{"title":"信号隐式关系:PDTB - RST比较","authors":"Lucie Poláková, Jirí Mírovský, Pavlína Synková","doi":"10.5087/DAD.2017.210","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Describing implicit phenomena in discourse is known to be a problematic task, from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. The present article contributes to this topic by a novel comparative analysis of two prominent annotation approaches to discourse relations (coherence relations) that were carried out on the same texts. We compare the annotation of implicit relations in the Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0, i.e. discourse relations not signalled by an explicit discourse connective, to the recently released analysis of signals of rhetorical relations in the RST Signalling Corpus (RST-SC). The intersection of corresponding pairs of relations is rather a small one, but it shows a cleartendency: unliketheoverallsignaldistributionintheRST-SC,morethanhalfofthesignalsin the studied intersection are of semantic type, formed mostly by loosely defined lexical chains. Our data transformation allows for a simultaneous depiction and detailed study of the two resources.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"49 1","pages":"225-248"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Signalling Implicit Relations: A PDTB - RST Comparison\",\"authors\":\"Lucie Poláková, Jirí Mírovský, Pavlína Synková\",\"doi\":\"10.5087/DAD.2017.210\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Describing implicit phenomena in discourse is known to be a problematic task, from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. The present article contributes to this topic by a novel comparative analysis of two prominent annotation approaches to discourse relations (coherence relations) that were carried out on the same texts. We compare the annotation of implicit relations in the Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0, i.e. discourse relations not signalled by an explicit discourse connective, to the recently released analysis of signals of rhetorical relations in the RST Signalling Corpus (RST-SC). The intersection of corresponding pairs of relations is rather a small one, but it shows a cleartendency: unliketheoverallsignaldistributionintheRST-SC,morethanhalfofthesignalsin the studied intersection are of semantic type, formed mostly by loosely defined lexical chains. Our data transformation allows for a simultaneous depiction and detailed study of the two resources.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"225-248\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5087/DAD.2017.210\",\"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.2017.210","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
Signalling Implicit Relations: A PDTB - RST Comparison
Describing implicit phenomena in discourse is known to be a problematic task, from both theoretical and empirical perspectives. The present article contributes to this topic by a novel comparative analysis of two prominent annotation approaches to discourse relations (coherence relations) that were carried out on the same texts. We compare the annotation of implicit relations in the Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0, i.e. discourse relations not signalled by an explicit discourse connective, to the recently released analysis of signals of rhetorical relations in the RST Signalling Corpus (RST-SC). The intersection of corresponding pairs of relations is rather a small one, but it shows a cleartendency: unliketheoverallsignaldistributionintheRST-SC,morethanhalfofthesignalsin the studied intersection are of semantic type, formed mostly by loosely defined lexical chains. Our data transformation allows for a simultaneous depiction and detailed study of the two resources.
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.