A semantic account of adverbials as discourse connectives

Proceedings of the SIGDIAL 2002 Workshop - 3rd Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue

Volumn , Issue , 2002, Pages 27-36

  Forbes, Kate ^a   Webber, Bonnie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPOSITIONAL SEMANTICS; MATRIX;

SEMANTICS;

EID: 4043113471     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Nicholas Asher. 1993. Reference to Abstract Objects. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
2. C. Creswell, K. Forbes, E. Miltsakaki, R. Prasad, B. Webber, and A. Joshi. The discourse anaphoric properties of connectives, in progress.
3. Osten Dahl and Christina Hellman. 1995. What happens when we use an anaphor. Presentation at the XVth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics. Oslo, Norway.
4. Thomas Boyden Ernst. 1984. Towards an Integrated Theory of Adverb Position in English. PhD dissertation, Indiana University.
5. K. Forbes, E. Miltsakaki, R. Prasad, A. Sarkar, B. Webber, and A. Joshi. 2001. Dltag system: Discourse parsing with a lexicalized tree-adjoining grammar. ESSLLI 2001.
6. Katherine Forbes. 2002. Discourse Semantics of S-Modifiers. PhD dissertation, in progress, University of Pennsylvania.
7. Claire Gardent. 1997. Discourse tree adjoining grammars. Claus report nr.89, University of the Saarland, Saarbrucken.
8. H. P. Grice. 1989. Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
9. Irene Heim and Angela Kratzer. 1998. Semantics in Generative Grammar. Blackwell.
10. Andrew Kehler. 1995. Interpreting Cohesive Forms in the Context of Discourse Inference. PhD dissertation, Harvard University.
11. Alistair Knott. 1996. A Data-Driven Methodology For Motivating A Set Of Coherence Relations. PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh.
12. William Mann and Sandra Thompson. 1988. Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization. Text, 8(3):243-281.
13. Daniel Marcu. 2000. The rhetorical parsing of unrestricted texts: A surface-based approach. Computational Linguistics, 25(3):395-448.
14. Anita Mittwoch. 1982. On the difference between eating and eating something: Activities versus accomplishments. Linguistic Inquiry, 13.
15. Robert C. Moore. 1993. Events, situations and adverbs. In R. Weischedel and M. Bates, editors, Challenges in Natural Language Processing. Cambridge University Press.
16. Frank Schilder. 1997. Tree discourse grammar, or how to get attached to a discourse. In P. Dekker and M. Stokhof, editors, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Computational Semantics. Tilburg, Netherlands.
17. Mark Steedman. 2000. Information structure and the syntax-phonology interface. Linguistic Inquiry, 31(4):649-689.
18. Martin van den Berg. 1996. Discourse grammar and dynamic logic. In P. Dekker and M. Stokhof, editors, Proceedings of the Tenth Amsterdam Colloquium. University of Amsterdam, ILLC/Department of Philosophy.
19. Cornelia Maria Verspoor. 1997. Contextually-Dependent Lexical Semantics. PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh.
20. Bonnie Webber, Aravind Joshi, Matthew Stone, and Alistair Knott. 2001. Anaphora and discourse semantics, submitted to Computational Linguistics.