Beyond elaboration: the interaction of relations and focus in coherent text

Human Cognitive Processing

Volumn 8, Issue , 2001, Pages 181-196

  Knott, Alistair ^a   Oberlander, Jon ^a   O'Donnell, Michael ^a   Mellish, Chris ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84918569548     PISSN: 13876724     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1075/hcp.8.10kno     Document Type: Chapter

References (20)

1. Our objections do not extend to other types of ELABORATION; for instance, what Mann and Thompson call PROCESS-STEP ELABORATION or GENERALIZATION-SPECIFIC ELABORATION. In what follows, references to ELABORATION are exclusively to the object-attribute variety, unless otherwise stated.
2. The notion of a resumption bears some resemblance to Grosz and Sidner's notion of a 'digression'. This is a discourse segment which (a) is not related to the immediately preceding segment by dominance or satisfaction-precedence, and (b) contains mention of an entity salient in the interrupted segment. However, Grosz and Sidner's deWnition implies that a link due to a common entity can only occur between adjacent segments; our claim is that resumptions can occur between non-adjacent segments.
3. In this respect, our proposal is similar to that made by Mooney, Carberry and McCoy (1990).
4. A working deWnition of what it is for a fact to be 'about' a certain entity is given in Mellish et al. (1998).
5. Grosz, B. J., & Sidner, C. L. (1986). Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12, 175-203.
6. Grosz, B. J., Joshi, A. K., & Weinstein, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21, 203-225.
7. Halliday, M. & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
8. Kittredge, R., Korelsky, T., & Rambow, O. (1991). On the need for domain communication knowledge. Computational Intelligence, 7, 305-314.
9. Knott, A. (1996). A data-driven methodology for motivating a set of coherence relations. Ph.D. thesis, Department of ArtiWcial Intelligence, University of Edinburgh.
10. Knott, A., & Mellish, C. (1996). A feature-based account of the relations signaled by sentence and clause connectives. Language and Speech, 39, 143-183.
11. Mann, W. C., & Thompson, S. A. (1988). Rhetorical structure theory: A theory of text organization. Text, 8, 243-281.
12. Marcu, D. (1997). The rhetorical parsing, summarisation and generation of natural language texts. Ph.D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto.
13. Martin, J. R. (1983). Conjunction: The logic of English text. In J. S. PetöW & E. Sözer (Eds.), Micro and Macroconnexity of Texts, (pp. 1-72). Helmut Buske Verlag, Hamburg.
14. McKeown, K. R. (1985). Text generation: Using discourse strategies and focus constraints to generate natural language text. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
15. Mellish, C., O'Donnell, M., Oberlander, J., & Knott, A. (1998). An architecture for opportunistic text generation. In Proceedings of the ninth International Workshop on Natural Language Generation (pp. 28-37). Montréal.
16. Mooney, D., Carberry, M. S., & McCoy, K. F. (1990). The generation of high-level structure for extended EXPLANATIONS. COLING 90, 2, 276-281.
17. Scott, D. R., & de Souza, C. S. (1990). Getting the message across in RST-based text generation. In R. Dale, C. Mellish, & M. Zock (Eds.), Current Research in Natural Language Generation. (pp. 47-73). London: Academic Press.
18. Sibun, P. (1992). Generating text without trees. Computational Intelligence, 8, 102-122. Walker, M. (1993). Informational redundancy and resource bounds in dialogue. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania.
19. Walker, M. (1996). Limited attention and discourse structure. Computational Linguistics, 22, 255-264.
20. Webber, B. (1991). Structure and ostension in the interpretation of discourse deixis. Natural Language and Cognitive Processes, 6, 107-135.