Abusive language detection is an unsolved and challenging problem for the NLP community. Recent literature suggests various approaches to distinguish between different language phenomena (e.g., hate speech vs. cyberbullying vs. offensive language) and factors (degree of explicitness and target) that may help to classify different abusive language phenomena. There are data sets that annotate the target of abusive messages (i.e.OLID/OffensEval (Zampieri et al., 2019a)). However, there is a lack of data sets that take into account the degree of explicitness. In this paper, we propose annotation guidelines to distinguish between explicit and implicit abuse in English and apply them to OLID/OffensEval. The outcome is a newly created resource, AbuseEval v1.0, which aims to address some of the existing issues in the annotation of offensive and abusive language (e.g., explicitness of the message, presence of a target, need of context, and interaction across different phenomena).

Lexical normalization is the task of translating non-standard social media data to a standard form. Previous work has shown that this is beneficial for many downstream tasks in multiple languages. However, for Italian, there is no benchmark available for lexical normalization, despite the presence of many benchmarks for other tasks involving social media data. In this paper, we discuss the creation of a lexical normalization dataset for Italian. After two rounds of annotation, a Cohen’s kappa score of 78.64 is obtained. During this process, we also analyze the inter-annotator agreement for this task, which is only rarely done on datasets for lexical normalization,and when it is reported, the analysis usually remains shallow. Furthermore, we utilize this dataset to train a lexical normalization model and show that it can be used to improve dependency parsing of social media data. All annotated data and the code to reproduce the results are available at: http://bitbucket.org/robvanderg/normit.

Datasets to train models for abusive language detection are at the same time necessary and still scarce. One the reasons for their limited availability is the cost of their creation. It is not only that manual annotation is expensive, it is also the case that the phenomenon is sparse, causing human annotators having to go through a large number of irrelevant examples in order to obtain some significant data. Strategies used until now to increase density of abusive language and obtain more meaningful data overall, include data filtering on the basis of pre-selected keywords and hate-rich sources of data. We suggest a recipe that at the same time can provide meaningful data with possibly higher density of abusive language and also reduce top-down biases imposed by corpus creators in the selection of the data to annotate. More specifically, we exploit the controversy channel on Reddit to obtain keywords that are used to filter a Twitter dataset. While the method needs further validation and refinement, our preliminary experiments show a higher density of abusive tweets in the filtered vs unfiltered dataset, and a more meaningful topic distribution after filtering.