By contrast , Turkish ( Oflazer et al. , 2003 ; Atalay et al. , 2003 ) exhibits high root accuracy but consistently low attachment scores ( about 88 % for length 1 and 68 % for length 2 ) .
the annotation process in the turkish treebank
N B Atalay K Oflazer B Say
as well as a rapid degradation of attachment score with arc length ( from about 93 % for length 1 to 67 % for length 2 ) . By contrast , Turkish ( Oflazer et al. , 2003 ; Atalay et al. , 2003 ) exhibits high root accuracy but consistently low attachment scores ( about 88 % for length 1 and 68 % for length 2 ) . It is noteworthy that Arabic and Turkish , being `` typological outliers '' , show patterns that are different both from each other and from most of the other languages .
By contrast , Turkish ( Oflazer et al. , 2003 ; @@CITATION ) exhibits high root accuracy but consistently low attachment scores ( about 88 % for length 1 and 68 % for length 2 ) .