Choosing rhetorical structures to plan instructional texts

Computational Intelligence

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 408-445

  Kosseim, Leila ^a   Lapalme, Guy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; CONSTRAINT THEORY; DATA STRUCTURES;

INSTRUCTIONAL TEXTS; RHETORICAL STRUCTURES;

NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS;

EID: 0034251503     PISSN: 08247935     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/0824-7935.00118     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. BATES, L., E. HOVY, and S. SENNEFF. 1994. Evaluating generation systems. Panel discussion at the 7th International Workshop on Natural Language Generation. Unpublished.
2. DALE, R. 1992. Generating Referring Expressions: Constructing Descriptions in a Domain of Objects and Processes. ACL-MIT Press Series in Natural Language Processing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
3. DANLOS, L., and G. LAPALME. 1999. An experiment in combining two text generators. In Proceedings of the AISB'99 Workshop on Reference Architectures and Data Standards for NLP, Edinburgh, pp. 1-7.
4. DELIN, J., A. HARTLEY, C. PARIS, D. SCOTT, and K. VANDER LINDEN. 1994. Expressing procedural relationships in multilingual instructions. In Proceedings of the 7th International Workshop on Natural Language Generation, Kennebunkport, Maine, pp. 61-70.
5. DELIN, J., D. SCOTT, and T. HARTLEY. 1993. Knowledge, intention, rhetoric: Levels of variation in multilingual instructions. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Intentionality and Structure in Discourse Relations. Edited by O. Rambow, pp. 7-10.
6. DELIN, J., D. SCOTT, and A. HARTLEY. 1996. Language-specific mappings from semantic to syntax. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-96), Copenhagen, pp. 292-297.
7. DI EUGENIO, B. 1993. Understanding natural language instructions: A computational approach to purpose clauses. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
8. DI EUGENIO, B., and B. L. WEBBER. 1996. Pragmatic overloading in natural language instructions. International Journal of Expert Systems, Special Issue on Knowledge Representation and Reasonning in Natural Language Processing, 9(1):53-84.
9. DIXON, P. 1987. The processing of organizational and component step information in written directions. Journal of Memory and Language, 26(1):24-35.
10. DIXON, P., J. FARIES, and G. GABRYS. 1988. The role of explicit action statements in understanding and using written directions. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(6):649-667.
11. DONIN, J., R. BRACEWELL, C. FREDERIKSEN, and M. DILLINGER. 1992. Students' strategies for writing instructions, organizing conceptual information in text. Written Communication, 9(2):209-236.
12. GOLDMAN, A. 1970. A Theory of Human Action. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
13. HARTLEY, A., and C. PARIS. 1996. Two sources of control over the generation of software instructions. In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-96), University of California, Santa Cruz, pp. 192-199.
14. KITTREDGE, R. 1982. Variation and Homogeneity of Sublanguages. In Sublanguage, Studies of Language in Restricted Semantic Domains. Edited by R. Kittredge and I. Lehrberger. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 107-137.
15. KORELSKY, T., and R. KITTREDGE. 1993. Towards stratification of RST. In Proceedings of the ACL Workshop on Intentionality and Structure in Discourse Relations. Edited by O. Rambow, pp. 52-55.
16. KOSSEIM, L. 1995. Planification de textes d'instruction: Sélection du contenu et de la structure rhétorique. Ph.D. thesis, Université de Montréal.
17. MANN, W., and S. THOMPSON. 1988. Rhetorical Structure Theory: Towards a functional theory of text organization. TEXT, 8(3):243-281.
18. MELLISH, C. 1988. Natural language generation from plans. In Advances in Natural Language Generation, Communications in Artificial Intelligence Series. Edited by M. Zock and G. Sabah. Pinter Publishers, London, pp. 131-145.
19. MOORE, J., and C. PARIS. 1993. Planning text for advisory dialogues: Capturing intentional, and rhetorical information. Computational Linguistics, 19(4):651-694.
20. MOORE, J., and M. POLLACK. 1992. A problem for RST: The need for multi-level discourse analysis. Computational Linguistics, 18(4):537-544.
21. PARIS, C., and K. VANDER LINDEN. 1996a. Building knowledge bases for the generation of software documentation. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-96), Vol. 2. Copenhagen, pp. 734-739.
22. PARIS, C., and K. VANDER LINDEN. 1996b. Drafter: An interactive support tool for writing multilingual instructions. IEEE Computer, 29(7):49-56 (Special Issue on Interactive Natural Language Processing).
23. PARIS, C., K. VANDER LINDEN, M. FISCHER, A. HARTLEY, L. PEMBERTON, R. POWER, and D. SCOTT. 1995. A support tool for writing multilingual instructions. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-95), Vol. 2, Montréal.
24. POLLACK, M. 1986. Inferring domain plans in question-answering. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
25. ROSCH, E. 1978. Principles of categorization. In Cognition and Categorization. Edited by E. Rosch and B. Lloyd. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, pp. 27-48.
26. ROSNER, D., and M. STEDE. 1992. Customizing RST for the automatic production of technical manuals. In R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. Rösner, and O. Stock. Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Edited by Springer-Verlag, Toronto, pp. 199-214.
27. SACERDOTI, E. D. 1977. A Structure for Plans and Behavior. Elsevier, New York.
28. TUTIN, A. 1992. Étude des anaphores grammaticales et lexicales pour la génération automatique de textes de procédures. Ph.D. thesis, Département de linguistique et philologie, Université de Montréal.
29. VANDER LINDEN, K. 1993a. Generating effective instructions. In 15th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Boulder, Colorado, pp. 1023-1028.
30. VANDER LINDEN, K. 1993b. Speaking of actions: Choosing rhetorical status and grammatical from in instructional text generation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Colorado.
31. VANDER LINDEN, K., and B. DI EUGENIO. 1996. Learning micro-planning rules for preventative expressions. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Natural Language Generation Workshop, Sussex, UK, pp. 11-20.
32. VANDER LINDEN, K., and J. H. MARTIN. 1995. Expressing local rhetorical relations in instructional text: A case-study of the purpose relation. Computational Linguistics, 21(1):29-57.
33. WALKER, M. 1989. Evaluating discourse processing algorithms. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL-89), Vancouver.