Explicitness and implicitness of discourse relations in a multilingual discourse bank

IF 0.6 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Amália Mendes, Deniz Zeyrek, G. Oleškevičienė
{"title":"Explicitness and implicitness of discourse relations in a multilingual discourse bank","authors":"Amália Mendes, Deniz Zeyrek, G. Oleškevičienė","doi":"10.1075/fol.22011.men","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Proposals such as continuity and causality-by-default relate the level of expectedness of a relation to its\n linguistic marking as an explicit or implicit relation. We investigate these two proposals with regard to the English transcripts\n of six TED Talks and their Lithuanian, Portuguese and Turkish translations in the TED-Multilingual Discourse Bank (TED-MDB),\n annotated for discourse relations, following the Penn Discourse Treebank style of annotation. Our data shows that the\n discontinuous relations contrast and concession are indeed frequently explicit in all languages. But continuous\n relations show differences per relation and language. For instance, cause is frequently conveyed implicitly in English\n and Portuguese, but not in Lithuanian and Turkish. We explore temporal continuity by analysing whether the forward-order sense\n result is more frequently implicit than the backward-order reason. The hypothesis is confirmed by English\n and Portuguese, but not Lithuanian and Turkish. However, in Turkish, the arguments of the backward-order relation reason\n are frequently presented by the reversed order of arguments, retaining the linear order of events even in the presence of the\n connective. The causality-by-default hypothesis is not confirmed, as cause is not the most frequent implicit relation in\n the four languages.","PeriodicalId":44232,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Functions of Language","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22011.men","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Proposals such as continuity and causality-by-default relate the level of expectedness of a relation to its linguistic marking as an explicit or implicit relation. We investigate these two proposals with regard to the English transcripts of six TED Talks and their Lithuanian, Portuguese and Turkish translations in the TED-Multilingual Discourse Bank (TED-MDB), annotated for discourse relations, following the Penn Discourse Treebank style of annotation. Our data shows that the discontinuous relations contrast and concession are indeed frequently explicit in all languages. But continuous relations show differences per relation and language. For instance, cause is frequently conveyed implicitly in English and Portuguese, but not in Lithuanian and Turkish. We explore temporal continuity by analysing whether the forward-order sense result is more frequently implicit than the backward-order reason. The hypothesis is confirmed by English and Portuguese, but not Lithuanian and Turkish. However, in Turkish, the arguments of the backward-order relation reason are frequently presented by the reversed order of arguments, retaining the linear order of events even in the presence of the connective. The causality-by-default hypothesis is not confirmed, as cause is not the most frequent implicit relation in the four languages.
多语言话语库中话语关系的显性与隐性
默认情况下,连续性和因果关系等建议将关系的预期水平与其作为显性或隐性关系的语言标记联系起来。我们研究了这两项建议,涉及TED多语言话语库(TED-MDB)中六次TED演讲的英语转录本及其立陶宛语、葡萄牙语和土耳其语翻译,按照宾夕法尼亚大学话语树库风格的注释进行了语篇关系注释。我们的数据表明,不连续的关系对比和让步确实在所有语言中都经常表现出来。但连续关系在每种关系和语言中都表现出差异。例如,原因经常用英语和葡萄牙语含蓄地表达,但立陶宛语和土耳其语却没有。我们通过分析前序感觉结果是否比后序原因更频繁地隐含来探索时间连续性。这一假设得到了英语和葡萄牙语的证实,但立陶宛语和土耳其语没有证实。然而,在土耳其语中,后序关系理性的论点经常由论点的相反顺序提出,即使在存在连接词的情况下也保持了事件的线性顺序。默认因果关系假说没有得到证实,因为原因不是四种语言中最常见的隐含关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Functions of Language is an international journal of linguistics which explores the functionalist perspective on the organisation and use of natural language. It encourages the interplay of theory and description, and provides space for the detailed analysis, qualitative or quantitative, of linguistic data from a broad range of languages. Its scope is broad, covering such matters as prosodic phenomena in phonology, the clause in its communicative context, and regularities of pragmatics, conversation and discourse, as well as the interaction between the various levels of analysis. The overall purpose is to contribute to our understanding of how the use of languages in speech and writing has impacted, and continues to impact, upon the structure of those languages.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信