Hedge detection as a lens on framing in the GMO debates: A position paper

Proceedings of the Workshop on Extra-Propositional Aspects of Meaning in Computational Linguistics, ExPro 2012 at the 50th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL 2012

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 70-79

  Choi, Eunsol ^a   Tan, Chenhao ^a   Lee, Lillian ^a   Danescu Niculescu Mizil, Cristian ^a   Spindel, Jennifer ^a  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

SOCIAL ASPECTS;

GENETICALLY MODIFIED ORGANISMS; POSITION PAPERS; PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS; PUBLIC OPINIONS; SCIENTIFIC DISCOURSE; SOCIOLOGY OF SCIENCE;

WOODEN FENCES;

EID: 85120089383     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (32)

1. Amr Ahmed and Eric P Xing. Staying informed: supervised and semi-supervised multi-view topical analysis of ideological perspective. In EMNLP, pages 1140-1150, 2010.
2. Charles Bazerman. Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, Wis., 1988.
3. Beata Beigman Klebanov, Eyal Beigman, and Daniel Diermeier. Vocabulary choice as an indicator of perspective. In ACL Short Papers, pages 253-257, Stroudsburg, PA, USA, 2010. Association for Computational Linguistics.
4. Robert D. Benford and David A. Snow. Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26: 611-639, 2000.
5. Richard Harvey Brown. Toward a democratic science: Scientific narration and civic communication. Yale University Press, New Haven, 1998.
6. Dennis Chong and James N. Druckman. Framing theory. Annual Review of Political Science, 10: 103-126, 2007.
7. Jeanne Fahnestock. Accommodating Science. Written Communication, 3(3):275-296, 1986.
8. Jeanne Fahnestock. Preserving the figure: Consistency in the presentation of scientific arguments. Written Communication, 21(1):6-31, 2004.
9. Rong-En Fan, Pai-Hsuen Chen, and Chih-Jen Lin. Working set selection using second order information for training support vector machines. JMLR, 6:1889-1918, December 2005. ISSN 1532-4435.
10. Richárd Farkas, Veronika Vincze, György Móra, János Csirik, and György Szarvas. The CoNLL- 2010 shared task: Learning to detect hedges and their scope in natural language text. In CoNLL- Shared Task, pages 1-12, 2010.
11. Joseph L. Fleiss. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions. Wiley series in probability and mathematical statistics. John Wiley & Sons, New York, second edition, 1981.
12. Maria Georgescul. A hedgehop over a max-margin framework using hedge cues. In CONLL- Shared-Task, pages 26-31, 2010.
13. G. Nigel Gilbert and Michael Joseph Mulkay. Opening Pandora's box: A sociological analysis of scientists' discourse. CUP Archive, 1984.
14. Erving Goffman. Frame analysis: An essay on the organization of experience. Harvard University Press, 1974.
15. Alan G. Gross. The rhetoric of science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1990.
16. Michael Alexander Kirkwood Halliday and James R. Martin. Writing science: Literacy and discursive power. Psychology Press, London [u.a.], 1993.
17. Eric A Hardisty, Jordan Boyd-Graber, and Philip Resnik. Modeling perspective using adaptor grammars. In EMNLP, pages 284-292, 2010.
18. Ken Hyland. Hedging in scientific research articles. John Benjamins Pub. Co., Amsterdam; Philadelphia, 1998.
19. Napoleon K. Juanillo, Jr. Frames for Public Discourse on Biotechnology. In Genetically Modified Food and the Consumer: Proceedings of the 13th meeting of the National Agricultural Biotechnology Council, pages 39-50, 2001.
20. J. Peter Kincaid, Robert P. Fishburne, Richard L. Rogers, and Brad S. Chissom. Derivation of new readability formulas for navy enlisted personnel. Technical report, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia, February 1975.
21. George Lakoff. Hedges: A study in meaning criteria and the logic of fuzzy concepts. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2(4):458-508, 1973.
22. Bruno Latour. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1987.
23. Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar. Laboratory life: The social construction of scientific facts. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, 1979.
24. Beverly A. Lewin. Hedging: Form and function in scientific research texts. In Genre Studies in English for Academic Purposes, volume 9, pages 89-108. Universitat Jaume I, 1998.
25. Wei-Hao Lin, Theresa Wilson, Janyce Wiebe, and Alexander Hauptmann. Which side are you on? identifying perspectives at the document and sentence levels. In CoNLL, 2006.
26. Greg Myers. The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10(1):1-35, 1989.
27. Greg Myers. Discourse studies of scientific popularization: Questioning the boundaries. Discourse Studies, 5(2):265-279, 2003.
28. Françoise Salager-Meyer. Scientific discourse and contrastive linguistics: hedging. European Science Editing, 37(2):35-37, 2011.
29. Dietram A. Scheufele. Framing as a theory of media effects. Journal of Communication, 49(1):103-122, 1999.
30. Vladimir N. Vapnik. Statistical Learning Theory. Wiley-Interscience, 1998.
31. Teppo Varttala. Remarks on the communicative functions of hedging in popular scientific and specialist research articles on medicine. English for Specific Purposes, 18(2):177-200, 1999.
32. Teppo Varttala. Hedging in scientifically oriented discourse: Exploring variation according to discipline and intended audience. PhD thesis, University of Tampere, 2001.