统一的句法和语篇结构:哥本哈根依存树库

Q1 Arts and Humanities Dialogue and Discourse Pub Date : 2013-04-30 DOI:10.5087/DAD.2013.203
D. Hardt
{"title":"统一的句法和语篇结构:哥本哈根依存树库","authors":"D. Hardt","doi":"10.5087/DAD.2013.203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"I present arguments in favor of the Uniformity Hypothesis: the hypothesis that discourse can extend syntax dependencies without conflicting with them. I consider arguments that Uniformity is violated in certain cases involving quotation, and I argue that the cases \npresented in the literature are in fact completely consistent with Uniformity. I report on an analysis of all examples in the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks involving violations of Uniformity. I argue that \nthey are in fact all consistent with Uniformity, and conclude that the CDT should be revised to reflect this.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"32 1","pages":"53-64"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-04-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"27","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Uniform Syntax and Discourse Structure: the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks\",\"authors\":\"D. Hardt\",\"doi\":\"10.5087/DAD.2013.203\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"I present arguments in favor of the Uniformity Hypothesis: the hypothesis that discourse can extend syntax dependencies without conflicting with them. I consider arguments that Uniformity is violated in certain cases involving quotation, and I argue that the cases \\npresented in the literature are in fact completely consistent with Uniformity. I report on an analysis of all examples in the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks involving violations of Uniformity. I argue that \\nthey are in fact all consistent with Uniformity, and conclude that the CDT should be revised to reflect this.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"53-64\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-04-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"27\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5087/DAD.2013.203\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialogue and Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5087/DAD.2013.203","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 27

摘要

我提出了支持一致性假设的论点:假设话语可以扩展语法依赖而不与它们冲突。我认为在涉及引用的某些情况下违反了一致性的论点,我认为文献中提出的案例实际上完全符合一致性。我报告了对哥本哈根依赖树库中涉及违反一致性的所有例子的分析。我认为它们实际上都与统一性一致,并得出结论,CDT应该进行修订以反映这一点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A Uniform Syntax and Discourse Structure: the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks
I present arguments in favor of the Uniformity Hypothesis: the hypothesis that discourse can extend syntax dependencies without conflicting with them. I consider arguments that Uniformity is violated in certain cases involving quotation, and I argue that the cases presented in the literature are in fact completely consistent with Uniformity. I report on an analysis of all examples in the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks involving violations of Uniformity. I argue that they are in fact all consistent with Uniformity, and conclude that the CDT should be revised to reflect this.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Dialogue and Discourse
Dialogue and Discourse Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: D&D seeks previously unpublished, high quality articles on the analysis of discourse and dialogue that contain -experimental and/or theoretical studies related to the construction, representation, and maintenance of (linguistic) context -linguistic analysis of phenomena characteristic of discourse and/or dialogue (including, but not limited to: reference and anaphora, presupposition and accommodation, topicality and salience, implicature, ---discourse structure and rhetorical relations, discourse markers and particles, the semantics and -pragmatics of dialogue acts, questions, imperatives, non-sentential utterances, intonation, and meta--communicative phenomena such as repair and grounding) -experimental and/or theoretical studies of agents'' information states and their dynamics in conversational interaction -new analytical frameworks that advance theoretical studies of discourse and dialogue -research on systems performing coreference resolution, discourse structure parsing, event and temporal -structure, and reference resolution in multimodal communication -experimental and/or theoretical results yielding new insight into non-linguistic interaction in -communication -work on natural language understanding (including spoken language understanding), dialogue management, -reasoning, and natural language generation (including text-to-speech) in dialogue systems -work related to the design and engineering of dialogue systems (including, but not limited to: -evaluation, usability design and testing, rapid application deployment, embodied agents, affect detection, -mixed-initiative, adaptation, and user modeling). -extremely well-written surveys of existing work. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers on discourse and dialogue and its associated fields, including computer scientists, linguists, psychologists, philosophers, roboticists, sociologists.
期刊最新文献
The Conversational Discourse Unit: Identification and Its Role in Conversational Turn-taking Management Exploring the Sensitivity to Alternative Signals of Coherence Relations Scoring Coreference Chains with Split-Antecedent Anaphors Form and Function of Connectives in Chinese Conversational Speech Bullshit, Pragmatic Deception, and Natural Language Processing
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1