysis and retrieval effectiveness. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Hong Kong, China, pp. 1827–30.Google Scholar
Kanayama, H., and Nasukawa, T., 2006. Fully automatic lexicon expansion for domain-oriented sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the 2006 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, Sydney, Australia, pp. 355–63.Google Scholar
Kaya, M., Fidan, G., and Toroslu, I. H. 2012. Sentiment analysis of Turkish political news. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Joint Conferences on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, Macau, China, (1) pp. 174–80.Google Scholar
Kaya, M., Fidan, G., and Toroslu, I. H. 2013. Transfer learning using twitter data for improving sentiment classification of Turkish political news. In Information Sciences and Systems, pp. 139–48, Springer.Google Scholar
Lenat, D. B. and Guha, R. V. 1989. Building large knowledge-based systems; representation and inference in the Cyc project. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.Google Scholar
Liu, B. 2012. Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining. Morgan and Claypool Publishers, USA.Google Scholar
Meena, A. and Prabhakar, T. V., 2014. Sentence Level Sentiment Analysis in the Presence of Conjuncts using Linguistic Cnalysis. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 573–80.Google Scholar
Minaei-Bidgoli, B., Topchy, A., and Punch, W. F., 2004. Ensembles of partitions via data resampling. In Proceedings of International Conference on Information Technology: Coding and Computing, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, pp. 188–92.Google Scholar
Narayanan, R., Liu, B., and Choudhary, A., 2012. Sentiment analysis of conditional sentences. In Proceedings of the 2009 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics, Suntec Singapore, vol. 1(1), pp. 180–9.Google Scholar
Oflazer, K., 1994. Two-level description of Turkish morphology. Literary and Linguistic Computing 2 (9): 137–48.Google Scholar
Oflazer, K. and Bozşahin, H. C. 1994. Turkish natural language processing initiative. In Proceedings of the 3rd Turkish Symposium on Artificial Intelligence and Artificial Neural Networks, Ankara, Turkey.Google Scholar
Pang, B., Lee, L., and Vaithyanathan, S. 2002. Thumbs up? Sentiment classification using machine learning techniques. In Proceedings of Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, Philadelphia, USA, (10) pp. 79–86.Google Scholar
Seslisözlük Group. 2014. Sesli sözlük, bidirectional English-Turkish-English dictionary. http://www.seslisozluk.net, Accessed: September 2014.Google Scholar
Sureka, A., Goyal, V., Correa, D., and Mondal, A. 2012. Polarity classification of subjective words using common-sense knowledge-base. Rough Sets, Fuzzy Sets, Data Mining and Granular Computing. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer, pp. 486–93.Google Scholar
Thelwall, M., Buckley, K., and Paltoglou, G., 2012. Sentiment strength detection for the social web. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 63 (1): 163–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turkmenoğlu, C., and Tantuğ, A. C. 2014. Sentiment analysis in Turkish media. In Proceedings of Workshop on Issues of Sentiment Discovery and Opinion Mining, International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), Beijing, China.Google Scholar
Vural, A. G., Cambazoğlu, B. B., Şenkul, P., and Tokgöz, Z. Ö. 2013. A framework for sentiment analysis in Turkish: application to polarity detection of movie reviews in Turkish. In Computer and Information Sciences, pp. 437–45. London: Springer.Google Scholar
Wang, Q., Cambria, E., Liu, C., and Hussain, A. 2013. Common sense knowledge for handwritten Chinese text recognition. Cognitive Computation, Springer 5 (2): 234–42.Google Scholar
Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., and Hoffmann, P., 2005. Recognizing contextual polarity in phrase-level sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Language Technology and Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Association for Computational Linguistics, Vancouver, B.C., Canada, pp. 347–54.Google Scholar
Wilson, T., Wiebe, J., and Hoffmann, P. 2009. Recognizing contextual polarity: an exploration of features for phrase-level sentiment analysis. Computational Linguistics, 35 (3): 399–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yıldırım, E., Çetin, F. S., Eryiğit, G., and Temel, T. 2015. The impact of NLP on Turkish sentiment analysis. In Proceedings of the TURKLANG’14 International Conference on Turkic Language Processing, Istanbul, pp. 6–7.Google Scholar