Category to Tag Converter – WordPress.com News

Category: Converter

Category: Converter

The category of water connection can be converted (Non-domestic to Domestic or vice versa) if the nature of consumption changes from one. en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Category:Converter_stations. [Plugin: Categories to Tags Converter] Status of tag/category convertor? Started by: NukeHavoc. 1; 0; 10 years, 2 months ago.

Opinion you: Category: Converter

WINDOWS ACTIVATOR - WINDOWS ACTIVATOR LOADER CRACK FOR WINDOWS OFFICE
DOWNIE 3 MAC ARCHIVES
Category: Converter
Category: Converter

Category: Converter - pity, that

Word Category Conversion Revisited: The Case of Adjectives and Participles in L1 and L2 German

Introduction

Word class category information is crucial for constructing syntactic representations and language comprehension in general. According to lexicalist approaches, which we address in this paper, this information is stored for each word in the mental lexicon (Chomsky, 1970; Levelt, 1999). While in some languages (like German or Czech), word class specific inflectional marking typically enables word class assignment even to isolated word forms, sometimes word forms can be ambiguous as it is often the case in English, where it is the syntactic context that determines the word class, e.g., Mary is surprisingVERB us, vs. Mary told us a surprisingADJstory.

Interestingly, there is only sparse psycholinguistic research concerning the processing of category ambiguous forms (e.g., Pliatsikas et al., 2014; Lukic et al., 2019) and to our knowledge no study that would compare their processing in L1 and L2. One of the few studies is by Stolterfoht et al. (2010) who argue in favor of a lexicalist account that involves a productive category changing procedure converting past participle verb forms into adjectives when needed. The study basically delivers the only psycholinguistic evidence for the representation and processing of conversion forms (also called zero-derivation) by means of a productive process (cf. Bauer and Valera, 2005, for other empirically based proposals of conversion representation). It is also the only psycholinguistic study that addresses the putative word-class change of past participle forms in German. Since both the claim that past participles are processed as adjectives in certain passive contexts and that conversion forms are a result of a productive process were based on just one experiment, we considered it desirable to address the same research questions with a different paradigm (grammaticality judgment task with a priming component) and to test whether the same processing mechanisms are employed by native German speakers and advanced L2 German learners with L1 Czech. As we show, our results favor an explanation based on frequency effects and shed doubt on the assumption that depending solely on the syntactic position, German past participles are processed either as verbs or as adjectives.

Study of Stolterfoht et al. (2010)

Stolterfoht et al.’s study is grounded in the assumption that there is a “verbal” and an “adjectival” passive in German, which both contain a morphologically ambiguous form of a past participle (example sentences based on Stolterfoht et al., 2010):

www.frontiersin.org

This assumption is, however, a controversial topic that has been extensively discussed in the linguistic literature (cf. Roy et al., 2013, for an overview). Some accounts share Stolterfoht et al.’s view (e.g., Rapp, 1997; Von Stechow, 1998; Kratzer, 2000; Maienborn, 2007), usually based on semantic considerations. In contrast, the majority of traditional accounts (Dudenredaktion, 2006; Helbig and Buscha, 2017) assume that participles are non-finite verb forms in both passive constructions and that the two examples differ only in that (1a) expresses a process (“Vorgangspassiv,” i.e., “procedural passive”) or (1b) its result (“Zustandspassiv”, i.e., “stative passive”). Adjectival status is assigned to participles only if they fulfill certain morphosyntactic criteria, i.e., conform to adjectival declension (i.e., inflectional marking of case, number, and gender, e.g., ein geschlossen-es Fenster “a closed(NOM/ACC.SINGULAR.NEUTER) window”).

Adopting the view that the past participle is a verb in (1a) and an (converted) adjective in (1b), Stolterfoht et al. argue within a lexicalist approach that the lexically specified category information of verschüttet (verb) must be converted into another category (adjective), and that this additional process of conversion leads to additional processing costs measurable in longer reading times. While this is one possible implementation of lexicalist accounts, it is by far not exhaustive. Lexical entries, for instance, may have an internal structure with word class specific sub-entries. According to such approaches, derived categories (e.g., adjective in the present case) are nested as sub-nodes under the main node from which they are derived (e.g., verb node). No supplementary process of category conversion is thus needed, only different (sub)parts of one lexical entry need to be accessed (cf. Bauer and Valera, 2005). On the other hand, in syntactic approaches (e.g., Borer, 1994; Marantz, 1997) that Stolterfoht et al. do not address experimentally, the syntactic context determines the word category and verbal and adjectival forms are derived from a category-neutral root by adjoining a category head. In such a scenario, processing efforts should be equally costly.

In their self-paced reading experiment, Stolterfoht et al. compared reading times of ambiguous (de)verbal forms (e.g., verschüttet) with those of genuine adjectives presented in the same syntactic contexts. They hypothesized that while processing should be the same for genuine adjectives that have the same word class category in both contexts (2a vs. 2b), the processing of participles involves a category change in adjectival contexts (1b), but not in verbal contexts (1a). The higher processing costs of the category-changing procedure should be manifested in slower reading times in (1b).

www.frontiersin.org

These were indeed the results that Stolterfoht et al. obtained for participles: significantly faster reading times in verbal than in adjectival contexts. No such difference was observed for adjectives. The authors interpret their findings as evidence for a lexicalist interpretation including a productive conversion process.

However, there is a caveat in this explanation, namely the frequency of co-occurrences. Participle forms are more frequent after werden (1a) than after sein (1b). Adjectives, on the other hand, occur more frequently after sein than after werden (cf. the corpus analysis reported in Stolterfoht et al., 2010: Table 1). Due to probabilistic expectancies of the parser, a verbal form is less surprising after werden and an adjective form after sein. A frequency-based account would thus predict slower reading times on participles after sein without the necessity of postulating any conversion process. Crucially, it would also predict slower reading times on adjectives after werden. Stolterfoht et al. argue that since they do not find such effects for adjectives, it is thus the costly conversion process that is responsible for the difference in the reading times in the participle condition.

It should be however, noted that (a) there was a numerical tendency of 15 ms in the expected direction based on frequency in the genuine adjective condition (compared to 33 ms for participles); (b) for the items used in the experiment (see Stolterfoht et al., 2010, Table 2), the relative difference in terms of co-occurrence between werden vs. sein was more than twice as large for participles (1:5.4) than for adjectives (2.2:1) running against the overall pattern that for adjectives the differences between the two contexts is generally more pronounced; the skewed item selection might have contributed to the observed null-effect for adjectives; and (c) the crucial null-effect for adjectives coincided with large SDs and a rather small sample size of items (N = 12) indicating low statistical power.

Obviously, more robust data are necessary to support the lexicalist conversion process hypothesis, or to deliver stronger evidence for or against alternative explanations (e.g., frequency-based).

The Present Study

We tested the same lexicalist hypothesis as formulated by Stolterfoht et al., namely that there is a morphosyntactic process that converts verbal participle forms into adjectives when they appear in particular syntactic contexts. We designed the experiment such that it also assesses an alternative lexicalist account assuming that conversion forms are represented as subnodes of a basic entry (cf. Bauer and Valera, 2005). Therefore, we used a grammatical decision task combined with priming. In order to avoid the caveats of Stolterfoht et al.’s study, we used more and better controlled items that followed the general trends for co-occurrences of adjectives/participles with sein/werden.

We also compared native and non-native processing. There are two main views regarding the differences in processing of morphologically complex words in L2 (Kırkıcı and Clahsen, 2013, p. 778). According to the first view (e.g., McDonald, 2006), processing mechanisms are fundamentally the same as in L1 and the differences arise only due to the fact that L2 processing is slower, cognitively more demanding and affected by L1. The second view states that there are differences in the processing mechanisms themselves, in that, for example, the L2 mechanism works in a “shallower” manner (e.g., Clahsen and Felser, 2006 see also Ullman, 2005). Accordingly, L2 learners should be less likely to engage an additional morphosyntactic operations (conversion) compared to native speakers. In contrast to such types of processing differences, frequency-based processing differences are typically observed in both L1 and L2. Thus, comparing native and non-native morphosyntactic processing can potentially help to differentiate between the two views and to advance our understanding of the nature of L2 processing.

While in Stolterfoht et al. (2010) the critical forms were embedded in sentences, the critical items in our study (genuine adjectives and participles) were presented as continuations of minimal syntactic contexts that involved the disambiguating verbs werden and sein.

The syntactic context was kept minimal in order to reduce lexically based expectations. Participants made grammaticality decisions over the phrases at the presentation of the critical word. We hypothesized (Hypothesis A1) that if a conversion process is involved for participles in the sein-context, processing should be more demanding in these cases and evidenced in longer response latencies (cf. Stolterfoht at al.). On the other hand (Hypothesis A2), if the results of Stolterfoht et al. were artifacts of frequency effects, we expected that reaction times would ally with the frequency of co-occurrences of the minimal contexts with adjectives and participles.

In order to obtain valid and comparable frequency measures for both L1 and L2 (which have different input frequency), we conducted a rating in which samples from both populations judged on a 10-point-scale how frequent was the appearance of a given item within either a sein- or a werden-context. The L1-results (n = 42) corresponded to the overall frequencies reported by Stolterfoht et al. (2010) in Table 1: Co-occurrences of werden + participles and sein + adjectives were judged more frequent than the alternate combination, and the difference was larger for adjectives than for participles. The L2-data (n = 17) differed in that there was no difference for the participles between the two contexts (see Figure 1).

www.frontiersin.org

Figure 1. Comparison of the results of the rating (on the left) with the reaction times to prime phrases (on the right) showing a correspondence between the rating scores and the RTs: Contexts that were rated more frequent (ist + adjective and wird + participle) were responded to faster. The differences between ist/wird-contexts were significant for adjectives both in L1 and L2, while for participles they were only significant in L1 (p = 0.003 both for ratings and RTs), but not for L2 (p = 0.353 for ratings and p = 0.301 for RTs) (Mixed effects models: Score/RT ∼ Language × Type × Context + (1 + Context × Type

SUNCOAST 23 SPLINE TRIPLE DISC BILLET CATEGORY 1 TORQUE CONVERTER

2,000 RPM CATEGORY 1 TRIPLE DISC BILLET 47/48RE TORQUE CONVERTER

FEATURES AND BENEFITS

 

- Billet Apply Piston

- Billet Steel Cover

- Balloon Plate

- Hardened Turbine Splines

- Heat-Treated Steel Hub

- 3 Carbon-Graphitic Clutch Discs

- Furnaced-Brazed Fins

 

This Category 1 SunCoast Torque Converter fits both 47 and 48RE transmissions and is engineered to handle all of your everyday duties. Whether you're towing a camper or hauling dirt to a job site, this torque converter is designed to improved vehicle response and give you years of solid, reliable performance. It comes with furnace-brazed fins and hardened turbine splines. The clutches in this converter are carbon-graphitic for precise and accurate lock-up.

If you're looking to increase the performance of the factory unit and looking for a cost-effective solution this is the converter for you. This converter, while great for heavy duty towing and hauling, is not intended for racing.

Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
Google Scholar

R Core Team (2018). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

Google Scholar

Rapp, I. (1997). Partizipien und Semantische Struktur. Zu Passivischen Konstruktionen Mit Dem 3. Status. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.

Google Scholar

Roy, I., Takamine, K., and Iordachioaia, G. (2013). Categorization and Category Change. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Google Scholar

Singmann, H., Bolker, B., Westfall, J., Aust, F., and Ben-Shachar, M. S. (2020). Afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments. R Package Version 0.26-0. Available online at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=afex (accessed March 28, 2020).

Google Scholar

Stolterfoht, B., Gese, H., and Maienborn, C. (2010). Word category conversion causes processing costs: evidence from adjectival passives. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 17, 651–656. doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.5.651

CrossRef Full Text Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. (2000). “Building statives,” in Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society, ed. L. J. Conathan (Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics), 385–399.

Google Scholar

Lukic, S., Meltzer-Asscher, A., Higgins, J., Parrish, T. B., and &Thompson, C. K. (2019). Neurocognitive correlates of category ambiguous verb processing: the single versus dual lexical entry hypotheses. Brain Lang. 194, 65–76. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2019.04.005

CrossRef Full Text

If you have a lot of categories and only a few tags, then one of the quickest ways to generate a lot of relevant tags is to use the WordPress Categories to Tags tool. This tool can be used to convert categories to tags or vice versa. Remember that if you’re creating tags, you should carefully consider the tags you generate if you are adding to an existing set of flags. Tags and categories should relevant to the content that you are showing to your users.

Setting up the Categories to Tags Tool

There are two ways to get to the Categories to Tags tool for setup: using the link in the Posts or Categories page or using the link in the Tools menu in the WordPress Administrator. If the tool has not been installed, then you will need to go through the installation process which is the same as installing a plugin.

  1. Login to the WordPress Administrator.
  2. Tools menuClick on Tools or click on Posts to get to the link for the Categories to Tags converter
  3. Categories to Tags converterWhen you click on the link and you’re installing the tool for the first time, you will see the landing page for the Categories to Tags Converter tool. Click on Install now to start the install.
  4. Activate pluginClick on Activate and Run Importer after the plugin finishes installing.

Convert Categories to Tags main screenAt this point, the tool will have been installed and you will see the main conversion screen. The number of tags you can create is based on the number of categories listed.

Using the Convert Categories to Tags Tool

The following tutorial starts with a screen that you see after you finish the installation above. You can also reach the same screen by going into the Tools Menu when logged into the WordPress Administrator. The following instructions will show the conversion from Categories to Tags, but you can use the same instructions to convert Tags into Categories.

  1. Convert Categories to Tags main screenIf you’re not already in the Convert Categories to Tags Tool, please click on Tools>Import, then click on the link labeled Categories and Tags Converter
  2. Click on Check All or select the categories (or tags) that you want to convert.
  3. Click on the Convert Categories to Tags button to make the conversion.
  4. Conversion completionYou will see the confirmation screen that shows what has been converted into a Tag or Category.

Congratulations! You should now be able to use the Categories to Tags Conversion tool within WordPress. Remember that the tool can be used to convert categories to tags or tags to categories. Check out Understanding Categories and Tags in WordPress and How to Create Categories in WordPress for more information.

Become a master of WordPress plugins! Protect, optimize, secure, and expand the functionality of your website easily with the help of WordPress plugins! 

Arnel CustodioContent Writer I

As a writer for InMotion Hosting, Arnel has always aimed to share helpful information and provide knowledge that will help solve problems and aid in achieving goals. He's also been active with WordPress local community groups and events since 2004.

More Articles by Arnel
Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
Participant.ID) + (1 + Language × Context Google Scholar

Crossley, S. A. (2013). Assessing automatic processing of hypernymic relations in first language speakers and advanced second language learners. Mental Lexi. 8, 96–116. doi: 10.1075/ml.8.1.05cro

CrossRef Full Text Participant.ID) + (1 + Language Category: Converter Context Google Scholar

R Core Team (2018). R: Category: Converter Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.

Google Scholar

Rapp, Category: Converter, I. (1997), Category: Converter. Partizipien und Semantische Struktur. Zu Passivischen Konstruktionen Mit Dem 3. Status. Tübingen: Stauffenburg Verlag.

Google Scholar

Roy, I., Category: Converter, Takamine, K., and Iordachioaia, G. (2013), Category: Converter. Categorization and Category: Converter Change. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Google Scholar

Singmann, H., Category: Converter, Bolker, B., Westfall, J., Aust, F., and Ben-Shachar, M. S. (2020). Afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments. R Package Version 0.26-0. Available online at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=afex (accessed March 28, 2020).

Google Scholar

Stolterfoht, Category: Converter, B., Gese, H., and Maienborn, C. (2010). Word category conversion causes processing costs: evidence from adjectival passives. Psychon. Bull. Category: Converter 17, 651–656. doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.5.651

CrossRef Full Text

SUNCOAST 23 SPLINE TRIPLE DISC BILLET CATEGORY 1 TORQUE CONVERTER

2,000 RPM CATEGORY 1 TRIPLE DISC BILLET 47/48RE TORQUE CONVERTER

FEATURES AND Category: Converter Billet Apply Piston

- Billet Steel Cover

- Balloon Plate

- Hardened Turbine Splines

- Heat-Treated Steel Hub

- 3 Carbon-Graphitic Clutch Discs

- Furnaced-Brazed Fins

 

This Category 1 SunCoast Torque Converter fits both 47 and 48RE transmissions and is engineered to handle all of your everyday duties. Whether you're towing a camper or hauling dirt to a job site, this torque converter is designed to improved vehicle response and give you years of solid, reliable performance. It comes with Category: Converter fins and hardened turbine splines. The clutches in this converter are carbon-graphitic for precise and accurate lock-up, Category: Converter.

If you're looking to increase the performance of the factory unit and looking for a cost-effective solution this is the converter for you. This converter, while great for heavy duty towing and hauling, is not intended for racing.

Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
Google Scholar

Ullman, Category: Converter, M. T. (2005). “A cognitive neuroscience perspective on second language acquisition: the declarative/procedural model,” in Mind & Context in Adult Second Language Acquisition: Methods, Theory, Category: Converter, and Practice, ed. C. Sanz (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press), 141–178.

Google Scholar

Von Stechow, A. (1998). German Participles II in Distributed Morphology. Tübingen: Ms, University of Tübingen.

Google Category: Converter conversion, mental lexicon, priming, frequency, participle

Citation: Opitz A and Bordag D (2020) Word Category Conversion Revisited: The Case of Adjectives and Participles in L1 and L2 German. Front. Psychol. 11:1045. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01045

Received: 17 July 2019; Accepted: Category: Converter April 2020;
Published: 28 May 2020.

Edited by:

Itziar Laka, University of the Basque Country, Spain

Copyright © 2020 Opitz and Bordag. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of Ashampoo Burning Studio 22 Crack & Activation Key [Latest] Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Andreas Opitz, andreas.opitz@uni-leipzig.de

Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]

Are you a WordPress enthusiast? Whether you are a casual blogger or a professional editor, Nelio Content is the editorial calendar that makes your life easier. Take a look at it!

No matter how carefully you plan your tags and category taxonomies at the beginning of your blog project, they will quickly degenerate and become a complete Category: Converter. This is specially true for tags on multi-author blogs where each Category: Converter can freely assign new tags to their posts. So, like it or not, every few months you’ll need to sanitize your terms by converting categories to tags (or the other way around), merging duplicate terms, updating hierarchies and so on.

For the category-to-tags conversion, the obvious choice is the “Categories to tags Converter”plugin. Even if, striclty speaking, Category: Converter plugin is not part of the WordPress core, it is authored by the WordPress.org team and the default conversion tool you get when accessing the Tools->Import option in your dashboard. For more advanced terms management you can try the Term Management Toolsplugin (still working even if its development stopped after his author announced he was leaving WordPress).

Still, both options present a very annoying limitation when trying to convert into tags categories that are part of a hierarchy: posts assigned to a subcategory being converted are not reassigned to its parent category. Let me explain this with an example. In one of my sites, Category: Converter, I’ve the following structure:

Category 'programming' has Python, Ruby and Java as subcategories Category ‘programming’ has Python, Ruby and Java as subcategories

Since very few Category: Converter are specific to one of the programming languages, I want to transform them to tags and leave only programming as a category to simplify my content organization. If I try to do it with the previous plugins, I’ll manage to Category: Converter Java, Pyhton and Ruby to tags and use these new tags to annotate the corresponding posts but all those posts will disappear from my programming category!!! Clearly, this is not the intended effect. Those are still programming posts and must be found by visitors browsing the programming category. Otherwise, the converter plugins may fix the mess in my Category: Converter but at the cost Category: Converter messing up my site content.

To fix this, I’ve slightly changed the file (the single file Category: Converter all the conversion logic of the default plugin) to add the following lines to the

//Force the posts linked to the converted category to be linked as well to their parent category if ($category->parent) { $term_order = 0; echo __('Linking posts with parent category.', Category: Converter, 'wpcat2tag-importer'). "

In short, the code retrieves the posts linked to the category-to-be-converted and for each post checks if the post is also linked to its parent category (in case a parent exist). If not, it adds the link.

Programming category after the conversion, linking <b>Category: Converter</b> all posts of its former subcategories Programming category after the conversion, linking to all posts of its former subcategories

Free bonus rant

So, what should I do with this improvement? (let’s assume for a moment that you believe as I do that this is in fact an improvement on the base plugin). The easiest option would be to just add this modification as new plugin on WordPress.org. But, Category: Converter, even if we make it nicer and with more options, 1 – I don’t think this is a change big enough to justify a new plugin and 2 – This would not reach all users of the current plugin.

What I really want is to send my patch to the plugin authors so that they study it and openly consider whether this could be integrated in the official (again, not part of the core but as if it was) plugin. Unfortunately, there doesn’t seem to be an easy way to do so (there’s no public repository where to submit a patch/pull request and have an open discussion about it and the support forum seems largely ignored, and even if it wasn’t, I don’t think that would be the place for this). For such an open project like WordPress, I’d definitely expect more open practices for all the ecosystem around it.

Therefore, for now I’m afraid if you’re interested in this functionality, the best option is to copy and paste the above lines of code in your installed PHP file.

Источник: [https://torrent-igruha.org/3551-portal.html]
Google Scholar

Dudenredaktion (Ed.). (2006). Duden: Die Grammatik, 7th Edn, Vol. 4. Mannheim: Dudenverlag.

Google Scholar

Helbig, G., and Buscha, J. (2017). Deutsche Grammatik: Ein Handbuch für den Ausländerunterricht. Stuttgart: Ernst Klett Sprachen.

Google Scholar

Kırkıcı, B., and Clahsen, H. (2013). Inflection and derivation in native and non-native language processing: masked priming experiments on Turkish. Bilingualism 16, 776–791. doi: 10.1017/S1366728912000648

CrossRef Full Text Category: Converter


Notice: Undefined variable: z_bot in /sites/arenaqq.us/itunes/category-converter.php on line 109

Notice: Undefined variable: z_empty in /sites/arenaqq.us/itunes/category-converter.php on line 109

Comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *