Realization of discourse relations by other means: Alternative lexicalizations

Coling 2010 - 23rd International Conference on Computational Linguistics, Proceedings of the Conference

Volumn 2, Issue , 2010, Pages 1023-1031

  Prasad, Rashmi ^a   Joshi, Aravind ^a   Webber, Bonnie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

TREEBANKS;

COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS;

SYNTACTICS;

EID: 79959963108     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (23)

1. Callison-Birch, Chris. 2007. Paraphrasing and Translation. Ph.D. thesis, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh.
2. Callison-Birch, Chris. 2008. Syntactic constraints on paraphrases extracted from parallel corpora. In Proceedings of Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (EMNLP).
3. Danlos, Laurence. 2006. Discourse verbs. In Proceedings of the 2ndWorkshop on Constraints in Discourse, pages 59-65, Maynooth, Ireland.
4. Forbes-Riley, Katherine, Bonnie Webber, and Aravind Joshi. 2006. Computing discourse semantics: The predicate-argument semantics of discourse connectives in D-LTAG. Journal of Semantics, 23:55-106. (Pubitemid 43210756)
5. Halliday, M. A. K. and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
6. Huong, LeThanh, Geetha Abeysinghe, and Christian Huyck. 2003. Using cohesive devices to recognize rhetorical relations in text. In Proceedings of 4th Computational Linguistics UK Research Colloquium (CLUK 4), University of Edinburgh, UK.
7. Kibble, Rodger. 1999. Nominalisation and rhetorical structure. In Proceedings of ESSLLI Formal Grammar conference, Utrecht.
8. Knott, Alistair. 1996. A Data-Driven Methodology for Motivating a Set of Coherence Relations. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.
9. Lin, Ziheng, Min-Yen Kan, and Hwee Tou Ng. 2009. Recognizing implicit discourse relations in the penn discourse treebank. In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Singapore.
10. Maat, Henk Pander and Ted Sanders. 2000. Domains of use or subjectivity? the distribution of three dutch causal connectives explained. TOPICS IN ENGLISH LINGUISTICS, pages 57-82.
11. Marcu, Daniel and Abdessamad Echihabi. 2002. An unsupervised approach to recognizing discourse relations. In Proceedings of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
12. Marcus, Mitchell P., Beatrice Santorini, and Mary Ann Marcinkiewicz. 1993. Building a large annotated corpus of english: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19(2):313-330.
13. Martin, James R. 1992. English text: System and structure. Benjamins, Amsterdam.
14. Oza, Umangi, Rashmi Prasad, Sudheer Kolachina, Dipti Mishra Sharma, and Aravind Joshi. 2009. The hindi discourse relation bank. In Proceedings of the ACL 2009 Linguistic Annotation Workshop III (LAW-III), Singapore.
15. Pitler, Emily and Ani Nenkova. 2009. Using syntax to disambiguate explicit discourse connectives in text. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing, Singapore.
16. Pitler, Emily, Annie Louis, and Ani Nenkova. 2009. Automatic sense prediction for implicit discourse relations in text. In Proceedings of the Joint Conference of the 47th Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics and the 4th International Joint Conference on Natural Language Processing.
17. Power, Richard. 2007. Abstract verbs. In ENLG'07: Proceedings of the Eleventh European Workshop on Natural Language Generation, pages 93-96, Morristown, NJ, USA. Association for Computational Linguistics.
18. Prasad, Rashmi, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Eleni Miltsakaki, Livio Robaldo, Aravind Joshi, and Bonnie Webber. 2008. The Penn Discourse TreeBank 2.0. In Proceedings of 6th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2008).
19. PDTB-Group. 2008. The Penn Discourse TreeBank 2.0 AnnotationManual. Technical Report IRCS-08-01, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science, University of Pennsylvania.
20. Sporleder, Caroline and Alex Lascarides. 2008. Using automatically labelled examples to classify rhetorical relations: an assessment. Natural Language Engineering, 14(3):369-416. (Pubitemid 351803570)
21. Steedman, Mark. 2000. The Syntactic Process. MIT Press, Cambridge MA.
22. Taboada, Maite. 2006. Discourse markers as signals (or not) of rhetorical relations. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(4):567-592. (Pubitemid 43399686)
23. Yu, Hong, Nadya Frid, Susan McRoy, P Simpson, Rashmi Prasad, Alan Lee, and Aravind Joshi. 2008. Exploring discourse connectivity in biomedical text for text mining. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual International Conference on Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology BioLINK SIG Meeting, Toronto, Canada.