Examples and Specifications that Prove a Point: Identifying Elaborative and Argumentative Discourse Relations

Examples and specifications occur frequently in text, but not much is known about how they function in discourse and how readers interpret them. Looking at how they’re annotated in existing discourse corpora, we find that annotators often disagree on these types of relations; specifically, there is disagreement about whether these relations are elaborative (additive) or argumentative (pragmatic causal). To investigate how readers interpret examples and specifications, we conducted a crowdsourced discourse annotation study. The results show that these relations can indeed have two functions: they can be used to both illustrate / specify a situation and serve as an argument for a claim. These findings suggest that examples and specifications can have multiple simultaneous readings. We discuss the implications of these results for discourse annotation.

[1]  Stefan Riezler,et al.  On the Problem of Theoretical Terms in Empirical Computational Linguistics , 2014, Computational Linguistics.

[2]  Katja Jasinskaja,et al.  Elaboration and Explanation ⋆ , 2011 .

[3]  Klaus Krippendorff,et al.  Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology , 1980 .

[4]  William C. Mann,et al.  Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization , 1988 .

[5]  Bonnie L. Webber,et al.  What excludes an Alternative in Coherence Relations? , 2013, IWCS.

[6]  Daisuke Kawahara,et al.  Rapid Development of a Corpus with Discourse Annotations using Two-stage Crowdsourcing , 2014, COLING.

[7]  A. Knott,et al.  Using Linguistic Phenomena to Motivate a Set of Coherence Relations. , 1994 .

[8]  Yannick Versley.  Multilabel Tagging of Discourse Relations in Ambiguous Temporal Connectives , 2011, RANLP.

[9]  G. Redeker.  Ideational and pragmatic markers of discourse structure , 1990 .

[10]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  The Penn Discourse TreeBank 2.0. , 2008, LREC.

[11]  D. Schiffrin,et al.  Discourse MarkersLanguage, Meaning, and Context , 2015 .

[12]  Annie Louis,et al.  Recovering discourse relations: Varying influence of discourse adverbials , 2015, LSDSem@EMNLP.

[13]  Alan Lee,et al.  A Discourse-Annotated Corpus of Conjoined VPs , 2016, LAW@ACL.

[14]  Jerry R. Hobbs.  Coherence and Coreference , 1979, Cogn. Sci..

[15]  Johanna D. Moore,et al.  A Problem for RST: The Need for Multi-Level Discourse Analysis , 1992, CL.

[16]  Junyi Jessy Li,et al.  The Instantiation Discourse Relation: A Corpus Analysis of Its Properties and Improved Detection , 2016, NAACL.

[17]  Vera Demberg,et al.  On the Information Conveyed by Discourse Markers , 2013, CMCL.

[18]  Vera Demberg,et al.  LingoTurk: managing crowdsourced tasks for psycholinguistics , 2016, NAACL.

[19]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Are Good Texts Always Better? Interactions of Text Coherence, Background Knowledge, and Levels of Understanding in Learning From Text , 1996 .

[20]  Merel Scholman,et al.  Categories of coherence relations in discourse annotation , 2016, Dialogue Discourse.

[21]  Maite Taboada,et al.  Annotation upon Annotation: Adding Signalling Information to a Corpus of Discourse Relations , 2013, Dialogue Discourse.

[22]  G. Meade.  Building a Discourse-Tagged Corpus in the Framework of Rhetorical Structure Theory , 2001 .

[23]  K. Hyland,et al.  Applying a gloss: exemplifying and reformulating in academic discourse , 2007 .

[24]  Maria-Josep Cuenca,et al.  Co-occurrence of discourse markers in Catalan and Spanish oral narrative , 2009 .

[25]  D. Martins,et al.  Influence of Expertise, Coherence, and Causal Connectives on Comprehension and Recall of an Expository Text , 2006 .

[26]  Liesbeth Degand.  On classifying connectives and coherence relations , 1998 .

[27]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  The Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0 Annotation Manual , 2007 .

[28]  Nathan Schneider,et al.  Filling in the Blanks in Understanding Discourse Adverbials: Consistency, Conflict, and Context-Dependence in a Crowdsourced Elicitation Task , 2016, LAW@ACL.

[29]  Montserrat González.  Pragmatic markers and discourse coherence relations in English and Catalan oral narrative , 2005 .

[30]  Maria-Josep Cuenca.  Two ways to reformulate: a contrastive analysis of reformulation markers , 2003 .

[31]  Robin Cohen,et al.  Analyzing the Structure of Argumentative Discourse , 1987, CL.

[32]  Livio Robaldo,et al.  Corpus-driven Semantics of Concession: Where do Expectations Come from? , 2014, Dialogue Discourse.

[33]  Brendan T. O'Connor,et al.  Cheap and Fast – But is it Good? Evaluating Non-Expert Annotations for Natural Language Tasks , 2008, EMNLP.

[34]  H. B. Allen,et al.  A Functional Grammar , 1946 .

[35]  Vera Demberg,et al.  How consistent are our discourse annotations? Insights from mapping RST-DT and PDTB annotations , 2017, ArXiv.

[36]  Iryna Gurevych,et al.  Identifying Argumentative Discourse Structures in Persuasive Essays , 2014, EMNLP.

[37]  Peter Siemund,et al.  Causal and concessive clauses: Formal and semantic relations , 2000 .

[38]  Leo G. M. Noordman,et al.  Toward a taxonomy of coherence relations , 1992 .

[39]  D. Blakemore.  Restatement and exemplification: A relevance theoretic reassessment of elaboration , 1997 .

[40]  R. Carston.  Conjunction, explanation and relevance , 1993 .

[41]  Daniel Marcu,et al.  Building a Discourse-Tagged Corpus in the Framework of Rhetorical Structure Theory , 2001, SIGDIAL Workshop.

[42]  Owen Rambow,et al.  Identifying Justifications in Written Dialogs by Classifying Text as Argumentative , 2011, Int. J. Semantic Comput..

[43]  The multifunctionality of discourse markers , 1995 .

[44]  Maki Watanabe,et al.  Discourse Tagging Reference Manual , 2001 .

[45]  Eduard Hovy,et al.  Parsimonious or Profligate: How Many and Which Discourse Structure Relations? , 1992 .

[46]  Bonnie Webber,et al.  Multiple Discourse Connectives in a Lexicalized Grammar For Discourse , 2001 .

[47]  Manfred Stede,et al.  From Argument Diagrams to Argumentation Mining in Texts: A Survey , 2013, Int. J. Cogn. Informatics Nat. Intell..

[48]  Marianne Vergez-Couret,et al.  Signaling Elaboration: Combining French Gerund Clauses with Lexical Cohesion Cues , 2012 .

[49]  Vera Demberg,et al.  Crowdsourcing discourse interpretations: On the influence of context and the reliability of a connective insertion task , 2017, LAW@ACL.

[50]  Sandrine Zufferey,et al.  Annotating the meaning of discourse connectives in multilingual corpora , 2017 .

[51]  Massimo Poesio,et al.  Bias decreases in proportion to the number of annotators , 2005 .