@inproceedings{rysova-2014-verbs,
title = "Verbs of Saying with a Textual Connecting Function in the {P}rague Discourse Treebank",
author = "Rysov{\'a}, Magdal{\'e}na",
editor = "Calzolari, Nicoletta and
Choukri, Khalid and
Declerck, Thierry and
Loftsson, Hrafn and
Maegaard, Bente and
Mariani, Joseph and
Moreno, Asuncion and
Odijk, Jan and
Piperidis, Stelios",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation ({LREC}'14)",
month = may,
year = "2014",
address = "Reykjavik, Iceland",
publisher = "European Language Resources Association (ELRA)",
url = "http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2014/pdf/79_Paper.pdf",
pages = "930--935",
abstract = "The paper tries to contribute to the general discussion on discourse connectives, concretely to the question whether it is meaningful to distinguish two separate groups of connectives ― i.e. {``}classical{''} connectives limited to few predefined classes like conjunctions or adverbs (e.g. {``}but{''}) vs. alternative lexicalizations of connectives (i.e. unrestricted expressions and phrases like {``}the reason is{''}, {``}he added{''}, {``}the condition was{''} etc.). In this respect, the paper focuses on one group of these broader connectives in Czech ― the selected verbs of saying {``}doplnit/dopl{\v{n}}ovat{''} ({``}to complement{''}), {``}up{\v{r}}esnit/up{\v{r}}es{\v{n}}ovat{''} ({``}to specify{''}), {``}dodat/dod{\'a}vat{''} ({``}to add{''}), {``}pokra{\v{c}}ovat{''} ({``}to continue{''}) ― and analyses their occurrence and function in texts from the Prague Discourse Treebank. The paper demonstrates that these verbs of saying have a special place within the other connectives, as they contain two items ― e.g. {``}he added{''} means {``}and he said{''} so the verb {``}to add{''} contains an information about the relation to the previous context ({``}and{''}) plus the verb of saying ({``}to say{''}). This information led us to a more general observation, i.e. discourse connectives in broader sense do not necessarily connect two pieces of a text but some of them carry the second argument right in their semantics, which {``}classical{''} connectives can never do.",
}
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<modsCollection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
<mods ID="rysova-2014-verbs">
<titleInfo>
<title>Verbs of Saying with a Textual Connecting Function in the Prague Discourse Treebank</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Magdaléna</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Rysová</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">author</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<dateIssued>2014-05</dateIssued>
</originInfo>
<typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
<relatedItem type="host">
<titleInfo>
<title>Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14)</title>
</titleInfo>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Nicoletta</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Calzolari</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Khalid</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Choukri</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Thierry</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Declerck</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Hrafn</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Loftsson</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Bente</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Maegaard</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Joseph</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Mariani</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Asuncion</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Moreno</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Jan</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Odijk</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<name type="personal">
<namePart type="given">Stelios</namePart>
<namePart type="family">Piperidis</namePart>
<role>
<roleTerm authority="marcrelator" type="text">editor</roleTerm>
</role>
</name>
<originInfo>
<publisher>European Language Resources Association (ELRA)</publisher>
<place>
<placeTerm type="text">Reykjavik, Iceland</placeTerm>
</place>
</originInfo>
<genre authority="marcgt">conference publication</genre>
</relatedItem>
<abstract>The paper tries to contribute to the general discussion on discourse connectives, concretely to the question whether it is meaningful to distinguish two separate groups of connectives ― i.e. “classical” connectives limited to few predefined classes like conjunctions or adverbs (e.g. “but”) vs. alternative lexicalizations of connectives (i.e. unrestricted expressions and phrases like “the reason is”, “he added”, “the condition was” etc.). In this respect, the paper focuses on one group of these broader connectives in Czech ― the selected verbs of saying “doplnit/doplňovat” (“to complement”), “upřesnit/upřesňovat” (“to specify”), “dodat/dodávat” (“to add”), “pokračovat” (“to continue”) ― and analyses their occurrence and function in texts from the Prague Discourse Treebank. The paper demonstrates that these verbs of saying have a special place within the other connectives, as they contain two items ― e.g. “he added” means “and he said” so the verb “to add” contains an information about the relation to the previous context (“and”) plus the verb of saying (“to say”). This information led us to a more general observation, i.e. discourse connectives in broader sense do not necessarily connect two pieces of a text but some of them carry the second argument right in their semantics, which “classical” connectives can never do.</abstract>
<identifier type="citekey">rysova-2014-verbs</identifier>
<location>
<url>http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2014/pdf/79_Paper.pdf</url>
</location>
<part>
<date>2014-05</date>
<extent unit="page">
<start>930</start>
<end>935</end>
</extent>
</part>
</mods>
</modsCollection>
%0 Conference Proceedings
%T Verbs of Saying with a Textual Connecting Function in the Prague Discourse Treebank
%A Rysová, Magdaléna
%Y Calzolari, Nicoletta
%Y Choukri, Khalid
%Y Declerck, Thierry
%Y Loftsson, Hrafn
%Y Maegaard, Bente
%Y Mariani, Joseph
%Y Moreno, Asuncion
%Y Odijk, Jan
%Y Piperidis, Stelios
%S Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC’14)
%D 2014
%8 May
%I European Language Resources Association (ELRA)
%C Reykjavik, Iceland
%F rysova-2014-verbs
%X The paper tries to contribute to the general discussion on discourse connectives, concretely to the question whether it is meaningful to distinguish two separate groups of connectives ― i.e. “classical” connectives limited to few predefined classes like conjunctions or adverbs (e.g. “but”) vs. alternative lexicalizations of connectives (i.e. unrestricted expressions and phrases like “the reason is”, “he added”, “the condition was” etc.). In this respect, the paper focuses on one group of these broader connectives in Czech ― the selected verbs of saying “doplnit/doplňovat” (“to complement”), “upřesnit/upřesňovat” (“to specify”), “dodat/dodávat” (“to add”), “pokračovat” (“to continue”) ― and analyses their occurrence and function in texts from the Prague Discourse Treebank. The paper demonstrates that these verbs of saying have a special place within the other connectives, as they contain two items ― e.g. “he added” means “and he said” so the verb “to add” contains an information about the relation to the previous context (“and”) plus the verb of saying (“to say”). This information led us to a more general observation, i.e. discourse connectives in broader sense do not necessarily connect two pieces of a text but some of them carry the second argument right in their semantics, which “classical” connectives can never do.
%U http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2014/pdf/79_Paper.pdf
%P 930-935
Markdown (Informal)
[Verbs of Saying with a Textual Connecting Function in the Prague Discourse Treebank](http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2014/pdf/79_Paper.pdf) (Rysová, LREC 2014)
ACL