Connotation Frames: A Data-Driven Investigation

Through a particular choice of a predicate (e.g., "x violated y"), a writer can subtly connote a range of implied sentiments and presupposed facts about the entities x and y: (1) writer's perspective: projecting x as an "antagonist"and y as a "victim", (2) entities' perspective: y probably dislikes x, (3) effect: something bad happened to y, (4) value: y is something valuable, and (5) mental state: y is distressed by the event. We introduce connotation frames as a representation formalism to organize these rich dimensions of connotation using typed relations. First, we investigate the feasibility of obtaining connotative labels through crowdsourcing experiments. We then present models for predicting the connotation frames of verb predicates based on their distributional word representations and the interplay between different types of connotative relations. Empirical results confirm that connotation frames can be induced from various data sources that reflect how people use language and give rise to the connotative meanings. We conclude with analytical results that show the potential use of connotation frames for analyzing subtle biases in online news media.

[1]  Brendan J. Frey,et al.  Factor graphs and the sum-product algorithm , 2001, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[2]  Navneet Kaur,et al.  Opinion mining and sentiment analysis , 2016, 2016 3rd International Conference on Computing for Sustainable Global Development (INDIACom).

[3]  Daniel Gildea,et al.  The Proposition Bank: An Annotated Corpus of Semantic Roles , 2005, CL.

[4]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  Sentiment Propagation via Implicature Constraints , 2014, EACL.

[5]  Takashi Inui,et al.  Extracting Semantic Orientations of Words using Spin Model , 2005, ACL.

[6]  M. de Rijke,et al.  UvA-DARE ( Digital Academic Repository ) Using WordNet to measure semantic orientations of adjectives , 2004 .

[7]  Peter D. Turney,et al.  Emotions Evoked by Common Words and Phrases: Using Mechanical Turk to Create an Emotion Lexicon , 2010, HLT-NAACL 2010.

[8]  Ivan Titov,et al.  A Hierarchical Bayesian Model for Unsupervised Induction of Script Knowledge , 2014, EACL.

[9]  Masaru Kitsuregawa,et al.  Building Lexicon for Sentiment Analysis from Massive Collection of HTML Documents , 2007, EMNLP.

[10]  Claire Cardie,et al.  Annotating Expressions of Opinions and Emotions in Language , 2005, Lang. Resour. Evaluation.

[11]  Noah A. Smith,et al.  Shedding (a Thousand Points of) Light on Biased Language , 2010, Mturk@HLT-NAACL.

[12]  Amber E. Boydstun,et al.  Identifying Media Frames and Frame Dynamics Within and Across Policy Issues , 2013 .

[13]  Nathanael Chambers,et al.  Unsupervised Learning of Narrative Schemas and their Participants , 2009, ACL.

[14]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  +/-EffectWordNet: Sense-level Lexicon Acquisition for Opinion Inference , 2014, EMNLP.

[15]  Sabine Bergler,et al.  Mining WordNet for a Fuzzy Sentiment: Sentiment Tag Extraction from WordNet Glosses , 2006, EACL.

[16]  Benjamin Van Durme,et al.  Annotated Gigaword , 2012, AKBC-WEKEX@NAACL-HLT.

[17]  Andrea Esuli,et al.  SentiWordNet 3.0: An Enhanced Lexical Resource for Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining , 2010, LREC.

[18]  Vincent Ng,et al.  Frame Semantics for Stance Classification , 2013, CoNLL.

[19]  Michael Wiegand,et al.  Opinion Holder and Target Extraction based on the Induction of Verbal Categories , 2015, CoNLL.

[20]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  Recognizing Contextual Polarity in Phrase-Level Sentiment Analysis , 2005, HLT.

[21]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  An Account of Opinion Implicatures , 2014, ArXiv.

[22]  Yoav Goldberg,et al.  A Dataset of Syntactic-Ngrams over Time from a Very Large Corpus of English Books , 2013, *SEMEVAL.

[23]  Geoffrey Zweig,et al.  Linguistic Regularities in Continuous Space Word Representations , 2013, NAACL.

[24]  John B. Lowe,et al.  The Berkeley FrameNet Project , 1998, ACL.

[25]  James H. Martin,et al.  Building a Corpus of Temporal-Causal Structure , 2008, LREC.

[26]  Yejin Choi,et al.  Connotation Lexicon: A Dash of Sentiment Beneath the Surface Meaning , 2013, ACL.

[27]  Swapna Somasundaran,et al.  Recognizing Stances in Ideological On-Line Debates , 2010, HLT-NAACL 2010.

[28]  Ellen Riloff,et al.  Toward Plot Units: Automatic Affect State Analysis , 2010, HLT-NAACL 2010.

[29]  Philip Resnik,et al.  More than Words: Syntactic Packaging and Implicit Sentiment , 2009, NAACL.

[30]  Ellen Riloff,et al.  Automatically Producing Plot Unit Representations for Narrative Text , 2010, EMNLP.

[31]  Daniel Jurafsky,et al.  Linguistic Models for Analyzing and Detecting Biased Language , 2013, ACL.

[32]  F. Heider Attitudes and cognitive organization. , 1946, The Journal of psychology.

[33]  Andrew McCallum,et al.  Piecewise training for structured prediction , 2009, Machine Learning.

[34]  悠太 菊池,et al.  大規模要約資源としてのNew York Times Annotated Corpus , 2015 .

[35]  Sasha Blair-Goldensohn,et al.  The viability of web-derived polarity lexicons , 2010, NAACL.

[36]  C. Fillmore FRAME SEMANTICS AND THE NATURE OF LANGUAGE * , 1976 .

[37]  Matt Thomas,et al.  Get out the vote: Determining support or opposition from Congressional floor-debate transcripts , 2006, EMNLP.

[38]  Lei Zhang,et al.  A Survey of Opinion Mining and Sentiment Analysis , 2012, Mining Text Data.

[39]  Nora Hollenstein,et al.  Verb Polarity Frames: a New Resource and its Application in Target-specific Polarity Classification , 2014, KONVENS.

[40]  Janyce Wiebe,et al.  Subjectivity Word Sense Disambiguation , 2009, EMNLP.