Difference between revisions of "Skrivesenter:Discourse relations"
m (→Sense Tags and their meanings) |
m (→Sense Tags and their meanings) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | ===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 | ||
| + | |- | ||
| + | |} | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
===Overall Motivation=== | ===Overall Motivation=== | ||
| Line 212: | Line 283: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|RESP | |RESP | ||
| + | |respond | ||
|Reply to a question in dialogue (direct, indirect or inferred) | |Reply to a question in dialogue (direct, indirect or inferred) | ||
|-} | |-} | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===References and Footnotes=== | ||
| + | <references/> | ||
===References and Footnotes=== | ===References and Footnotes=== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
Revision as of 14:08, 14 November 2013
Contents
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
| 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 |
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
| 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
| Sense tag | Meaning | Descriptive Definition | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASS | assert | Introduces a new topic | |
| COM | comparison | Point out similarity or points of correspondence between two events, ideas, objects or statements | |
| ASSdesc | assert through description | Introducing a new setting, character or atmosphere | |
| ASSnar | assert through narration | Introducing a state or a new event or action | |
| CONCES | concession | ||
| COND | condition | ||
| CONJ | conjunction | ||
| CAUS | cause | Identify the cause of an event. To be distinguished from reason or purpose | |
| CONCLD | conclude | Draw a logical conclusion on the basis of previously presented premises | |
| EVAL | evaluate | Make a value judgment, state an opinion or indicate a preference | |
| META | meta-statement | Make a statement about the text itself | |
| QUE | question | Ask a question that will be answered in a following unit | |
| RESULT | result | Indicate an effect, outcome, result or consequence | |
| SUM | summary | Make a statement that summarizes previous, more specific statements, without drawing logical conclusions (cf. conclude) | |
| CONTIN | contingency | ||
| C-EXPECT | contra-expectation | ||
| CONT | contrast | Point out difference(s) between two events, objects or ideasopenly signalled or inferred | |
| DIS | disjunction | ||
| EX | exception | ||
| EXPEXT | expectation | ||
| PURP | purpose | ||
| GEN | generalization | Make a more general statement that builds on/includes previous specific statements | |
| JUST | justification | ||
| JUX | juxtaposition | ||
| LIST | list | ||
| OPP | opposition | ||
| PRES | precedence | ||
| REASON | reason | ||
| RESTATE | restatement | Rephrase or repeat a a previous assertion on approximately the same level of generality | |
| SEQ | sequence temporal | ||
| SPEC | specification | enumeration of specific facts or details | |
| SUPP | supplement | ||
| 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) |