<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="hardt-2013-uniform">
    <titleInfo>
        <title>A Uniform Syntax and Discourse Structure: the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <name type="personal">
        <namePart type="given">Daniel</namePart>
        <namePart type="family">Hardt</namePart>
        <role>
            <roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
        </role>
    </name>
    <originInfo>
        <dateIssued>2013-04</dateIssued>
    </originInfo>
    <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
    <genre authority="bibutilsgt">journal article</genre>
    <relatedItem type="host">
        <titleInfo>
            <title>Dialogue &amp; Discourse</title>
        </titleInfo>
        <originInfo>
            <issuance>continuing</issuance>
            <publisher>University of Bielefeld</publisher>
            <place>
                <placeTerm type="text">Bielefeld, Germany</placeTerm>
            </place>
        </originInfo>
        <genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
        <genre authority="bibutilsgt">academic journal</genre>
    </relatedItem>
    <abstract>I present arguments in favor of the Uniformity Hypothesis: the hypothesis that discourse can extend syntax dependencies without conflicting with them. I consider arguments that Uniformity is violated in certain cases involving quotation, and I argue that the cases presented in the literature are in fact completely consistent with Uniformity. I report on an analysis of all examples in the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks involving violations of Uniformity. I argue that they are in fact all consistent with Uniformity, and conclude that the CDT should be revised to reflect this.</abstract>
    <identifier type="citekey">hardt-2013-uniform</identifier>
    <identifier type="doi">10.5087/dad.2013.203</identifier>
    <location>
        <url>https://aclanthology.org/2013.dnd-4.10/</url>
    </location>
    <part>
        <date>2013-04</date>
        <detail type="volume"><number>4</number></detail>
        <extent unit="page">
            <start>53</start>
            <end>64</end>
        </extent>
    </part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>

%0 Journal Article
%T A Uniform Syntax and Discourse Structure: the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks
%A Hardt, Daniel
%J Dialogue & Discourse
%D 2013
%8 April
%V 4
%I University of Bielefeld
%C Bielefeld, Germany
%F hardt-2013-uniform
%X I present arguments in favor of the Uniformity Hypothesis: the hypothesis that discourse can extend syntax dependencies without conflicting with them. I consider arguments that Uniformity is violated in certain cases involving quotation, and I argue that the cases presented in the literature are in fact completely consistent with Uniformity. I report on an analysis of all examples in the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks involving violations of Uniformity. I argue that they are in fact all consistent with Uniformity, and conclude that the CDT should be revised to reflect this.
%R 10.5087/dad.2013.203
%U https://aclanthology.org/2013.dnd-4.10/
%U https://doi.org/10.5087/dad.2013.203
%P 53-64

Markdown (Informal)

[A Uniform Syntax and Discourse Structure: the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks](https://aclanthology.org/2013.dnd-4.10/) (Hardt, DND 2013)

• A Uniform Syntax and Discourse Structure: the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks (Hardt, DND 2013)

ACL

• Daniel Hardt. 2013. A Uniform Syntax and Discourse Structure: the Copenhagen Dependency Treebanks. Dialogue & Discourse, 4:53–64.