A framework for annotating information structure in discourse

Proceedings of the Workshop on Frontiers in Corpus Annotations II: Pie in the Sky@ACL 2005

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 45-52

  Calhoun, Sasha ^a   Nissim, Malvina ^a   Steedman, Mark ^a   Jason, B ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DISCOURSE MODELLING; INFORMATION STRUCTURES; INTEGRATED ANALYSIS; PROSODICS; STAND-OFF; SWITCHBOARD CORPUS;

EID: 84907528244     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (40)

1. G. M. Ayers. 1994. Discourse functions of pitch range in spontaneous and read speech. In J. Venditti, editor, OSU Working Papers in Linguistics, volume 44, pages 1-49.
2. C. F. Baker, C. J. Fillmore, and J. B. Lowe. 1998. The Berkeley FrameNet project. In C. Boitet and P. Whitelock, editors, Proc. COLING-ACL, pages 86-90.
3. E. Bard, D. Robertson, and A. Sorace. 1996. Magnitude estimation of linguistic acceptability. Language, 72(1):32-68.
4. S. Baumann, C. Brinckmann, S. Hansen-Schirra, G-J. Kruijff, I. Kruijff-Korbayova, S. Neumann, and E. Teich. 2004. Multi-dimensional annotation of linguistic corpora for investigating information structure. In Proc. NAACL/HLT-Frontiers in Corpus Annotation, Boston, MA.
5. M. Beckman and G. Elam. 1997. Guidelines for ToBI Labelling. The OSU Research Foundation, v.3.0.
6. P. Boersma and D. Weenink. 2003. Praat:doing phonetics by computer. http://www.praat.org.
7. J. M. Brenier, D. M. Cer, and D. Jurafsky. 2005. Emphasis detection in speech using acoustic and lexical features. In LSA Annual Meeting, Oakland, CA.
8. S. Calhoun. 2004a. Overloaded ToBI and what to do about it: An argument for function-based phonological intonation categories. In Univ. of Edinburgh Ling. Postgrad. Conf.
9. S. Calhoun. 2004b. Phonetic dimensions of intonational categories-L+H*and H*. In Prosody 2004, Nara, Japan.
10. J. Carletta, S. Dingare, M. Nissim, and T. Nikitina. 2004. Using the NITE XML Toolkit on the Switchboard Corpus to study syntactic choice: A case study. In Proc. of LREC2004, Lisbon.
11. J. Carletta. 1996. Assessing agreement on classication tasks: The kappa statistic. Comp. Ling., 22(2):249-254.
12. H. H. Clark. 1975. Bridging. In R. Schank and B. Nash-Webber, eds, Theoretical Issues in NLP. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
13. A. Cutler, D. Dahan, and W. van Donselaar. 1997. Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Lang. and Sp., 40(2):141-201.
14. S. Davies, M. Poesio, F. Bruneseaux, and L. Romary. 1998. Annotating coreference in dialogues: Proposal for a scheme for MATE, http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/poesio/anno-manual.html.
15. G. Dogil, J. Kuhn, J. Mayer, G. Mhler, and S. Rapp. 1997. Prosody and discourse structure: Issues and experiments. In Proc. of the ESCA Workshop on Intonation: Theory, Models and Applications, pages 99-102, Athens, Greece.
16. M. Eckert and M. Strube. 2001. Dialogue acts, synchronising units and anaphora resolution. J. of Semantics, 17(1):51-89.
17. C. Fellbaum, editor. 1998. WordNet: An Electronic Lexical Database. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
18. J. Godfrey, E. Holliman, and J. McDaniel. 1992. SWITCHBOARD: Telephone speech corpus for research and development. In Proc. ICASSP-92, pages 517-520.
19. N. Hedberg and JM. Sosa. 2001. The prosodic structure of topic and focus in spontaneous english dialogue. In LSA Workshop on Topic and Focus, Santa Barbara.
20. M. Heldner, E. Strangert, and T. Deschamps. 1999. A focus detector using overall intensity and high frequency emphasis. In Proc. ICPhS-99, vol 2, 1491-1493, San Francisco.
21. J. Hirschberg. 1993. Pitch accent in context: Predicting intonational prominence from text. AI, 63:305-340.
22. L. Hirschman and N. Chinchor. 1997. MUC-7 coreference task definition. In Proc. of 7 YCZ Conf. on Message Understanding.
23. D. R. Ladd. 1996. Intonational Phonology. CUP, UK.
24. K. Lambrecht. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus, and the mental representation of discourse referents. Camb. U. Press, UK.
25. S. Löbner. 1985. Definites. J. of Semantics, 4:279-326.
26. M. Marcus, B. Santorini, and MA. Marcinkiewicz. 1993. Building a large annotated corpus of english: The Penn treebank. Comp. Ling., 19:313-330.
27. A. Mengel and W. Lezius. 2000. An XML-based encoding format for syntactically annotated corpora. In Proc. LREC2000,121-126.
28. M. Nissim. 2003. Annotation scheme for information status in dialogue. HCRC, University of Edinburgh. Unpub. ms.
29. M. Nissim, S. Dingare, J. Carletta, and M. Steedman. 2004. An annotation scheme for information status in dialogue. In Proc. LREC2004, Lisbon.
30. R. Passonneau. 1996. Instructions for applying discourse reference annotation for multiple applications (DRAMA). Unpub.ms.
31. J. Pitrelli, M. Beckman, and J. Hirschberg. 1994. Evaluation of prosodic transcription labelling reliability in the ToBI framework. In Proc. of the 3rd]\ Intl. Conf. on Spoken Lge. Proc., vol. 2, pages 123-126.
32. M. Poesio. 2000. The GNOME annotation scheme manual (v.4), http://www.hcrc.ed.ac.uk/gnome/ anno-0manual.html.
33. E. F. Prince. 1981. Toward a taxonomy of given-new information. In P. Cole, ed., Radical Pragmatics. Acad. Press, NY.
34. E. Prince. 1992. The ZPG letter: subjects, deniteness, and information-status. In S. Thompson and W. Mann, eds., Discourse description: diverse analyses of a fund raising text, pages 295-325. John Benjamins, Philadelphia/Amsterdam.
35. H.H. Rump and R. Collier. 1996. Focus conditions and the prominence of pitch-Accented syllables. Lang. and Sp., 39:1-17.
36. E. Shriberg, P. Taylor, R. Bates, A. Stolcke, K. Ries, D. Jurafsky, N. Coccaro, R. Martin, M. Meteer, and C.V. Ess-Dykema. 1998. Can prosody aid the automatic classification of dialog acts in conversational speech? Lang. and Sp., 41(3-4):439-487.
37. E. Shriberg, A. Stolcke, D. Hakkani-Tür, and G. Tür. 2000. Prosody-based automatic segmentation of speech into sentences and topics. Sp. Comm., 32(2):127-154.
38. M. Steedman. 2000. Information Structure and the Syntax-Phonology Interface. LI, 31(4):649-689.
39. H. Truckenbrodt. 2002. Upstep and embedded register levels. Phonology, 19:77-120.
40. E. Vallduv and M. Vilkuna. 1998. On Rheme and Kontrast. Syntax and Semantics, 29:79-108.