| { | |
| "paper_id": "W93-0201", | |
| "header": { | |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", | |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T04:41:51.765345Z" | |
| }, | |
| "title": "Rhetorical Relations: Necessary But Not Sufficient", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Sandra", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Carberry", | |
| "suffix": "", | |
| "affiliation": { | |
| "laboratory": "", | |
| "institution": "University of Delaware Newark", | |
| "location": { | |
| "postCode": "19716", | |
| "settlement": "Delaware" | |
| } | |
| }, | |
| "email": "[email protected]" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "Jennifer", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Chu", | |
| "suffix": "", | |
| "affiliation": { | |
| "laboratory": "", | |
| "institution": "University of Delaware Newark", | |
| "location": { | |
| "postCode": "19716", | |
| "settlement": "Delaware" | |
| } | |
| }, | |
| "email": "[email protected]" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "Nancy", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Green", | |
| "suffix": "", | |
| "affiliation": { | |
| "laboratory": "", | |
| "institution": "University of Delaware Newark", | |
| "location": { | |
| "postCode": "19716", | |
| "settlement": "Delaware" | |
| } | |
| }, | |
| "email": "[email protected]" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "Lynn", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Lambert", | |
| "suffix": "", | |
| "affiliation": { | |
| "laboratory": "", | |
| "institution": "Newport University", | |
| "location": { | |
| "postCode": "23606", | |
| "settlement": "Newport News", | |
| "region": "Virginia" | |
| } | |
| }, | |
| "email": "[email protected]" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": "", | |
| "venue": null, | |
| "identifiers": {}, | |
| "abstract": "It is generMly agreed that coherent (lis('ourse consists of segments tha,t are related to one another. A number of researchers have a, rgm~d lbr the use of rhetorica,l[(~ri75] or coherence relations [I-Iol)79], and the rhetorical relations specified by R S'I? [MT87] have I)e(,~, used in structuring text [tlov88, MP90]. In this l)a.l)el\" , we exa.mine rh(q.ori(:al relations in the cold.~,xt of dia.logue, ra, tlmr than single-speaker te\u00d7t. We argue that rea,s(millg about relational l)r()lmsit, ions is necessary but not sufficient ior structuring (lialogtm, 1)oiHt out s(,v(q'al prol)h,ms of a, pplyiug RST to dialogue, a, nd argue tbr the necessity of recognizillg the intentions underlying utteratlces a,lld I, he rich relationshil)s among these intentions. Our research on recognizing expressions of (hml)t and interpreting ilMirect replies provides evidence that what Moore a,nd Polla,ck call i lfformal,itmal level rela, ti(ms [Ml'!)2] play a,n illlporta, llt role in identil~ing intentions ill (lia.h)gue.", | |
| "pdf_parse": { | |
| "paper_id": "W93-0201", | |
| "_pdf_hash": "", | |
| "abstract": [ | |
| { | |
| "text": "It is generMly agreed that coherent (lis('ourse consists of segments tha,t are related to one another. A number of researchers have a, rgm~d lbr the use of rhetorica,l[(~ri75] or coherence relations [I-Iol)79], and the rhetorical relations specified by R S'I? [MT87] have I)e(,~, used in structuring text [tlov88, MP90]. In this l)a.l)el\" , we exa.mine rh(q.ori(:al relations in the cold.~,xt of dia.logue, ra, tlmr than single-speaker te\u00d7t. We argue that rea,s(millg about relational l)r()lmsit, ions is necessary but not sufficient ior structuring (lialogtm, 1)oiHt out s(,v(q'al prol)h,ms of a, pplyiug RST to dialogue, a, nd argue tbr the necessity of recognizillg the intentions underlying utteratlces a,lld I, he rich relationshil)s among these intentions. Our research on recognizing expressions of (hml)t and interpreting ilMirect replies provides evidence that what Moore a,nd Polla,ck call i lfformal,itmal level rela, ti(ms [Ml'!)2] play a,n illlporta, llt role in identil~ing intentions ill (lia.h)gue.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "Abstract", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "body_text": [ | |
| { | |
| "text": "If $1 responds with \"Wasn't Dr. Smith aw,trdcd a ~;albright?', then since it is plausilfle that. Dr. Smith having a Full)right would result ill his going on sa,l)l)a, tical, Sl's utterance should Im interpreted as exl)ressing doubt at the l)rOlmsition that Dr. Smith is ii(:)l, (m sabbatical. Similarly, if heing a systems person is necessa.ry for teaclfillg C,$360 and Sl reslmll(Is with \"Lsn't Dr. Smith a theory person?\", then since Dr. Smith being a, theory person in an alterna, l, ive t,o Dr. Smith being a. systems person, Sl's utterance shonhl be interpreted as exl)ressing (h)ul)t at the l>roposition that l)r. Smith is teaching CS360. But if SI had instead asked \"l.~u 't C'$240 a prcrcq'ui.~itc for CS360~', Sl's utterance should be interpreted as seekillg new itlforma.tion since there is ,,o pla.usibh~ intbrmational relation suggesting that the new utterance contril)utes to (leteu'mitfiug wht,tlmr Dr. Smith is ~)nt sabbatical or to identifying the instructor of (',S3(i0. Thus, identilying the illformational relationship between utterances is essential for responding apl~rt>l)ria,tely. [LC, 92] I~rovi(tes a,n algorithm tha.t utilizes such relations in recognizing expressions of doul)t.", | |
| "cite_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 679, | |
| "end": 718, | |
| "text": "'t C'$240 a prcrcq'ui.~itc for CS360~',", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 719, | |
| "end": 723, | |
| "text": "Sl's", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 1104, | |
| "end": 1108, | |
| "text": "[LC,", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 1109, | |
| "end": 1112, | |
| "text": "92]", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Our research on interpreti~g iudirect rel)lies [GC'92] l)rovid~'s a.(hlitio,~al evidence that inh)rmational relations play an iml)ortant role in discourse iutel'l)r(,ta.tio~. (',onsider the tbllowing dia.|ogue sequence:", | |
| "cite_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 47, | |
| "end": 54, | |
| "text": "[GC'92]", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "(5) SI: \"Did Harry scc his girlJ)'icnd last u,~.t'kcm, dW' (6) S2: \"He: h:ft for New York on Friday. \"", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "We have shown [GC92] that S1 and S2's shaxed a.ssumptiol~ tha.t S2's iutlirect answer in (5) is coherelDtly related to sonte possible dir(~ct a.usw~r is uecessary 1.o (,n;ibl(~ S 1 I.o identify S2's intended (but implicit) answer of \"Yes\" or \"No\". l;k~r example, SUl~pt)se Sl I)(dieves tha.t it is mutually believed that Harry and his girlfriend I)oth live iu Deliver. Then, S1 w(mld interl)ret ((i) as describing a.n alternative to Ha,rry seeing his girlfriend a.,M thus would iul'(~r a. n(,ga.l.iv(' a.nsw(~r to (5). ()n the other hand, SUl)l)ose SI believes tha.t it is mutually believe(I that l[arry lives in Denver but his girlfriend lives in New York. Then, $1 would iuterpret ((i) as (lescril)ing a.u action enabling Harry to see his girlfriend and thus would iufer a l)ositive answer. In ol.]mr words, Sl's recognition of the relational l)roposition which $2 intended to convey is nec(,ssa.ry lk)r iuterl)reting S2's intended answer. If $1 failed to recognize such a rela.tion, then SI would I)e unable to answer a question such a.s \"Why didu't Ilarry st:t: his girlfriend la.~t 'weekend?\" Thus in our mod , the al)plicability conditions of discourse plan operators tbr a.nswering a Yes/No question include conditions requiring that COml)onents of the response (whether iml)licit or explicit) be related by coherence relations similar to informational-level rhetorical relations. Since the sa.me set of operators is used in generating answers, inforlnational relations also play a role in ensuring that an indirect answer is approl)riate. In other woMs, the intbrmationa.1 relations coustrain wha.t ::xtlu iuibrmation (information not specifically requested by the questioner) may be included in au a.l)prol)riate resl)onse. Alk indirect answer is genera.ted by use of the ~'xlra iM'ormati(m ~l.h)lJ~.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "In our view, this extr;~ intbrmation m;~.y serve a rhetori('a.I t'u ncl.iol, such as to increase belief. For example, $2 might have decided to include the extra iuforma.tion in ((i) (tha,t I-larry left for New York on Frida.y) in his negative a.nswer because $2 anticipate(I tha.t SI would have doubted a simple \"No\". In our current research, we a.re defining stimulus (:(:mditioJls for use of the extra iJfformation in an answer. A stimulus condition describes a situa.ti(m i,~ which it may 1)e beneficial to inch,de iMbrmation that was neither requested m)r wha.t tim Sl)(,ak(~r Ii~.(l a. prior intention to convey. Thus, stimulus Coliditions are used to s(,lect ~.u a,I)l)r~)t)ria.t(' it,l~)rlual.ioua.I r(,l;J.tion.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "]Iowever, we contend that rhetorical r(~la.ti()ns, eslwcia. Although one might argue that there is a Motiwl.te-Volitiona.l-Actiou rela.tion between John cutting class ill (9) and John going home in (8), the fimction of uttera,nce (9) is to attack the evidence relationship between utterances (8) and (7), which RST cannot account for since RST captures rela.tions between spans of text whereas (9) is rel'uting the ilnpli('it l)rol)(,sitiou between (7)-(8), not the text itself.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "In addition, rhetorical relatious as (lelivwd iu IT ST rela.te s:ll.ellites l.(~ a mtcl(~us, which together form an uninterrul)ted text spa.]~, l[()w(,v(,r, lit dia.logu(~, ;~.,~ ill.l.Ol';i.iic(, III;I.y rel~.t(~ to an earli~r utterance U yet be separated fl'om U by other utterances that do m)t relat(, to U. In such ('a.ses, expectations about speaker iutentions pl;i,y ~. ma.jor role in us,des'sta.t,di,,g, a.s illustrated by tl,, following example.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "(10) Sl: (11) $2: (12) $1: (13) $2: (14) Si: (15) s2:", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "\"AI is the best course to take ncxt semester. \" \"You should take Comp'ulcr Graphics instead.\" \"Dr. Smith is teaching A 1 aml he ',~ wo'ndc'rfM. \" \"Dr. Brown is teaching Graphics and hc',s a great tcuch.c'r.\" \"Th.c A I projects sou'nd like' a lot of J'u'n. \" \"Computer G'raphic.~ ha.s you din'win 9 all kind.~ of objccl.~. \" SI and $2 each declare a claim in utteran(:es (10) and (11). Although (:)n(~ can argue that an alternative relation holds between utterances (12) a.nd (13) and between utterances 14and 15, the structure of the dialogue is not c.oml)letely cal)tured by rela.l.ilkg l:hese consecutive pa.irs of utterances. Utterances (12) and (14) SUl)l,ort Sl's claim in (]0), and tltl;es'aslces (13) alld (]5) support S2's clMm in (11). Although one might suggest (lrol)ping the requirement tha.t rhetorica.l relations relate a span of utterances, it is unclear how rhetorica,l rela.tions Mone couhl handle complex dialogues. We believe that in i(lentit:ving the structure o[\" dialogues such as the ab(we, expectations about the discourse goals of the particil)ants must be taken into a.ccount (in this case, a speaker supporting his/her own claim and indi'mctly attacking tha.t of the other) and a more elaborate intentional structure allowed.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Furthermore, uttera.nces ca.n silmfltaneously serve more than ot,e function, which would require two distinct RST a.na.lyses. (',(:msider the following (liMogue se(iHelwo:", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "(16) $1: \"Can you com, c to a party at my ho'u.~c ,5'alurday ~tigl~t?\" (17) $2: \"No, I can'l. \" (18) \"I have to 'work. \" (19) \",.5'0 I am very .~orry, b'ul I must dcelim: your in'vitali,m. \" Utterance (16) conveys both a. litera.l question alLd an invita.tion. Two RST a.nalyses ;i.re required for S2's response, one relating (17) and (18) to the literal questiols aml the other rela.ting (19) to the invitation. However, RST requires a single a.mdysis a.nd a hierarchical structure. In addition, RST cannot account for the fact that if (19) is omitted from S2's response, it m:l.y still be imp]ica:l.ed.", | |
| "cite_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 96, | |
| "end": 100, | |
| "text": "(18)", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "start": 121, | |
| "end": 190, | |
| "text": "(19) \",.5'0 I am very .~orry, b'ul I must dcelim: your in'vitali,m. \"", | |
| "ref_id": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "P~ecognizing intentions is essential tot dialogue ullderstan(ling, since these intentions provide expectations used in interpreting subsequent utterances and identif~qng the structure of the dialogue. For example, we show in [GC92] that expectations about discourse goals pla.y a role in the interpretation of indirect replies to Yes/No questions. After Sl's request for informa.tion in the exchange (5) -(6), $1 and $2 sha,re the exlmctation that S2's response will convey the requested information. This expectation is used to focus on a. certain set of discourse plan ol)erators representing mutuMly accessil)le knowledge of standard forms tbr giving a. positive or negative answer. Furtherlnore, our dialogue model [LC91] captures not only communicative intentions l)ut a.lso dolnMn and prol)lem-solving intentions, a.ud these intentions result it, a. set. of expectations tlmt facilitate understanding subse(lueld; uttera.ttcos and genera.tillg a.1)l~rol~ria.t(, responses. In [C, hug:~], we explore response generation in (olla.l)ora.tiv(, (li;dogue.", | |
| "cite_spans": [ | |
| { | |
| "start": 719, | |
| "end": 725, | |
| "text": "[LC91]", | |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF0" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "Although current resea.rch has been com'er,md with recognizillg tit(, i|lloJd.ions tlsa.t a. spea.k(,r is trying to convey, we 1)elieve th;~.t an effective aim intelligent sysl,em must do l|lore. If a sysl,(,m is to handle naturally occurring (lia.l(~gue, which can ra.nge from COmlfletely COOl~er;dfive to non-COOl)erative in a single interaction, then the system must be ~l.l~le I.o recognize hidden intentions, such as the intention to lie or deceive. Although recognition of such hid(le]! intentions may not be essential for identifying the structure of the (lisco!!rse, it is necessary for the system's responses to be intelligent, natural, and effective.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "text": "So what makes a dialogue coherent? We believe that dialogue coherence depends upon both informational and intentional level properties of the dialogue. We contend that a natural language dialogue system must be able to recognize a, speaker's intentions, tha.t this recognition of intention is often aided by identification of intbrmational level relational 1)rol)ositions, and thaJ; in many cases ;L speaker intends for these informationaJ level rela.tions to be recognized (as in the exchange giw~n in (5) -(6)). Our research has led us to conclude that rhetorical rela.tions as specified by RST are necessary but not sufficient for ha.ndling dialogues --the rich relationshiI)s among discourse intentions must also he captured.", | |
| "cite_spans": [], | |
| "ref_spans": [], | |
| "eq_spans": [], | |
| "section": "", | |
| "sec_num": null | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "back_matter": [], | |
| "bib_entries": { | |
| "BIBREF0": { | |
| "ref_id": "b0", | |
| "title": "Responding to user queries in a. collaJ)(~!'a.tive (qkvironment", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Jennii~er", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Chu", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1993, | |
| "venue": "Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of tlu' A.~.~ocia.tion Jbr (,'~rm.lralatioual Linguistics, Student Session", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Jennii~er Chu. Responding to user queries in a. collaJ)(~!'a.tive (qkvironment. In Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of tlu' A.~.~ocia.tion Jbr (,'~rm.lralatioual Linguistics, Student Session, 1993. To apl)ear.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF1": { | |
| "ref_id": "b1", | |
| "title": "arl)erry. Co!!versa.tional lml)licat!lres in h!direct Rel)lies", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Nancy", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Green", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "Sandra", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1992, | |
| "venue": "Proceedings of the 30th Awwmd Meeting oJ\" the Assm'itt/imt for (,'omlrutatio'ual Li1~gui,~tic,~", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "64--71", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Nancy Green and Sandra (:arl)erry. Co!!versa.tional lml)licat!lres in h!direct Rel)lies. In Proceedings of the 30th Awwmd Meeting oJ\" the Assm'itt/imt for (,'omlrutatio'ual Li1~gui,~tic,~, pages 64-71, 1992.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF2": { | |
| "ref_id": "b2", | |
| "title": "The Thread of", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Joseph", | |
| "middle": [ | |
| "E" | |
| ], | |
| "last": "Grimes", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1975, | |
| "venue": "Jerry R. Hol)bs. Coherence and C, oreference. Cognitivt ,S'cicncc", | |
| "volume": "3", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "7--90", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Joseph E. Grimes. The Thread of Diseour.~(:. Mouto!!, Th(, l[a.gue, Paris, 1975, Jerry R. Hol)bs. Coherence and C, oreference. Cognitivt ,S'cicncc, 3:(i7-90, 1979.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF3": { | |
| "ref_id": "b3", | |
| "title": "Planning Coherent Multisentential Text", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Eduard", | |
| "middle": [ | |
| "H" | |
| ], | |
| "last": "Hovy", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1988, | |
| "venue": "Procecdiugs of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association ftrr Co~lqratational Linguistic,~", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "163--169", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Eduard H. Hovy. Planning Coherent Multisentential Text. Procecdiugs of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association ftrr Co~lqratational Linguistic,~, pages 163-169, 1988.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF4": { | |
| "ref_id": "b4", | |
| "title": "A Tripartite Pla.]l-ba.sed Model of Dialogue", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Lynn", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Lambert", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "Sandra", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Carberry", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1991, | |
| "venue": "P~veeedings of the 29th Annual Met!lug of the AC'L, pa.g(~s", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "47--54", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Lynn Lambert and Sandra Carberry. A Tripartite Pla.]l-ba.sed Model of Dialogue. In P~veeedings of the 29th Annual Met!lug of the AC'L, pa.g(~s 47-54, Berkeley, CA, June 1991.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF5": { | |
| "ref_id": "b5", | |
| "title": "Using Linguistic, World, a.]!d (,ontext lal Knowledge in a Plan Recognition Model of Dia.logue", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Lynn", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Lambert", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "Sandra", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Carl~erry", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1992, | |
| "venue": "Proceedings of tlu' 14th International Con-? ference on Computational Lingui.s'tics (COLING-92)", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "310--341", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Lynn Lambert and Sandra Carl~erry. Using Linguistic, World, a.]!d (,ontext lal Knowledge in a Plan Recognition Model of Dia.logue. In Proceedings of tlu' 14th International Con- ? ference on Computational Lingui.s'tics (COLING-92), pages 310-31(i, Nantes, [ rance, July 1992.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF6": { | |
| "ref_id": "b6", | |
| "title": "Omlrulaliolml l, ing'u, istic,~, l)a.ges 203-211", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Johann~l", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Moore", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "C'ecile", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Paris", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1990, | |
| "venue": "Proceeding~ of the 27th A'm~ual Meeting of the A.~,~m'ialion for", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Johann~L Moore and C'ecile Paris. Planaiug Text for A(lvis()ry Dialogues. In Proceeding~ of the 27th A'm~ual Meeting of the A.~,~m'ialion for (.'Omlrulaliolml l, ing'u, istic,~, l)a.ges 203-211, Vancouver, Canada, 1990.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF7": { | |
| "ref_id": "b7", | |
| "title": "A Prol)lem fi)r RST: The Need for Multi-Level Discourse Analysis", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "Johanna", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Moore", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "Martha", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Polliwk", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": null, | |
| "venue": "Computatio~ud Lingui.~lies", | |
| "volume": "18", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "Johanna Moore and Martha. Polliwk. A Prol)lem fi)r RST: The Need for Multi-Level Discourse Analysis. Computatio~ud Lingui.~lies, 18(d):537 544, 1!)92.", | |
| "links": null | |
| }, | |
| "BIBREF8": { | |
| "ref_id": "b8", | |
| "title": "Thoml)SOu. Rhetorica.I Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization", | |
| "authors": [ | |
| { | |
| "first": "C", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "William", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Ma", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| }, | |
| { | |
| "first": "Sandra", | |
| "middle": [], | |
| "last": "Nn", | |
| "suffix": "" | |
| } | |
| ], | |
| "year": 1987, | |
| "venue": "", | |
| "volume": "", | |
| "issue": "", | |
| "pages": "", | |
| "other_ids": {}, | |
| "num": null, | |
| "urls": [], | |
| "raw_text": "William C. Ma.nn and Sandra. A. Thoml)SOu. Rhetorica.I Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization. Tectmica.1 Report ISI/RS-87-190, ISI/USC,, June 1987.", | |
| "links": null | |
| } | |
| }, | |
| "ref_entries": { | |
| "FIGREF0": { | |
| "type_str": "figure", | |
| "text": "lly a.s d(,liu(,(I I)y RST, axe insul[icient tbr characterizing dialogue. Although (~ne might consider (level()piug a l;u'ger s~t of rhetoric;d relations [Hob79], the tollowing diah)gue can n(.)t b(, COml)letely ('ha.ra.~'t.(,riz(,(I by rlmtorical rebttions 1)etween segments.(7) $1: \"The AI class must b(' \u00a2'ancclh'd today.\" (8) \"John is taking the: course: and h,~' .j'u.~l \"wcnt home. \" (9) $2: \"John oJ'tcn cut.~ \u00a2.la.~'s,..~.\"", | |
| "uris": null, | |
| "num": null | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } | |
| } |