I have a large corpus of hotel and restaurant reviews and I'm trying to figure out which adjectives are most commonly associated with a aspect (e.g., "rooms", "tables", "ambience", "food") to generate some form of summary. Using off-the-shelf Part-of-Speech tagger and regular expressions, I can quite reliably extract adjective-noun-pairs (ANPs). So, from a technical point of view I kind of solved my task (IT background).
However, when I a run it for say "tables" over my corpus of restaurant reviews, I get the following adjectives ranked according to their frequency (in brackets):
- other (333)
- few (206)
- many (179)
- close (152)
- outside (96)
- occupied (72)
- long (65)
- outdoor (61)
- large (54)
- full (54)
- wooden (53)
- most (50)
- ...
In the context of a summary, adjectives such as "other", "few", "many", etc. make arguably not much sense. If I understand correctly after some Google search, I'm interested in descriptive adjectives. My naive approach would be to collect list of such adjectives (e.g., from http://descriptivewords.org/) and filter out all found adjectives that are not in the list.
I wonder now, if there is a more linguistic approach to distinguish between "good" (meaningful for creating a summary) and "bad" adjectives. I assume it boils down to identify descriptive adjectives, but I'm nor sure. Language it's not by background and I'm not even a native English speaker.
EDIT: It seems that the class of descriptive adjectives is still to large. It's probably rather qualitative adjectives. Ideally, I would like to keep only adjectives where writing "The tables are ADJ" is grammatically correct and meaningful. For "small", "wooden", "long" etc. that's perfect. I'm even OK with "reserved", "occupied", "close". But "few", "more", "same", "many" etc. doesn't make much sense.