Difference between revisions of "Skrivesenter:Discourse relations"
| Line 277: | Line 277: | ||
|- | |- | ||
|JUX | |JUX | ||
| − | |juxtapose | + | |juxtapose [=alternative?] |
| | | | ||
| − | |< | + | |<Could you give an example? cf (...hvis vennen din bommer på målet... Du må si: )Ååh, så synd. Du klarer det neste gang, ikke : Herregud, hvorfor gjorde du det, din fjott? |
|- | |- | ||
|LIST | |LIST | ||
|list | |list | ||
| | | | ||
| − | |<how is this tag different from Conjunction? | + | |<how is this tag different from Conjunction? NP list here, or clause list? |
|- | |- | ||
|OPP | |OPP | ||
Revision as of 15:53, 3 February 2014
Contents
Overall Motivation
Dorothee's Presentation for download
The overall motivation is to create a richly annotated discourse corpus facilitating the analysis of student texts within writing research.
The main perspective taken is that of discourse analysis. Linguistic analysis is helpful, but not our main goal.
A student text is understood as a written discourse, and it is it mainly the argumentation structure of the discourse that we will be annotating.
So far we have identified a couple of Lexically-grounded discourse relations, but also talked about, Anchors and Discourse chains.
Lexically-grounded discourse relations we have listed in the sortable table below:
Lexically grounded discourse relations
| Sense | Grammatical category | Connective |
|---|---|---|
| condition | conjunction | hvis |
| condition | conjunction | når |
| goal | conjunction | for å |
| sequence/temporal | conjunction | og[1] |
| list | conjunction | og |
| precedence | adverb | etterpå |
| precedence | adverb | så |
| specification | multi-word expression | for eksempel |
| supplement | adverb | alias |
| disjunction | conjunction | eller[1] |
| temporal | conjunction | når |
Overall Motivation
Dorothee's Presentation for download
The overall motivation is to create a richly annotated discourse corpus facilitating the analysis of student texts within writing research.
The main perspective taken is that of discourse analysis. Linguistic analysis is helpful, but not our main goal.
A student text is understood as a written discourse, and it is it mainly the argumentation structure of the discourse that we will be annotating.
So far we have identified a couple of Lexically-grounded discourse relations, but also talked about, Anchors and Discourse chains.
Lexically-grounded discourse relations we have listed in the sortable table below:
Lexically grounded discourse relations
| Sense | Grammatical category | Connective |
|---|---|---|
| condition | conjunction | hvis |
| condition | conjunction | når |
| goal | conjunction | for å |
| sequence/temporal | conjunction | og[1] |
| list | conjunction | og |
| precedence | adverb | etterpå |
| precedence | adverb | så |
| specification | multi-word expression | for eksempel |
| supplement | adverb | alias |
| disjunction | conjunction | eller[1] |
| temporal | conjunction | når |
Sense Tags and their meanings
| Sense tag | Meaning | Descriptive Definition | Example | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ASS | assert | Introduces a (new) topic, normally to be developed in the following sequence | Jeg og vennene mine driver med blogg. | |
| COM | compare | Point out similarity or points of correspondence
between two events, ideas, objects or statements |
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx | |
| ASSdesc | assert through description | Introduce a new setting, character or atmosphere of a narrative | ||
| ASSnar | assert through narration | Introduce a new narrative event or action that is not causally or hyponymically related to a previous event or action | ||
| CONCES | concession | |||
| COND | condition | Når man går går på skulen, lærer ein å lese, skrive, rekne... | ||
| CONJ | conjunction | <how is this different from List? jf. "Og så må en venn støtte deg" (fra en tekst om vennskap) | ||
| CAUS | cause | Identify the external cause of an event or evaluation. To be distinguished from reason
or purpose |
(Det er bra å gå på skule) for da får dei vener (og da...) | |
| CONCLD | conclude | Draw a logical conclusion on the basis of previously
presented premises |
||
| EVAL | evaluate | Make a value judgement, state an opinion or
indicate a preference. Also used to indicate the significance of an object, idea or event previously introduced |
(Alle skal få ein utdanning), og det er bra at barn går på skule... | |
| META | meta-statement | Make a statement about the text itself | Nå skal jeg svare på spørsmålene dine! | |
| QUE | question | Ask a question that will be answered in a
following unit. |
||
| RESULT | result | Indicate an effect, outcome, result or
consequence |
||
| SUM | summarise | Make a statement that summarises previous,
more specific statements, without drawing logical conclusions (vs. conclude) |
Ja, det var det jeg gjør på dataen. | |
| CONTIN | contingency | <could you give an example? | ||
| C-EXPECT | contra-expectation | <could you give an example? | ||
| CONT | contrast | Point out difference(s) between two events,
objects or ideas, openly signalled or inferred |
(FNs barnekomvensjon har bestemt at barn skal få gå på skulen). Det er 75 mill som ikkje får skulegang. [inferred contrast] | |
| DIS | disjunction | |||
| EX | exception | <could you give an example? | ||
| EXPEXT | expect | <could you give an exampple? | ||
| PURP | purpose | |||
| GEN | generalise | Make a more general statement that builds
on/includes previous specific statements |
||
| JUST | justify | <could you give an example? | ||
| JUX | juxtapose [=alternative?] | <Could you give an example? cf (...hvis vennen din bommer på målet... Du må si: )Ååh, så synd. Du klarer det neste gang, ikke : Herregud, hvorfor gjorde du det, din fjott? | ||
| LIST | list | <how is this tag different from Conjunction? NP list here, or clause list? | ||
| OPP | opposition | <how is this different from Contrast? | ||
| PRES | precedence | |||
| REASON | reason | Indicate the internal reason of an animate subject for some (course of) action or inference | ||
| RESTATE | restate | Rephrase or repeat a a previous assertion at
approximately the same level of generality |
||
| SEQ | sequence temporally | Indicate the temporal unfolding of a sequence of events or actions | ||
| SPEC | specify | enumerate specific facts or details | (Jeg og vennene mine driver med blogg.) Blogg er en nettside om meg selv. | |
| SUPP | supplement | <could you give an example? | ||
| REACT | physical or mental actions | Indicates physical or mental actions or change of states of
animates which result from previously introduced actions, events or states. REACT is differentiated from RESULT by being open to choice or idiosyncracy |
||
| RESP | respond | Reply to a question in dialogue (direct, indirect
or inferred) |