字里行间的推理:关系命题的逻辑

Q1 Arts and Humanities Dialogue and Discourse Pub Date : 2019-01-04 DOI:10.5087/dad.2018.203
Andrew Potter
{"title":"字里行间的推理:关系命题的逻辑","authors":"Andrew Potter","doi":"10.5087/dad.2018.203","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes how Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) and relational propositions can be used to define a method for rendering and analyzing texts as expressions in propositional logic.  Relational propositions, the implicit assertions that correspond to RST relations, are defined using standard logical operators and rules of inference.  The resulting logical forms are used to construct logical expressions that map to RST tree structures.  The resulting expressions show that inference is pervasive within coherent texts.  To support reasoning over these expressions, a set of rules for negation is defined.  The logical forms and their negation rules can be used to examine the flow of reasoning and the effects of incoherence.  Because there is a correspondence between logical coherence and the functional relationships of RST, an RST analysis that cannot pass the test of logic is indicative either of a problematic analysis or of an incoherent text.  The result is a method for analyzing the logic implicit within discursive reasoning.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"41 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reasoning Between the Lines: a Logic of Relational Propositions\",\"authors\":\"Andrew Potter\",\"doi\":\"10.5087/dad.2018.203\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper describes how Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) and relational propositions can be used to define a method for rendering and analyzing texts as expressions in propositional logic.  Relational propositions, the implicit assertions that correspond to RST relations, are defined using standard logical operators and rules of inference.  The resulting logical forms are used to construct logical expressions that map to RST tree structures.  The resulting expressions show that inference is pervasive within coherent texts.  To support reasoning over these expressions, a set of rules for negation is defined.  The logical forms and their negation rules can be used to examine the flow of reasoning and the effects of incoherence.  Because there is a correspondence between logical coherence and the functional relationships of RST, an RST analysis that cannot pass the test of logic is indicative either of a problematic analysis or of an incoherent text.  The result is a method for analyzing the logic implicit within discursive reasoning.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"volume\":\"41 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5087/dad.2018.203\",\"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.2018.203","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: 5

摘要

本文描述了如何利用修辞结构理论和关系命题来定义一种将文本作为命题逻辑表达式来呈现和分析的方法。关系命题,即对应于RST关系的隐式断言,是使用标准逻辑运算符和推理规则定义的。生成的逻辑形式用于构造映射到RST树结构的逻辑表达式。结果表明,推理在连贯文本中是普遍存在的。为了支持对这些表达式的推理,定义了一组否定规则。逻辑形式及其否定规则可以用来检验推理的流程和不连贯的影响。由于逻辑连贯与RST的功能关系之间存在对应关系,因此不能通过逻辑测试的RST分析要么表明分析有问题,要么表明文本不连贯。结果是一种分析话语推理中隐含逻辑的方法。
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
Reasoning Between the Lines: a Logic of Relational Propositions
This paper describes how Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) and relational propositions can be used to define a method for rendering and analyzing texts as expressions in propositional logic.  Relational propositions, the implicit assertions that correspond to RST relations, are defined using standard logical operators and rules of inference.  The resulting logical forms are used to construct logical expressions that map to RST tree structures.  The resulting expressions show that inference is pervasive within coherent texts.  To support reasoning over these expressions, a set of rules for negation is defined.  The logical forms and their negation rules can be used to examine the flow of reasoning and the effects of incoherence.  Because there is a correspondence between logical coherence and the functional relationships of RST, an RST analysis that cannot pass the test of logic is indicative either of a problematic analysis or of an incoherent text.  The result is a method for analyzing the logic implicit within discursive reasoning.
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