Resolving discourse deictic anaphora in dialogues

9th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics, EACL 1999

Volumn , Issue , 1999, Pages 37-44

  Eckert, Miriam ^a   Strube, Michael ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANAPHORA RESOLUTION; ANAPHORS; RESOLUTION ALGORITHMS; SPOKEN DIALOGUE;

EID: 85121204640     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (20)

1. Nicholas Asher. 1993. Reference toAbstract Objects. Kluwer, Dordrecht.
2. Adriana Belletti and Luigi Rizzi. 1988. Psych verbs and theta theory. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 6:291-352.
3. Donna Byron and Amanda Stent. 1998. A preliminary model of centering in dialog. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Montrral, Qurbec, Canada, 10-14 August 1998, pages 1475-1477.
4. Jean Carletta, Amy Isard, Stephen Isard, Jacqueline Kowtko, Gwyneth Doherty-Sneddon, and Anne Anderson. 1997. The reliability of a dialogue structure coding scheme. Computational Linguistics, 23(1):13-31.
5. Jean Carletta. 1996. Assessing agreement on classification tasks: The kappa statistic. Computational Linguistics, 22(2):249-254.
6. Herbert H. Clark and Edward F. Schaefer. 1989. Contributing to discourse. Cognitive Science, 13:259-294.
7. Ido Dagan and Alon Itai. 1991. A statistical filter for resolving pronoun references. In Y.A. Feldman and A. Bruckstein, editors, Artificial Intelligence and Computer Vision, pages 125-135. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
8. t3sten Dahl and Christina Hellman. 1995. What happens when we use an anaphor. In Presentation at the XVth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics Oslo, Norway.
9. Susan Garnsey, Neal Pearlmutter, Elizabeth Myers, and Melanie Lotocky. 1997. Contributions of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 37:58-93.
10. Barbara J. Grosz, Aravind K. Joshi, and Scott Weinstein. 1995. Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21(2):203-225.
11. Jeanette K. Gundel, Nancy Hedberg, and Ron Zacharski. 1993. Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 69:274-307.
12. Osvaldo Jaeggli. 1986. Arbitrary plural pronominals. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 4:43-76.
13. LDC. 1993. Switchboard. Linguistic Data Consortium. University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Penn.
14. Susann LuperFoy. 1992. The representation of multimodal user interface dialogues using discourse pegs. In Proceedings of the 30 th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Newark, Del., 28 June - 2 July 1992, pages 22-31.
15. Rebecca Passonneau and Diane Litman. 1997. Discourse segmentation by human and automated means. Computational Linguistics, 23(1): 103-139.
16. Paul Postal and Geoffrey Pullum. 1988. Expletive noun phrases in subcategorized positions. Linguistic Inquiry, 19:635-670.
17. Michael Strube. 1998. Never look back: An alternative to centering. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics and 36th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, Montrfal, Qurbec, Canada, 10-14 August 1998, pages 1251-1257.
18. David R. Traum. 1994. A Computational Theory of Grounding in Natural Language Conversation. Ph:D. thesis, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester.
19. Marilyn A. Walker. 1998. Centering, anaphora resolution, and discourse structure. In M.A. Walker, A.K. Joshi, and E.E Prince, editors, Centering Theory in Discourse, pages 401-435. Oxford University Press, Oxford, U.K.
20. Bonnie L. Webber. 1991. Structure and ostension in the interpretation of discourse deixis. Language and Cognitive Processes, 6(2): 107-135.