Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (1)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
Language
- English (2)
Keywords
- discourse structure (2) (remove)
Institute
In this paper we review the current state of research on the issue of discourse structure (DS)/information structure (IS) interface. This field has received a lot of attention from discourse semanticists and pragmatists, and has made substantial progress in recent years. In this paper we summarize the relevant studies. In addition, we look at the issue of DS/ISinteraction at a different level - that of phonetics. It is known that both information structure and discourse structure can be realized prosodically, but the issue of phonetic interaction between the prosodic devices they employ has hardly ever been discussed in this context. We think that a proper consideration of this aspect of DS/IS-interaction would enrich our understanding of the phenomenon, and hence we formulate some related research-programmatic positions.
The aim of this thesis is to develop approaches to automatically recognise the structure of argumentation in short monological texts. This amounts to identifying the central claim of the text, supporting premises, possible objections, and counter-objections to these objections, and connecting them correspondingly to a structure that adequately describes the argumentation presented in the text.
The first step towards such an automatic analysis of the structure of argumentation is to know how to represent it. We systematically review the literature on theories of discourse, as well as on theories of the structure of argumentation against a set of requirements and desiderata, and identify the theory of J. B. Freeman (1991, 2011) as a suitable candidate to represent argumentation structure. Based on this, a scheme is derived that is able to represent complex argumentative structures and can cope with various segmentation issues typically occurring in authentic text.
In order to empirically test our scheme for reliability of annotation, we conduct several annotation experiments, the most important of which assesses the agreement in reconstructing argumentation structure. The results show that expert annotators produce very reliable annotations, while the results of non-expert annotators highly depend on their training in and commitment to the task.
We then introduce the 'microtext' corpus, a collection of short argumentative texts. We report on the creation, translation, and annotation of it and provide a variety of statistics. It is the first parallel corpus (with a German and English version) annotated with argumentation structure, and -- thanks to the work of our colleagues -- also the first annotated according to multiple theories of (global) discourse structure.
The corpus is then used to develop and evaluate approaches to automatically predict argumentation structures in a series of six studies: The first two of them focus on learning local models for different aspects of argumentation structure. In the third study, we develop the main approach proposed in this thesis for predicting globally optimal argumentation structures: the 'evidence graph' model. This model is then systematically compared to other approaches in the fourth study, and achieves state-of-the-art results on the microtext corpus. The remaining two studies aim to demonstrate the versatility and elegance of the proposed approach by predicting argumentation structures of different granularity from text, and finally by using it to translate rhetorical structure representations into argumentation structures.