An empirical resource for discovering cognitive principles of discourse organisation: The ANNODIS corpus

Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, LREC 2012

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 2727-2734

  Afantenos, Stergos ^a   Asher, Nicholas ^a   Benamara, Farah ^a   Bras, Myriam ^a   Fabre, Cécile ^a   Ho Dac, Mai ^a   Le Draoulec, Anne ^a   Muller, Philippe ^a   Péry Woodley, Marie Paule ^a   Prévot, Laurent ^b   Rebeyrolle, Josette ^a   Tanguy, Ludovic ^a   Vergez Couret, Marianne ^a   Vieu, Laure ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

^b AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

Author keywords

Corpus annotation; Corpus linguistics; Discourse structure; Document structure

Indexed keywords

BOTTOM UP APPROACH; COGNITIVE PRINCIPLES; CORPUS ANNOTATIONS; CORPUS LINGUISTICS; DISCOURSE STRUCTURE; DOCUMENT STRUCTURE; ITERATIVE DESIGN; TOP DOWN APPROACHES;

ITERATIVE METHODS;

EID: 85028331426     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (29)

1. S. Afantenos and N. Asher. 2010. Testing SDRT's Right Frontier. In Proceedings of COLING 2010, pages 1-9.
2. S. Afantenos, P. Denis, P. Muller, and L. Danlos. 2010. Learning Recursive Segments for Discourse Parsing. In Proceedings of LREC 2010.
3. N. Asher and A. Lascarides. 2003. Logics of Conversation. Studies in Natural Language Processing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
4. N. Asher, A. Venant, P. Muller, and S. D. Afantenos. 2011. Complex discourse units and their semantics. In Constraints in Discourse (CID 2011), Agay-Roches Rouges, France.
5. N. Asher. 1993. Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse. Kluwer.
6. Adam L. Berger, Vincent J. Della Pietra, and Stephen A. Della Pietra. 1996. A maximum entropy approach to natural language processing. Comput. Linguist., 22: 39-71, March.
7. D. Biber. 1988. Variation Across Speech and Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. D. Bourigault. 2007. Un analyseur syntaxique opérationnel: Syntex. Mémoire d'HDR, Université de Toulouse.
9. Le Draoulec A. Charolles M., M.-P. Péry-Woodley, and L. Sarda. 2005. Temporal and spatial dimensions of discourse organisation. Journal of French Language Studies, 15 (2): 203-218.
10. F. Cornish. 1999. Anaphora, Discourse and Understanding. Evidence from English and French. Calendron Press: Oxford.
11. L. Danlos. 2007. Strong generative capacity of RST, SDRT and discourse dependency DAGs. In A. Benz and P. Kühnlein, editors, Constraints in Discourse. Benjamins.
12. K. Forbes, E. Miltsakaki, R. Prasad, A. Sarkar, A. K. Joshi, and B. L. Webber. 2003. D-ltag system: Discourse parsing with a lexicalized tree-adjoining grammar. Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 12 (3): 261-279.
13. G. Francis. 1994. Labelling discourse: an aspect of nominal-group lexical cohesion. In M. Coulthard, editor, Advances in Written Text Analysis, pages 83-101. Routledge: London.
14. D. Goutsos. 1996. A model of sequential relations in expository test. Text, 16 (4): 501-533.
15. B. Grosz and C. L. Sidner. 1986. Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12 (3): 175-204, July-September.
16. M. A. K. Halliday and R. Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. Longman: London.
17. S. Hempel and L. Degand. 2008. Sequencers in different text genres: Academic writing, journalese and fiction. Journal of Pragmatics, 40: 676-693.
18. E. Hovy and E. Maier. 1993. Parsimonious or profligate: How many and which discourse structure relations Unpublished manuscript, available at http: //www. isi. edu/natural-language/ people/hovy/papers/93discproc. pdf.
19. W. Mann and S. Thompson. 1987. Rhetorical structure theory: a theory of text organization. Technical report, Information Science Institute.
20. D. Marcu. 2000. The rhetorical parsing of unrestricted texts: A surface-based approach. Computational Linguistics, 26 (3): 395-448.
21. Y. Mathet and A. Widlöcher. 2009. La plate-forme GLOZZ: environnement d'annotation et d'exploration de corpus. In TALN 2009, Senlis, June. ATALA, LIPN.
22. L. Polanyi, C. Culy, M. van den Berg, G. L. Thione, and D. Ahn. 2004. A rule based approach to discourse parsing. In Michael Strube and Candy Sidner, editors, Proceedings of the 5th SIGdial Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue, pages 108-117, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, April 30-May 1. Association for Computational Linguistics.
23. L. Polanyi. 1988. A formal model of the structure of discourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 12: 601-638.
24. R. Power, D. Scott, and N. Bouayad-Agha. 2003. Document structure. Computational Linguistics, 2 (29): 211-260.
25. R. Prasad, N. Dinesh, A. Lee, E. Miltsakaki, L. Robaldo, A. Joshi, and B. Webber. 2008. The penn discourse treebank 2. 0. In N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, J. Odjik, S. Piperidis, and D. Tapias, editors, Proceedings of LREC'08, Marrakech, Morocco, may. ELRA. http: //www. lrec-conf. org/proceedings/lrec2008/.
26. L. Prévot, L. Vieu, and N. Asher. 2009. Une formalisation plus précise pour une annotation moins confuse: la relation d'élaboration d'entité. Journal of French Language Studies, 19 (2): 207-228.
27. C. Roze. 2011. Towards a Discourse Relation Algebra for Comparing Discourse Structures. In Constraints in Discourse (CID 2011), Agay-Roches Rouges, France.
28. L. Vieu, M. Bras, N. Asher, and M. Aurnague. 2005. Locating adverbials in discourse. Journal of French Language Studies, 15 (2): 173-193.
29. F. Wolf and E. Gibson. 2005. Representing discourse coherence: A corpus based study. Computational Linguistics, 31 (2): 249-287.