Page locked

This page is currently locked for editing by another user. You have to wait until this user finishes editing or the lock expires.
Currently locked by: 18.226.28.197
Lock expires at: 2024/05/03 06:30 (2 min)
This page is read only. You can view the source, but not change it. Ask your administrator if you think this is wrong.
====== Program ======

  * [[#Invited speakers]]
  * [[#Oral presentations]]
  * [[#Posters]]

| ^ **Wednesday 14th**           ^ **Thursday 15th**       ^ **Friday 16th**       ^
|9h15 | Opening |  | | 
|9h30 | Invited: Jonathan Ginzburg | Invited: Andrew Kehler | Invited: Barbara di Eugenio |
|10h30 | **Break**  | **Break**  | **Break** | 
| 11h | R. Fernández | L. Danlos & O. Rambow| N. Asher et al. |
| 11h45 |K. Jasinskaja & E. Karagjosova |M. Vergez-Couret et al. |N. Van der Vliet & G. Redeker | 
| 12h30 | **Lunch** |** Lunch** | **Closure & Lunch**   |
| 14h | A. Tantos  |M. Egg  |  |
| 14h45 | L. Vieu | **Poster Session**: \\ K. Alahverdzhieva & A. Lascarides, \\ A. Gazdik & G. Winterstein, \\ L. Mayol & E. Castroviejo \\  C. Roze \\ M. Gylling & I. Korzen | |
| 15h30 | **Break** | ::: | |
| 16h | J. Hunter | ::: ||
| 16h45 | R. Moot et al. | **End** | |
| 17h30 | **End** |||
| 20h | Dinner | Dinner | |
----
----
===== Invited speakers =====
Barbara di Eugenio // Semantic Constraints and Discourse Parsing //

 Abstract: "Discourse Parsing, the computational segmentation and  inference of structure and relations in text, remains a highly challenging task. Efforts have relied mostly on syntactic and lexical information. The use of semantics has been restricted to shallow semantic features such as lexical chains and similarity measures based on word co-occurrences.

 I will present an innovative discourse parser that uses rich verb semantics and relational information on the structure of  the segment being built. Our discourse parser, based on a modified shift-reduce algorithm, crucially uses a rhetorical relation classifier to determine the site of attachment of a new incoming chunk together with the appropriate relation label. Another novel
 aspect of our work is that the relation classifier uses Inductive Logic Programming, a method that learns from first-order logic representations. We show that on classifying rhetorical elations,  our results are significantly better than attribute-value learning paradigms such as Decision Trees, RIPPER and Naive Bayes. Our work demonstrates that, when available, semantic information for discourse parsing can be used effectively."

 BIO: Barbara Di Eugenio is Associate Professor in the Department of Computer Science of the
 University of Illinois, Chicago campus. There she leads the NLP laboratory (http://nlp.cs.uic.edu/). She obtained her laurea in Informatica in 1985, from Universita'
 di Torino, and her PhD in Computer Science in 1993, from the University of Pennsylvania. She  is an NSF CAREER awardee, a past treasurer of the North American Chapter of the Association
 for Computational Linguistics, and a past treasurer of SIGDial, the ACL special interest group for
 discourse and dialogue; she is also one of the founding and managing editors of the Journal of Discourse and Dialogue Research.


===== Oral presentations =====
----
**[[http://www.let.rug.nl/~vandervliet/|Nynke Van Der Vliet]] and [[http://www.let.rug.nl/~redeker|Gisela Redeker]]**	//Complex sentences as leaky units in discourse parsing//

Abstract: \\
It is usually assumed that complex sentences with multiple clauses function as rhetorical units in discourse. We show that there are rare but systematic exceptions to this general assumption: structures where a sentence-external unit attaches to one of the clauses in a complex sentence before the combined span joins the rest of the complex sentence. In our Dutch RST-annotated text corpus, 13% of the complex sentences have such ’leaky’ boundaries.  The majority of the cases have a structure that can be accommodated by a sentence-ﬁrst parser. Still, ’leaky’ complex sentences are an intriguing phenomenon, and we therefore intend to further explore their semantic, syntactic, and functional characteristics.

----
**[[http://www.angl.hu-berlin.de/faculty/egg|Markus Egg]].** //Discourse particles between cohesion and coherence//

 
Abstract:\\
 This paper discusses relational discourse particles as a device for the organisation of texts that holds the middle ground between cohesion and coherence. They are cohesive devices like "then" and other discourse anaphors, which link whole discourse segments directly but do not contribute to discourse structure proper. But they resemble conjunctions and other discourse markers in that they introduce relations between discourse segments that refer to inference patterns from the common ground, e.g., denial of expectation. In addition, they can refer to the literal content of segments or to their felicity conditions just like discourse markers. 

----


**  [[http://www.ims.uni-stuttgart.de/~jasinsk/|Katja Jasinskaja]] and Elena Karagjosova.** //Elaboration and Explanation//

Abstract:\\
 In this paper we study two expressive patterns  shared between elaboration and explanation relations: unmarked connection, i.e. juxtaposition of sentences without any explicit marker, and the German marker `nämlich' (namely), which must have emerged as a marker of specification but has spread in the direction of explanation.  We try to answer the question what is common to elaboration and explanation relations which licenses the use of same expressive patterns, and argue that elaboration and explanation are closely connected in the conceptual space of discourse relations. 

----
**  [[http://www.irit.fr/~Nicholas.Asher|Nicholas Asher]], Antoine Venant, [[http://www.irit.fr/~Philippe.Muller/|Philippe Muller]] and [[http://www.irit.fr/-Annuaire-?code=6334|Stergos Afantenos]].** //Complex discourse units and their semantics//

Abstract:\\
 A natural and intuitive principle concerning the organization of content in discourse is that discourse structure and rhetorical function operate at several levels of granularity at once. There are low level discourse connections between elementary discourse units (EDUs), even within a single sentence; but there are also discourse connections between larger constituents, complex discourse units or CDUs, which may include only two or three EDUs or may correspond to several paragraphs. CDUs and the constraints they impose on the discourse structure have not been an object of study in computational or formal work on discourse, as they are generally the by-product of processes either focused on elementary units (eg in RST) or on thematic cohesion (eg in text tiling).  The purpose of this paper is to ﬁll this lacuna. First, we give some more details about the importance of CDUs in an account of discourse structure. We then provide formal deﬁnitions of equivalences involving discourse graphs, which enables us to prove some results about how CDUS relate to EDUs and to each other. This in turn leads us to provide separation axioms or existence principles for CDUs. We work within the framework of SDRT (Asher 1993, Asher and Lascarides 2003).

----
**  Julie Hunter.** //`Now': A Discourse-Based Theory//

Abstract:\\
 English `now' depends on a perspective point which need not be given by the time of utterance.  Contrary to existing theories of  `now', I claim that this perspective point is determined by the rhetorical structure of the discourse.  The details of my theory are presented in Segmented Discourse Representation Theory  and are  supported by over 150 examples of `now' from recognized newspapers and published narratives. The general picture is that  `now' imposes structure on a temporal ordering; it divides a given period from that which comes before and from that which comes after.   `Now' also has a  spotlighting effect, so the discourse must call for special attention to the events/states described by the `now' clause; the clause must contribute to the main point of the story, rather than to background information. 

----

**  [[http://staff.science.uva.nl/~raquel|Raquel Fernández]].** //Incremental Resolution of Relative Adjectives: A DRT-based Approach//

Abstract:\\
 This paper is concerned with the incremental interpretation of exophoric referring descriptions with relative gradable adjectives, such as the description in the instruction `Pick up the tall glass'. Relative adjective such as `tall' are typically considered subsective with respect to the head noun and thus pose a challenge to incremental approaches that operate strictly from left to right. However, psycholinguistic research within the eye-tracking paradigm has shown that relative adjectives are interpreted incrementally: listeners interpret them in an incremental manner as they encounter them during processing, without need to wait until the head noun has been heard. Our aim in this paper is to provide a formal account of the incremental interpretation of descriptions with relative gradable adjectives that reflects the psycholinguistic evidence. We propose a DRT-based treatment that combines the PTT approach to incremental interpretation developed by Poesio and Rieser (2010, 2011) with the main ingredients of Van der Sandt's presupposition-as-anaphora theory, as implemented by Bos (2003).

----
**  [[http://www.labri.fr/perso/moot|Richard Moot]], Laurent Prévot and [[http://www.labri.fr/perso/retore|Christian Retore]].** //Discursive analysis of itineraries in an historical and regional corpus of  travels: syntax, semantics, and pragmatics in a uniﬁed type theoretical  framework//

Abstract:\\
 In this paper we will discuss the application of (Segmented) Discourse Representation Theory to the analysis a historical French corpus of itineraries in the Pyrénées. Our research will focus in particular on how type coercion can help us give a correct analysis of cases of so-called ``fictive motion''.

----

**  [[http://www.linguist.univ-paris-diderot.fr/~danlos/|Laurence Danlos]] and Owen Rambow.** //Veridicality of discourse relations and factivity information//

Abstract:\\
 We show that the notion of (right) veridical  discourse relation cannot be defined as in SDRT in which veridicality is not evaluated relative to the different sources at play.  We put forward  two rules  which should be satisfied respectively by a veridical and right veridical  relation.  These rules rely on a new paradigm for discourse analysis in which factivity information (such as that given in Factbank) plays a crucial role.

----
**  [[http://www.irit.fr/~Laure.Vieu|Laure Vieu]].** //On the Semantics of Discourse Relations//

Abstract:\\
 I reconsider in this paper the semantics schemata given for veridical discourse relations in SDRT. I claim that for different reasons, structural and semantics, one cannot reduce discourse relations to their semantic effects. I propose a revised schema involving public commitment operators to characterize the rhetorical import of discourse relations.

----
**  Alexandros Tantos.** //Discourse Constraints of Clitic Left Dislocation in Modern Greek//

Abstract:\\
 The purpose of this talk is to illustrate the importance of Clitic Left Dislocation (CLLD) in Greek for inferences of intersentential relations. SDRT (Segmented Discourse Representation Theory, Asher and Lascarides 2003), a formal discourse semantic theory that aims to present the discourse logical tree enhanced with rhetorical relations (Explanation, Narration, Elaboration among others) is used as a vehicle to approach CLLD from a different perspective. CLLD is important for discourse coherence in two points: the clitic cannot be replaced in specific cases where an anaphoric (bridging or identity) relation with an antecedent referent in a previous sentence is aimed and furthermore it triggers subordinating rhetorical relations (Asher and Vieau 2005) to discourse accessible segments and disallows coordinating ones.

----
**  Marianne Vergez-Couret, Myriam Bras and Laurent Prévot.** //Discourse contribution of Enumerative Structures involving pour deux raisons//

Abstract:\\
 Description of discourse structure is a major topic of ongoing research (Moore &amp; Wiemer-Hastings, 2003; Péry-Woodley &amp; Scott, 2006). The importance of the discourse level (Asher &amp; Lascarides, 2003; Grosz &amp; Sidner, 1986; Hobbs, 1990; Mann &amp; Thompson, 1987) is commonly accepted but the exact nature of its contribution and the rules that govern the interpretation are still debated. We would like to pay particular attention to enumerative structures as a textual pattern that constrain, in some way, their interpretation and their treatment in the SDRT model (Asher &amp; Lascarides, 2003). Following Bras et al’s (2008) proposition to introduce a new textual discourse relation, Enumeration, we would like to go into this solution in depth in order to question its relevance. In brief, is the Enumeration relation necessary to construe the right representation of texts containing enumerative structures? To suggest possible answers to this question, we will consider discourse segments including the prepositional phrase  pour deux raisons (for two reasons) in order to examine its relations with subsequent segments. 

----
----

===== Posters =====
----

**  [[http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/s0896251/|Katya Alahverdzhieva]] and [[http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/alex|Alex Lascarides]].** //Semantic Composition of Multimodal Communicative Actions in Constraint-based Grammars//

Abstract:\\
 The past few decades have witnessed substantial research in spontaneous, improvised co-speech gestures performed in synchrony with speech, e.g., Kendon (1972), McNeill (1992). The vast majority of the descriptive, cognitive and formal studies of gesture unanimously acknowledge the fact that speech and gesture function within a single communicative system to convey an integrated meaning through spoken and visual material. In this paper, we take the integrated nature of the speech-gesture action as a starting point, and we demonstrate that well-established mechanisms for semantic composition from linguistics can be applied to multimodal communicative actions consisting of speech and co-speech hand gestures. In particular, we use the constraint-based grammar formalism of HPSG (Pollard and Sag, 1994) and the semantic framework of Robust Minimal Recursion Semantics (RMRS) (Copestake, 2007) to map the form of the multimodal signal to an (underspecified) meaning representation.

----
**  Laia Mayol and [[http://elena-castroviejo-miro.cat/|Elena Castroviejo]].** //The connective "doncs" in dialogue and the QUD//

Abstract:\\
 This paper addresses the discourse use of the Catalan discourse connective "doncs" (and Spanish "pues"), which has evolved from being a temporal connective meaning "then" ("tunc" in Latin) into being a more elusive discourse connective. As a matter of fact, "doncs" does not have a uniform semantic and pragmatic import. Here we focus on the "doncs" that retains some of its original semantics, and compare it to French "donc" and to English "then" to conclude that it takes as antecedent either an if-clause or a previous utterance, and it presupposes that the speaker evokes a set of alternatives to the consequent which constitute worse scenarios than the actual one.

----
**  [[http://www.llf.cnrs.fr/Gens/Gazdik/index-fr.php|Anna Gazdik]] and [[http://www.linguist.jussieu.fr/~gwinterstein/|Grégoire Winterstein]].** //A Discursive Approach to Discourse Functions in Hungarian//

Abstract:\\
 In this paper, our aim is to propose an analysis of discourse functions in Hungarian, a discourse-configurational language. We concentrate on the preverbal position and demonstrate that the exact position of constituents bearing a particular discourse function depends on the discourse relation the sentence is part of, and discourse functions can by no means be exclusively assigned to a designated syntactic position, as it has been proposed in the literature.

----

**  [[http://www.linguist.univ-paris-diderot.fr/~croze/|Charlotte Roze]].** //Towards a Discourse Relation Algebra for Comparing Discourse Structures//

Abstract:\\
 We propose a methodology for building discourse relations inference rules, to  be integrated into an algebra of these relations. The construction of these rules has as main objective to allow for the calculation of the discourse closure of a structure, i.e. deduce all the discourse relations it implicitly contains. Calculating the closure of discourse structures improves their comparison, in particular within the evaluation of discourse parsing systems. We present and illustrate the adopted methodology, taking as theoretical background the Segmented Discourse Representation Theory.

----
**  [[http://uk.cbs.dk/staff/mgj|Morten Gylling]] and [[http://uk.cbs.dk/staff/iorn.korzen|Iørn Korzen]].** //Discourse Constraints in a Cross-linguistic Typological Perspective//

Abstract:\\
 This paper examines some typological differences in the discourse structure of Italian and Danish. The results of the study indicate that there are significant differences in information packing in the two languages, especially in their use of deverbalisation. Italian sentences tend to include more propositions (and other EDUs), of which a higher percentage is backgrounded by means of non-finite and nominalised predicates, whereas Danish text structure is more informationally linear and characteristic of a higher degree of finite verbs and topic shifts. The study also suggests that a more fine-grained classification of non-finite and nominalised EDUs is needed for a complete in-depth analysis of discourse constraints in different language families.

----
Constraints In Discourse 2011

Categories

Table of Contents

Page locked
