Typecraft v2.5
Jump to: navigation, search

Difference between revisions of "Skrivesenter:Discourse relations"

(Created page with 'under constructions Discourse relations, their senses and the lexical items that realise them')
 
(→‎Sense Tags and their meanings)
 
(38 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
under constructions
+
===Overall Motivation===
  
−
Discourse relations, their senses and the lexical items that realise them
+
 
 +
[[Media:DiscourseAnnotation.pdf|'''Dorothee's Presentation for download''']]
 +
 
 +
The overall motivation is to create a richly annotated discourse corpus facilitating the analysis of student texts within writing research.
 +
 
 +
The main perspective taken is that of discourse analysis. Linguistic analysis is helpful, but not our main goal.
 +
 
 +
A student text is understood as a written discourse, and it is it mainly the argumentation structure of the discourse that we will be annotating.
 +
 
 +
So far we have identified a couple of ''Lexically-grounded discourse relations'', but also talked about, ''Anchors'' and ''Discourse chains''.
 +
 
 +
Lexically-grounded discourse relations we have listed in the sortable table below:
 +
 
 +
===Lexically grounded discourse relations===
 +
 
 +
{| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
 +
|+ Lexically-grounded discourse relations
 +
|-
 +
! Sense
 +
! Grammatical category
 +
! Connective
 +
|-
 +
|condition
 +
|conjunction
 +
|hvis
 +
|-
 +
|condition
 +
|conjunction
 +
|når
 +
|-
 +
|goal
 +
|conjunction
 +
|for å
 +
|-
 +
|sequence/temporal
 +
|conjunction
 +
|og
 +
|-
 +
|list
 +
|conjunction
 +
|og
 +
|-
 +
|precedence
 +
|adverb
 +
|etterpå
 +
|-
 +
|precedence
 +
|adverb
 +
|så
 +
|-
 +
|specification
 +
|multi-word expression
 +
|for eksempel
 +
|-
 +
|supplement
 +
 
 +
|adverb
 +
|alias
 +
|-
 +
|disjunction
 +
|conjunction
 +
|eller
 +
|-
 +
|temporal
 +
|conjunction
 +
|når
 +
|-
 +
|}
 +
 
 +
 
 +
===Overall Motivation===
 +
 
 +
 
 +
[[Media:DiscourseAnnotation.pdf|'''Dorothee's Presentation for download''']]
 +
 
 +
The overall motivation is to create a richly annotated discourse corpus facilitating the analysis of student texts within writing research.
 +
 
 +
The main perspective taken is that of discourse analysis. Linguistic analysis is helpful, but not our main goal.
 +
 
 +
A student text is understood as a written discourse, and it is it mainly the argumentation structure of the discourse that we will be annotating.
 +
 
 +
So far we have identified a couple of ''Lexically-grounded discourse relations'', but also talked about, ''Anchors'' and ''Discourse chains''.
 +
 
 +
Lexically-grounded discourse relations we have listed in the sortable table below:
 +
 
 +
===Lexically grounded discourse relations===
 +
 
 +
{| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
 +
|+ Lexically-grounded discourse relations
 +
|-
 +
! Sense
 +
! Grammatical category
 +
! Connective
 +
|-
 +
|condition
 +
|conjunction
 +
|hvis
 +
|-
 +
|condition
 +
|conjunction
 +
|når
 +
|-
 +
|goal
 +
|conjunction
 +
|for å
 +
|-
 +
|sequence/temporal
 +
|conjunction
 +
|og<ref name="NP">Notice that 'og' and 'eller' can combine noun phrases, as in 'pc og mobilen' or verb phrases, as in 'jeg dusjer og fikser meg'. It is the latter case that we are interested in here.</ref>
 +
|-
 +
|list
 +
|conjunction
 +
|og
 +
|-
 +
|precedence
 +
|adverb
 +
|etterpå
 +
|-
 +
|precedence
 +
|adverb
 +
|så
 +
|-
 +
|specification
 +
|multi-word expression
 +
|for eksempel
 +
|-
 +
|supplement
 +
|adverb
 +
|alias
 +
|-
 +
|disjunction
 +
|conjunction
 +
|eller<ref name="NP"/>
 +
|-
 +
|temporal
 +
|conjunction
 +
|når
 +
|-
 +
|}
 +
 
 +
 
 +
===Sense Tags and their meanings===
 +
 
 +
Having discussed with Cherise, we think that we will be best suited by relatively general categories to deal with young writer.  Consequently we have the following suggestions about the sense tags:
 +
 
 +
The following tags should be skipped:
 +
-conjunction (is covered by more specific tags)
 +
-contingency (as above)
 +
-contra-expectation (sufficiently covered by Evaluate)
 +
-exception (subsumed under Condition)
 +
-expect (covered by Predict)
 +
-justify (covered by Reason)
 +
-opposition (covered by/ a special case of Contrast)
 +
-supplement (covered by Restate or Specify).
 +
 
 +
Lars, February 2014
 +
 
 +
{| class="wikitable sortable" border="1"
 +
|+ Sense tags and their meanings
 +
|-
 +
! Sense tag
 +
! Meaning
 +
! Descriptive Definition
 +
! Example
 +
|-
 +
|ASS
 +
|assert
 +
|Introduces a (new) topic, normally to be developed in the following sequence
 +
|Jeg og vennene mine driver med blogg.
 +
|-
 +
|COM
 +
|compare
 +
|nemjhv,erv,rkjv.,rj.rtb.gkb.ltkb.|Point out similarity or points of correspondence
 +
between two states, events, ideas, objects or statements
 +
|(Jeg tror at barna hadde det fint) men ''ikke like fint som'' vi har det i dag
 +
|-
 +
|ASSdesc
 +
|assert through description
 +
|Introduce a new setting, character or atmosphere of a narrative
 +
|Det var morgen. (Morten våknet til en ny dag...)
 +
|-
 +
|ASSnar
 +
|assert through narration
 +
|Introduce a new narrative event or action that is not causally or hyponymically related to a previous event or action
 +
|(nytt avsnitt:)Morten gikk ut av teltet og bort til bålet.
 +
|-
 +
|CONCES
 +
|concession
 +
|
 +
|(Vi hadde det bra i hula) ''selv om'' det var lite mat noen ganger
 +
|-
 +
|COND
 +
|condition
 +
|
 +
|''Når'' man går går på skulen, lærer ein å lese, skrive, rekne...
 +
|-
 +
|<strike>CONJ</strike>
 +
|<strike>conjunction</strike>
 +
|
 +
|<strike>how is this different from List? jf. "Og så må en venn støtte deg" (fra en tekst om vennskap)</strike>
 +
|-
 +
|CAUS
 +
|cause
 +
|Identify the external cause of an event or evaluation. To be distinguished from reason
 +
or purpose
 +
|(Det er bra å gå på skule) ''for'' da får dei vener (og da...)
 +
|-
 +
|CONCLD
 +
|conclude
 +
|Draw a logical conclusion on the basis of previously
 +
presented premises
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|EVAL
 +
|evaluate
 +
|Make a value judgement, state an opinion or
 +
indicate a preference. Also used to indicate the significance of an object, idea or event previously introduced
 +
| (Alle skal få ein utdanning), og ''det er bra at'' barn går på skule...
 +
|-
 +
|META
 +
|meta-statement
 +
|Make a statement about the text itself
 +
|Nå skal jeg svare på spørsmålene dine!
 +
|-
 +
|QUE
 +
|question
 +
|Ask a question that will be answered in a
 +
following unit.
 +
|Hva ville du gjort? (Valgt en venn som...)
 +
|-
 +
|RESULT
 +
|result
 +
|Indicate an effect, outcome, result or
 +
consequence
 +
|(Pappa og mamma jobber så mye) ''så'' jeg er ofte alene hjemme
 +
|-
 +
|SUM
 +
|summarise
 +
|Make a statement that summarises previous,
 +
more specific statements, without drawing
 +
logical conclusions (vs. conclude)
 +
|Ja, det var det jeg gjør på dataen.
 +
|-
 +
|<strike>CONTIN</strike>
 +
|<strike>contingency</strike>
 +
|
 +
|<strike>could you give an example?</strike>
 +
|-
 +
|<strike>C-EXPECT</strike>
 +
|<strike>contra-expectation</strike>
 +
|
 +
|<strike>could you give an example?</strike>
 +
|-
 +
|CONT
 +
|contrast
 +
|Point out difference(s) between two events,
 +
objects or ideas, openly signalled or inferred
 +
|(FNs barnekomvensjon har bestemt at barn skal få gå på skulen). Det er 75 mill som ikkje får skulegang. [inferred contrast]
 +
|-
 +
|DIS
 +
|disjunction
 +
|
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|<strike>EX</strike>
 +
|<strike>exception</strike>
 +
|
 +
|<strike>could you give an example?</strike>
 +
|-
 +
|<strike>EXPEXT</strike>
 +
|<strike>expect</strike>
 +
|
 +
|<strike>could you give an exampple?</strike>
 +
|-
 +
|PURP
 +
|purpose
 +
|
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|GEN
 +
|generalise
 +
|Make a more general statement that builds
 +
on/includes previous specific statements
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|<strike>JUST</strike>
 +
|<strike>justify</strike> '''This tag has been used for annotation and can therefore not be deleted'''
 +
|
 +
|<strike>could you give an example?</strike>
 +
|-
 +
|JUX
 +
|juxtapose [=alternative?]
 +
|
 +
|<Could you give an example? cf (...hvis vennen din bommer på målet... Du må si: )Ååh, så synd. Du klarer det neste gang, ikke : Herregud, hvorfor gjorde du det, din fjott?
 +
|-
 +
|LIST
 +
|list
 +
|
 +
|<how is this tag different from Conjunction? NP list here, or clause list?
 +
|-
 +
|<strike>OPP</strike>
 +
|<strike>opposition</strike>'''This tag has been used for annotation and can therefore not be deleted'''
 +
|
 +
|<strike>how is this different from Contrast?</strike>
 +
|-
 +
|PRES
 +
|precedence
 +
|
 +
|<hov is tis different from ASSnarr or SEQ?
 +
|-
 +
|REASON
 +
|reason
 +
|Indicate the internal reason of an animate subject for some (course of) action or inference
 +
|Jeg var sint (så jeg ville ikke snakke med henne)
 +
|-
 +
|RESTATE
 +
|restate
 +
|Rephrase or repeat a a previous assertion at
 +
approximately the same level of generality
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|SEQ
 +
|sequence temporally
 +
|Indicate the temporal unfolding of a sequence of events or actions
 +
|-
 +
|SPEC
 +
|specify
 +
|enumerate specific facts or details
 +
|(Jeg og vennene mine driver med blogg.) Blogg er en nettside om meg selv.
 +
|-
 +
|<strike>SUPP</strike>
 +
|<strike>supplement</strike>'''This tag has been used for annotation and can therefore not be deleted'''
 +
|
 +
|<strike>could you give an example?</strike>
 +
|-
 +
|REACT
 +
|physical or mental actions
 +
|Indicates physical or mental actions or change of states of
 +
animates which result from previously introduced actions,
 +
events or states. REACT is differentiated from RESULT
 +
by being open to choice or idiosyncracy
 +
|
 +
|
 +
|-
 +
|RESP
 +
|respond
 +
|Reply to a question in dialogue (direct, indirect
 +
or inferred)
 +
|-
 +
|N-FUNC
 +
|non-functional
 +
|
 +
|-}

Latest revision as of 10:35, 28 February 2014

Overall Motivation

Dorothee's Presentation for download

The overall motivation is to create a richly annotated discourse corpus facilitating the analysis of student texts within writing research.

The main perspective taken is that of discourse analysis. Linguistic analysis is helpful, but not our main goal.

A student text is understood as a written discourse, and it is it mainly the argumentation structure of the discourse that we will be annotating.

So far we have identified a couple of Lexically-grounded discourse relations, but also talked about, Anchors and Discourse chains.

Lexically-grounded discourse relations we have listed in the sortable table below:

Lexically grounded discourse relations

Lexically-grounded discourse relations
Sense Grammatical category Connective
condition conjunction hvis
condition conjunction når
goal conjunction for å
sequence/temporal conjunction og
list conjunction og
precedence adverb etterpå
precedence adverb så
specification multi-word expression for eksempel
supplement adverb alias
disjunction conjunction eller
temporal conjunction når


Overall Motivation

Dorothee's Presentation for download

The overall motivation is to create a richly annotated discourse corpus facilitating the analysis of student texts within writing research.

The main perspective taken is that of discourse analysis. Linguistic analysis is helpful, but not our main goal.

A student text is understood as a written discourse, and it is it mainly the argumentation structure of the discourse that we will be annotating.

So far we have identified a couple of Lexically-grounded discourse relations, but also talked about, Anchors and Discourse chains.

Lexically-grounded discourse relations we have listed in the sortable table below:

Lexically grounded discourse relations

Lexically-grounded discourse relations
Sense Grammatical category Connective
condition conjunction hvis
condition conjunction når
goal conjunction for å
sequence/temporal conjunction og[1]
list conjunction og
precedence adverb etterpå
precedence adverb så
specification multi-word expression for eksempel
supplement adverb alias
disjunction conjunction eller[1]
temporal conjunction når


Sense Tags and their meanings

Having discussed with Cherise, we think that we will be best suited by relatively general categories to deal with young writer. Consequently we have the following suggestions about the sense tags:

The following tags should be skipped: -conjunction (is covered by more specific tags) -contingency (as above) -contra-expectation (sufficiently covered by Evaluate) -exception (subsumed under Condition) -expect (covered by Predict) -justify (covered by Reason) -opposition (covered by/ a special case of Contrast) -supplement (covered by Restate or Specify).

Lars, February 2014

Sense tags and their meanings
Sense tag Meaning Descriptive Definition Example
ASS assert Introduces a (new) topic, normally to be developed in the following sequence Jeg og vennene mine driver med blogg.
COM compare Point out similarity or points of correspondence

between two states, events, ideas, objects or statements

(Jeg tror at barna hadde det fint) men ikke like fint som vi har det i dag
ASSdesc assert through description Introduce a new setting, character or atmosphere of a narrative Det var morgen. (Morten våknet til en ny dag...)
ASSnar assert through narration Introduce a new narrative event or action that is not causally or hyponymically related to a previous event or action (nytt avsnitt:)Morten gikk ut av teltet og bort til bålet.
CONCES concession (Vi hadde det bra i hula) selv om det var lite mat noen ganger
COND condition Når man går går på skulen, lærer ein å lese, skrive, rekne...
CONJ conjunction how is this different from List? jf. "Og så må en venn støtte deg" (fra en tekst om vennskap)
CAUS cause Identify the external cause of an event or evaluation. To be distinguished from reason

or purpose

(Det er bra å gå på skule) for da får dei vener (og da...)
CONCLD conclude Draw a logical conclusion on the basis of previously

presented premises

EVAL evaluate Make a value judgement, state an opinion or

indicate a preference. Also used to indicate the significance of an object, idea or event previously introduced

(Alle skal få ein utdanning), og det er bra at barn går på skule...
META meta-statement Make a statement about the text itself Nå skal jeg svare på spørsmålene dine!
QUE question Ask a question that will be answered in a

following unit.

Hva ville du gjort? (Valgt en venn som...)
RESULT result Indicate an effect, outcome, result or

consequence

(Pappa og mamma jobber så mye) så jeg er ofte alene hjemme
SUM summarise Make a statement that summarises previous,

more specific statements, without drawing logical conclusions (vs. conclude)

Ja, det var det jeg gjør på dataen.
CONTIN contingency could you give an example?
C-EXPECT contra-expectation could you give an example?
CONT contrast Point out difference(s) between two events,

objects or ideas, openly signalled or inferred

(FNs barnekomvensjon har bestemt at barn skal få gå på skulen). Det er 75 mill som ikkje får skulegang. [inferred contrast]
DIS disjunction
EX exception could you give an example?
EXPEXT expect could you give an exampple?
PURP purpose
GEN generalise Make a more general statement that builds

on/includes previous specific statements

JUST justify This tag has been used for annotation and can therefore not be deleted could you give an example?
JUX juxtapose [=alternative?] <Could you give an example? cf (...hvis vennen din bommer på målet... Du må si: )Ååh, så synd. Du klarer det neste gang, ikke : Herregud, hvorfor gjorde du det, din fjott?
LIST list <how is this tag different from Conjunction? NP list here, or clause list?
OPP oppositionThis tag has been used for annotation and can therefore not be deleted how is this different from Contrast?
PRES precedence <hov is tis different from ASSnarr or SEQ?
REASON reason Indicate the internal reason of an animate subject for some (course of) action or inference Jeg var sint (så jeg ville ikke snakke med henne)
RESTATE restate Rephrase or repeat a a previous assertion at

approximately the same level of generality

SEQ sequence temporally Indicate the temporal unfolding of a sequence of events or actions
SPEC specify enumerate specific facts or details (Jeg og vennene mine driver med blogg.) Blogg er en nettside om meg selv.
SUPP supplementThis tag has been used for annotation and can therefore not be deleted could you give an example?
REACT physical or mental actions Indicates physical or mental actions or change of states of

animates which result from previously introduced actions, events or states. REACT is differentiated from RESULT by being open to choice or idiosyncracy

RESP respond Reply to a question in dialogue (direct, indirect

or inferred)

N-FUNC non-functional
  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Notice that 'og' and 'eller' can combine noun phrases, as in 'pc og mobilen' or verb phrases, as in 'jeg dusjer og fikser meg'. It is the latter case that we are interested in here.
Retrieved from "https://tc.polytext.io/w/index.php?title=Skrivesenter:Discourse_relations&oldid=13523"