话语关系标记的心理语言学模型

Q1 Arts and Humanities
Frances Yung, Kevin Duh, T. Komura, Yuji Matsumoto
{"title":"话语关系标记的心理语言学模型","authors":"Frances Yung, Kevin Duh, T. Komura, Yuji Matsumoto","doi":"10.5087/DAD.2017.104","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Discourse relations can either be explicitly marked by discourse connectives (DCs), such as therefore and but , or implicitly conveyed in natural language utterances. How speakers choose between the two options is a question that is not well understood. In this study, we propose a psycholinguistic model that predicts whether or not speakers will produce an explicit marker given the discourse relation they wish to express. Our model is based on two information-theoretic frameworks: (1) the Rational Speech Acts model, which models the pragmatic interaction between language production and interpretation by Bayesian inference, and (2) the Uniform Information Density theory, which advocates that speakers adjust linguistic redundancy to maintain a uniform rate of information transmission. Specifically, our model quantifies the utility of using or omitting a DC based on the expected surprisal of comprehension, cost of production, and availability of other signals in the rest of the utterance. Experiments based on the Penn Discourse Treebank show that our approach outperforms the state-of-the-art performance at predicting the presence of DCs (Patterson and Kehler, 2013), in addition to giving an explanatory account of the speaker’s choice.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"5 1","pages":"106-131"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Psycholinguistic Model for the Marking of Discourse Relations\",\"authors\":\"Frances Yung, Kevin Duh, T. Komura, Yuji Matsumoto\",\"doi\":\"10.5087/DAD.2017.104\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Discourse relations can either be explicitly marked by discourse connectives (DCs), such as therefore and but , or implicitly conveyed in natural language utterances. How speakers choose between the two options is a question that is not well understood. In this study, we propose a psycholinguistic model that predicts whether or not speakers will produce an explicit marker given the discourse relation they wish to express. Our model is based on two information-theoretic frameworks: (1) the Rational Speech Acts model, which models the pragmatic interaction between language production and interpretation by Bayesian inference, and (2) the Uniform Information Density theory, which advocates that speakers adjust linguistic redundancy to maintain a uniform rate of information transmission. Specifically, our model quantifies the utility of using or omitting a DC based on the expected surprisal of comprehension, cost of production, and availability of other signals in the rest of the utterance. Experiments based on the Penn Discourse Treebank show that our approach outperforms the state-of-the-art performance at predicting the presence of DCs (Patterson and Kehler, 2013), in addition to giving an explanatory account of the speaker’s choice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"106-131\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5087/DAD.2017.104\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialogue and Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5087/DAD.2017.104","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

话语关系既可以由话语连接词(dc)明确标记,如“因此”和“但是”,也可以在自然语言话语中含蓄地传达。说话者如何在这两种选择之间做出选择,这是一个尚未得到很好理解的问题。在本研究中,我们提出了一个心理语言学模型来预测说话者是否会在给定他们希望表达的话语关系下产生显式标记。我们的模型基于两个信息理论框架:(1)理性言语行为模型,该模型通过贝叶斯推理模拟语言产生和解释之间的语用相互作用;(2)均匀信息密度理论,该理论主张说话者调整语言冗余以保持统一的信息传递率。具体来说,我们的模型基于理解的预期惊讶度、生产成本和话语其余部分中其他信号的可用性,量化了使用或省略DC的效用。基于宾夕法尼亚大学话语树库的实验表明,我们的方法在预测dc的存在方面优于最先进的性能(Patterson和Kehler, 2013),此外还给出了说话人选择的解释性说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Psycholinguistic Model for the Marking of Discourse Relations
Discourse relations can either be explicitly marked by discourse connectives (DCs), such as therefore and but , or implicitly conveyed in natural language utterances. How speakers choose between the two options is a question that is not well understood. In this study, we propose a psycholinguistic model that predicts whether or not speakers will produce an explicit marker given the discourse relation they wish to express. Our model is based on two information-theoretic frameworks: (1) the Rational Speech Acts model, which models the pragmatic interaction between language production and interpretation by Bayesian inference, and (2) the Uniform Information Density theory, which advocates that speakers adjust linguistic redundancy to maintain a uniform rate of information transmission. Specifically, our model quantifies the utility of using or omitting a DC based on the expected surprisal of comprehension, cost of production, and availability of other signals in the rest of the utterance. Experiments based on the Penn Discourse Treebank show that our approach outperforms the state-of-the-art performance at predicting the presence of DCs (Patterson and Kehler, 2013), in addition to giving an explanatory account of the speaker’s choice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Dialogue and Discourse
Dialogue and Discourse Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: D&D seeks previously unpublished, high quality articles on the analysis of discourse and dialogue that contain -experimental and/or theoretical studies related to the construction, representation, and maintenance of (linguistic) context -linguistic analysis of phenomena characteristic of discourse and/or dialogue (including, but not limited to: reference and anaphora, presupposition and accommodation, topicality and salience, implicature, ---discourse structure and rhetorical relations, discourse markers and particles, the semantics and -pragmatics of dialogue acts, questions, imperatives, non-sentential utterances, intonation, and meta--communicative phenomena such as repair and grounding) -experimental and/or theoretical studies of agents'' information states and their dynamics in conversational interaction -new analytical frameworks that advance theoretical studies of discourse and dialogue -research on systems performing coreference resolution, discourse structure parsing, event and temporal -structure, and reference resolution in multimodal communication -experimental and/or theoretical results yielding new insight into non-linguistic interaction in -communication -work on natural language understanding (including spoken language understanding), dialogue management, -reasoning, and natural language generation (including text-to-speech) in dialogue systems -work related to the design and engineering of dialogue systems (including, but not limited to: -evaluation, usability design and testing, rapid application deployment, embodied agents, affect detection, -mixed-initiative, adaptation, and user modeling). -extremely well-written surveys of existing work. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers on discourse and dialogue and its associated fields, including computer scientists, linguists, psychologists, philosophers, roboticists, sociologists.
×
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