Two problematic intersects in our work: The first is the outcome of the NLP, the second moves closer to the IT problems in the CALL. Let us start by, first, describing the problematic in NLP and subsequently in CALL.
The achievement of the tools NLP, according to specific objectives, is a complex and costly operation to implement. It is for this reason that it becomes paramount, benefit of language resources already developed, in order to catch up with the technological gap, in terms of content and services.
In fact, when trying to establish a tool NLP for any language from zero, as is the case of Arabic, we can take advantage of the pre-existing tools. Indeed, when looking more closely, we have found that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to exploit the existing tools for several reasons:
- ▪
Inexploitabilité of several tools because they are in the form of a prototype (or incomplete), non-portable, non-modifiable, Non-reusable and/or programed by old languages (Shaalan & Kaled, 2005). However, there are several morphological analyzers. Several studies have shown that the most used are the analyzers Aramorph, Al Khalil and BuckWalter (Bama). They have many weak points: first, they do not identify the pattern of the word which limits its use in a syntactic analysis. Then, they do not use the diacritic signs which are inserted generally to reduce the ambiguity and the number of possible solutions. Finally, the output of analysis is in the format translitéré and therefore is not exploitable directly by other applications (Dichy, Hassoun, Mouelhi& Zaafrani, 2002).
- ▪
Unavailability of most of these tools because of the lack of literature which concerns, their inexistences on the market and/ or the inability to reach the filmmaker who often, is no longer interested in the field (Mesfar, 2008).
- ▪
Some tools are limited to one or two language levels and the possibility of the reuse or the extension is difficult and expensive. The limits and the imperfection that can be criticized in these tools are numerous, such as the circularity, errors, inconsistencies (Mars, 2012).
- ▪
Expensive because several are paid, with unsatisfactory results; in addition they are asking for a long time to be able to adapt to our needs, without being sure of achieving the goal, because most of the tools are made by well specific applications (Briot & Demazeau, 2001).
- ▪
Inadequacy of the amount of information that contain these tools.