| { |
| "paper_id": "W94-0316", |
| "header": { |
| "generated_with": "S2ORC 1.0.0", |
| "date_generated": "2023-01-19T04:46:32.301896Z" |
| }, |
| "title": "Building Another Bridge over the Generation Gap", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "Leo", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Wanner", |
| "suffix": "", |
| "affiliation": { |
| "laboratory": "", |
| "institution": "University of Stuttgart", |
| "location": { |
| "addrLine": "Keplerstr. 17", |
| "postCode": "D-70174", |
| "settlement": "Stuttgart", |
| "country": "Germany" |
| } |
| }, |
| "email": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": "", |
| "venue": null, |
| "identifiers": {}, |
| "abstract": "In this paper, we address one of the central problems in text generation: the missing link (\"the generation gap\" in Meteer's terms) between the global discourse organization as often provided by text planning modules and the linguistic realization of this organization. We argue that the link should be established by the lexical choice proces s using resources derived from Mel'~uk's Lezical Functions (LFs). In particular, we demonstrate that sequences of LFs may well serve as lexical discourse structure relations which link up to global discourse relations in the output of a Rhetorical Structure Theory style text planner.", |
| "pdf_parse": { |
| "paper_id": "W94-0316", |
| "_pdf_hash": "", |
| "abstract": [ |
| { |
| "text": "In this paper, we address one of the central problems in text generation: the missing link (\"the generation gap\" in Meteer's terms) between the global discourse organization as often provided by text planning modules and the linguistic realization of this organization. We argue that the link should be established by the lexical choice proces s using resources derived from Mel'~uk's Lezical Functions (LFs). In particular, we demonstrate that sequences of LFs may well serve as lexical discourse structure relations which link up to global discourse relations in the output of a Rhetorical Structure Theory style text planner.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Abstract", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "body_text": [ |
| { |
| "text": "In text generation, content selection and discourse organization (i.e. the text planning tasks) have often been dealt with independently from the linguistic realization of the tezt plan-the information selected and structured by the text planning process (eft, e.g., [McKeown and Swartout, 1987] ). However, a text planning process which does not take into account linguistic resources that are available to express a particular meaning suffers from two major shortcomings: (i) it is not sensitive to variant discourse organizations at the sentence level; and (ii) it cannot guarantee that its text plan is always verbalizable by the linguistic module. With other words, there is a discrepancy (a \"generation gap\" in Meteer's terms) between a text plan that is not tailored to linguistic resources and the input as required by the linguistic realization module. For extensive examples that illustrate this, see, especially Meteer's work [Mercer, 1991] and [Mercer, 1992] , but also, e.g., [Rubinoff, 1992 , Vander Linden et al., 1992 . In our work, we have found that especially lexical phenomena (such as lexical cooccurrence and lexical semantics) play an im-portant role in discourse organization at the level of sentence planning, which is still one of the unsolved problems in text planning, cf. [Hovy, 1991] . Consider the following example:", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 267, |
| "end": 295, |
| "text": "[McKeown and Swartout, 1987]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 937, |
| "end": 951, |
| "text": "[Mercer, 1991]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 956, |
| "end": 970, |
| "text": "[Mercer, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 989, |
| "end": 1004, |
| "text": "[Rubinoff, 1992", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 1005, |
| "end": 1033, |
| "text": ", Vander Linden et al., 1992", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF11" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 1301, |
| "end": 1313, |
| "text": "[Hovy, 1991]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF7" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Identifying the Generation Gap", |
| "sec_num": "1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(1) a. Opa schofl auff den Einbrecher, der nun tot ist lit. 'Grandpa shot at the burglax who is now dead'.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Identifying the Generation Gap", |
| "sec_num": "1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The interpretation of (la) does not necessarily suggest that burglar's death is in consequence of grandpa's shooting. To communicate this relation, (lb) is more appropriate:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Identifying the Generation Gap", |
| "sec_num": "1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(1) b. Opa sehofl au] den Einbrecher und tJtete ihn/ verwundete ihn tJdlich lit. 'Grandpa shot at the burglar and killed him/wounded him deadly'.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Identifying the Generation Gap", |
| "sec_num": "1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "However, despite an analogous syntactic construction, (2) suggests the interpretation that grandpa's being well is in consequence of doctor's curing:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Identifying the Generation Gap", |
| "sec_num": "1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "(2) Der Arzt heilte Opa, der nun ganz gesund ist ].it. 'The doctor cured grandpa, who is now completely well'.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Identifying the Generation Gap", |
| "sec_num": "1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "That is, the consideration of lexical phenomena helps to resolve the discrepancy between discourse structure relations (as, e.g., given by Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST) [Mann and Thompson, 1987] ) and their linguistic realization. Therefore, a text generator has to provide an organization of lexical resources which makes explicit the rhetorical potential of lexical phenomena and which allows for the purposeful choice of these phenomena.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 167, |
| "end": 172, |
| "text": "(RST)", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 173, |
| "end": 198, |
| "text": "[Mann and Thompson, 1987]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF8" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Identifying the Generation Gap", |
| "sec_num": "1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In principle, three ways seem to be feasible for how to proceed: (i) to broaden the task of text planning by lexical choice (eft, e.g., [Mercer, 1992] ), (ii) to realize an interaction link between the linguistic realization module and text planning (eft, e.g., [Rubinoff, 1992] ), or Off) to broaden the task of linguistic realization in order to deal with a final, lexically guided determination of a discourse organization that has been predetermined by text planning. In our work, we follow (iii). This is, in order to keep s separate level of discourse organization that is realized independently from linguistic resources and to make use of the potential of linguistic resources to guide the discourse organization at a more detailed level than conventional text planning is able to do. In contrast to, e.g., [Fawcett et al., 1992] and [Elhadad and Robin, 1_992] , who deal with lexically biased sentence organization within the grammar, we take a radically lexicalist position (similar to that of [McDonald, 1991] ) in that we assume that lexicalization has to take place before grammatical realization; and that it is the words chosen, which dictate the possible syntactic realizations of a content to be communicated. More precisely, we propose a two level discourse organization where the first level is provided by an RST style text planner and the second level by a separate lexical choice module. Then, the discourse organization of a text is done in two steps: in the first step, the text planner predetermines the discourse structure relations and selects the content; in the second step, the lexical choice module provides, in accordance with linguistic constraints, a finer specification and the realization of these relations and tailors their content to linguistic realization.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 136, |
| "end": 150, |
| "text": "[Mercer, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 262, |
| "end": 278, |
| "text": "[Rubinoff, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 815, |
| "end": 837, |
| "text": "[Fawcett et al., 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF6" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 842, |
| "end": 861, |
| "text": "[Elhadad and Robin,", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 862, |
| "end": 868, |
| "text": "1_992]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 1004, |
| "end": 1020, |
| "text": "[McDonald, 1991]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF8" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Identifying the Generation Gap", |
| "sec_num": "1.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The computational framework in which our lexical choice model has partially been implemented is the systemic text generator KOMET . One source of constraints for the first level text organization comes in KOMET from an RST-based planner, z The output of this planner is a collection of case frames with RST relations holding between them as shown in Figure 1 .", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 350, |
| "end": 358, |
| "text": "Figure 1", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Framework", |
| "sec_num": "1.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Starting from such a text plan, the lexical choice ich, 1992] ). This input contains the lexicalization of the text plan content and constraints for its syntactic realization. Figure 2 shows such an input (called Partial Grammatical Structure (P6S)) 2 encoded in terms of Typed Feature Structures (TFSs) [Emele, 1989] . This input has been derived from the text plan in Figure 1 .s", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 51, |
| "end": 61, |
| "text": "ich, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 304, |
| "end": 317, |
| "text": "[Emele, 1989]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF6" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 176, |
| "end": 184, |
| "text": "Figure 2", |
| "ref_id": "FIGREF0" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 370, |
| "end": 378, |
| "text": "Figure 1", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Framework", |
| "sec_num": "1.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In what follows, we present an ongoing attempt to define a general model of lexical resources which would provide the missing link between the global discourse organization as given by discourse structure relations in the text plan and its linguistic realization. In particular, we show how Mel'~uk's Lezical Functions (LFS) (cf., e.g., [Mel'~uk and Polgu~re, 1987] ) can be used to compile such a general model. After the introduction of the general principles that underly our organization of lexical resources, we focus on LF sequences. We demonstrate that they may well function as lexically biased discourse structure relations at the intrasentential level; and, thus, be interpreted as a finer specification of global discourse structure relations.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 337, |
| "end": 365, |
| "text": "[Mel'~uk and Polgu~re, 1987]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Framework", |
| "sec_num": "1.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "2A oos corresponds, roughly speaking, to the Partial Surface Functional Description (PSFD) specification in the COMEr system [MeKeown et aL, 1991] .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 125, |
| "end": 146, |
| "text": "[MeKeown et aL, 1991]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Framework", |
| "sec_num": "1.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "SThe current implementations of the lexical choice module and the grammar still require an additional mapping between the pGs and the input ax taken by the grammar. Since this mapping is, however, purely due to implementational details, it is of no interest here.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "The Framework", |
| "sec_num": "1.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "While designing a lexical choice model, it is important to note that (a) lexical phenomena and, therefore, also lexical choices that are available to communicate a specific meaning are dependent on this meaning; and (b) lexical phenomena are involved at different stages of the utterance construction process. Thus, the process of SHOOTING has another lexiealization potential than that of CURINC; and the choice of fierce in The terrorists put up fierce resistance is done at another stage than the choice of put up. This calls for:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Overview of the Lexical Resources Organization", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022 a (fairly) excaustive coverage of the lexical potential of each semantic entity (such as process, event, etc.);", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Overview of the Lexical Resources Organization", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022 clustering of lexical resources locally to semantic units of a certain size;", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Overview of the Lexical Resources Organization", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022 a multilayered organization of lexical resources (and therefore also a multilayered lexical choice process).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Overview of the Lexical Resources Organization", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In our model, the resources are provided mainly by Lezical Functions as introduced in the Meaning Text Theory (MTT). They are clustered locally to situations and organized into four layers.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Overview of the Lexical Resources Organization", |
| "sec_num": "2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Most excaustively, hxical phenomena have been described in MTT by \u00a3exical Functions.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Using Lexical Functions as the Source of Lexical Resources", |
| "sec_num": "2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Roughly speaking, an LF f is a standard semanticolexical relation which holds between a lexeme L, (the keyword of f) and a set of lexemes f(L) (the value of If). Consider the following examples: Mel'~uk distinguishes about sixty simple LFS of the above kind. Simple LFs can further be composed with each other; the meaning of such complex LFs is, as a rule, a composition of the meanings of the participating LFS. Thus, AntiMagn means 'slightly' (e.g., An-tiMagn(injury) = minor); and IncepOperl 'start performing' (e.g., IncepOper1(shooting) = [to] start (shooting)). If several (simple or complex) LFs compose a phrase or a clause (as, e.g., AntiMagn and So compose minor injury), we separate these LFs by a 'o' sign.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Using Lexical Functions as the Source of Lexical Resources", |
| "sec_num": "2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In addition to complex LFs, we introduce LF sequences --pairs of LFS (denoted LF1 A LFz), whose values cooccur at the syntagmatic axis. For example, Prepar(shooting) A Vo(shooting) with Prepar(shooting) = [to] charge (the gun) and Vo(shooting) = [to] shoot in He charged the gun and shot. LF sequences are directed, i.e. LFx A LF2 LF2 A LFx. Consider, e.g., Prepar A V0, which is an instantiation of a TEMPORAL SEQUENCE relation with the first LF expression preceding the second on the temporal axis, and V0 A Prepar as in He shot after charging the gun, where the first LF expression succeeds the second. Moreover, the existence of LFx A LFz for an entity in a language does not mean that LF2 A LFz is also available (consider, e.g., the following instantiation of A0 A Magn o So: She is beautiful --a real beauty and Magn o So A A0: *She is a real beauty --beautiful. Therefore, in LF sequences, one argument is the 'hub' m the point of departure (or the expanded LF) and the other argument is the 'hub expander'.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Using Lexical Functions as the Source of Lexical Resources", |
| "sec_num": "2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "LFs and LF sequences (henceforth, both are referred to as 'LFS') have well-defined syntactic realizations. For example, Operz is defined as taking the ACTOR as grammatical'subject and the keyword of the situation as direct object. The LF sequence Operl A Magn o So --when applied to SHOOTING m can be realized as a paratactic complex clause (of. Grandpa took a shot at the burglar; it was a good shot.~ or as a simple clause (eft Grandpa took a good shot at the burglar), but not, e.g., as a hypotactic complex clause (eft *Grandpa took a shot at the burglar, which was a good shot/one). And so on.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Using Lexical Functions as the Source of Lexical Resources", |
| "sec_num": "2.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In accordance with [Apresjan, 1974] , a situation is comprehensively defined by: 1. a predicate; 2. the constituents (i.e. potential participants and circumstantials) of this predicate; 3. the relations between different constituents as well as between constituents and the predicate (these relations are usually given in terms of actions, states, etc.); 4. the features of the predicate, constituents, and the above actions and relations.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 19, |
| "end": 35, |
| "text": "[Apresjan, 1974]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The lexical resources of a situation (the Lezicaliza-tion Cluster in terms of [McDonald, 1991] Bateman, 1990] ); therefore, we organize them coherently at each of the first three layers in network form in terms of the functional, semantic, and syntactic features that they represent (cf. also [Wanner, 1992] ). For example, the Operl function is decomposed as {actor.realization, situation-oriented, actor-salience, ...}. Within this organization, the most general structures provide the representation of lexical semantics and the most deli-4Evidently, semantically related situations have intersecting lexicalization clusters. In order to achieve an efficient organization of the overall lexical resources, we use inheritance techniques, cf. [Wanner, 1992] .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 78, |
| "end": 94, |
| "text": "[McDonald, 1991]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF8" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 95, |
| "end": 109, |
| "text": "Bateman, 1990]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 293, |
| "end": 307, |
| "text": "[Wanner, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF11" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 744, |
| "end": 758, |
| "text": "[Wanner, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF11" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "SObviously, our layers are in analogy to the \"ranks\" in systemic functional grammars, cf. [Halliday, 1985] .", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 90, |
| "end": 106, |
| "text": "[Halliday, 1985]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "cate ones --lexicalization.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "A PGS is then built up b] the lexical choice process by a successive traversal of the layers starting from the intersituational layer. How this is done is described in detail in [Wanner, 1992] . Here we focus on the organization of the layers and on the interface between the output of the text planning module and lexical resources.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 178, |
| "end": 192, |
| "text": "[Wanner, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF11" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In what follows, each layer is described briefly (starting with the lexeme layer). Note that this description is necessarily extremely oversimplified; it largely abstracts from the actual representation in a systemic functional framework.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Lexeme Layer. The lexeme layer contains LF -LF value pairs. Consider selected entries for Operl and $1 in the lexicalization cluster of SHOOTING: L.o~: + J Constituent Layer. The constituent layer contains feature specifications for the realization of predicate constituents and their attributes, s For example, to name the ACTOR in SHOOTING, his/her proper name; a situation non-specific realization, e.g., his/her function in relation to other entities in the knowledge base (e.g., grandfather); the situation-specific and contextually neutral lexeme marksman; or a negatively loaded situation-related expression such as murderer, killer, etc. can be chosen. Consider a sample fragment for the realization of the ACTOR in SHOOTING in network form:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "actor--situation-spectr~-1 ne 1o\" g.o ! mg -Io \u2022 . .o \u2022", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The labels in Times Roman are network features in the corresponding fragment; those in italics are pointers to \"external features\" that provide a more detailed specification of the feature they are associated with. \"External\" means 'at other layers of the same cluster' or 'in clusters of other situations'. Clusters of other situations are identified by labels in small capitals (preceded by an uparrow). The labels in bold denote roles which are introduced into the PGS when 6To keep the presentation simple, we do not discuss the attributes here. the corresponding feature is chosen during the network traversal.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The fragment shows that there are pointers to features in. other lexicalization clusters and to features at lower layers of the same lexicalization cluster (of. the pointer to S1 at the lexeme layer).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Intrasituational Layer. The intrasituational layer contains feature specifications for the realization of predicates and their attributes. For example, to express ACTOR's performance of SHOOTING, e.g., V0 ( [tO] Bateman, 1990 ] for a detailed discussion):", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 205, |
| "end": 211, |
| "text": "( [tO]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 212, |
| "end": 225, |
| "text": "Bateman, 1990", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "axis: the 'causation' and the 'initial' phases precede the 'continuing' and the 'final' phases; the 'continuing' phase precedes the 'final' phase, etc. Further, the phases 'initial' and 'final' are related to SHOOTING itself.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "As global, for example, the different PREPARA-TION actions (PREPARATION / (verbalized, e.g., by [to] charge the gun) and PREPARATION// (verbalized, e.g., by [to] cock the trigger) precede SHOOTING; ACTOR's and ACTEE'S actions that follow SHOOTING as well as the 'resulting state' of ACTEE succeed it. In the following fragment, only the 'global' organization is partially illustrated:", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 59, |
| "end": 100, |
| "text": "(PREPARATION / (verbalized, e.g., by [to]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 157, |
| "end": 161, |
| "text": "[to]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "[ -gL tazce, aag... ", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Compiling Lexical Resources Locally to Situations", |
| "sec_num": "2.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To tailor RST relations in the text plan to lexical resources, the lexical choice process must know (i) how, e.g., RST relations are specified in more detail by lexical resources and (it) what the possible linguistic realizations of these finer specifications are. Since LFs have well-defined semantic, lexical and syntactic realizations, (it) is provided by our representation. In this section, we address (i); and more precisely: the following fragment, we present the specification of the TEMPORAL SEQUENCE relation taking SHOOTING as reference time. We represent the 'internal' temporal and the 'global' temporal organization of SHOOTING. As 'internal', we present its phases at the temporal \u2022 how these relations are linked up with the relations specified in the text plan.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Using Lexical Resources for Discourse Organization", |
| "sec_num": "3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Using Lexical Resources for Discourse Organization", |
| "sec_num": "3" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For the definition of discourse structure relations in lexical resources (henceforth lexical discourse structure relations), we use LF sequences. As stated above, LF sequences (and LFs in general) are organized in terms of their semantic, functional, and syntactic features. The expression of the same content via different syntactic patterns is an important task in sentence planning (eft, e.g., [Meteer, 1992, Vander ., 1992, Scott and de Souza, 1991] . 7 But it is the functional content we associate with each LF sequence, which links t_he lexical resources up to global discourse structure relations. Table 1 shows the functional content we associate with some LF sequences, s", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 397, |
| "end": 418, |
| "text": "[Meteer, 1992, Vander", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 419, |
| "end": 437, |
| "text": "., 1992, Scott and", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF10" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 438, |
| "end": 453, |
| "text": "de Souza, 1991]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF10" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 606, |
| "end": 613, |
| "text": "Table 1", |
| "ref_id": "TABREF5" |
| } |
| ], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Towards Lexical Discourse Structure Relations", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "For a detailed discussion of how the functional content of LF sequences is used to define and to structure lexical discourse relations following Halliday's organization of intrasentential logico-semantic relations (cf. [Halliday, 1985] ), see [Wanner, 1994] . The functional content of these realizations is more detailed than that of VOLITIONAL CAUSE. For example: 1. communicates an active role of the CAUSER; 2.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 219, |
| "end": 235, |
| "text": "[Halliday, 1985]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 243, |
| "end": 257, |
| "text": "[Wanner, 1994]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF11" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Towards Lexical Discourse Structure Relations", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "--the active role of the ACTOR, and 3. --the active role of the SUBJECT. Therefore, they not only realize VOLITIONAL CAUSE, but also specify it in more detail.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Towards Lexical Discourse Structure Relations", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To summarize, the search for a lexical discourse structure relation is done in accordance with the functional content, the communicative intention of the speaker, and the contents of the arguments of the RST relation considered. If the RST relation connects unrelated case frames 1\u00b0 (as, e.g., EVIDENCE in In winter, the days are short. It is getting light late and early dark) these case frames are realized independently without being connected by a lexical discourse structure relation. If the case frames are related, the following three variations are possible: (i) An RST relation coincides, in general, with the functional content of a lexical discourse structure relation; as, e.g., VOLITIONAL CAUSE in the following rudimentary text plan for the 'RESPECT' examples given above does:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Towards Lexical Discourse Structure Relations", |
| "sec_num": "3.1" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The first and the most important task in tailoring the text plan to linguistic resources is to find lexical discourse structure relations that correspond to RST relations specified in the text plan.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Establishing the Initial Link", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "To illustrate this task, let us consider the RST relation VOLITIONAL CAUSE as it holds between the situation's causation and the situation itself. The corresponding function in our model is causal enhancement. Apart from the LF sequence Caus A V0 given in the table above (in the cluster of RESPECT, instantiated, e.g., by An old tradition requires children 4o show respect for their parents), at least the following three also function as causal enhancement: 9 rClosely related to this topic is the task of 'compacting' the information to be corv_mtmJcated' (sometimes called 'aggregatlon' [Hovy, 1993] ).", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 591, |
| "end": 603, |
| "text": "[Hovy, 1993]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF8" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Establishing the Initial Link", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "STl~s is not to say that these functions are the only ones that are possible. 9 The Syn function provides a synonym expression; the Caus indices '2' and '3' stand for 'causation by ACTEE' and 'causation by the SUBJECT', respectively. If so, the subclassification of the lexical relation determines its final realization. (it) An RST relation instantiation subsumes several distinct classes of lexical discourse structure relations; as, e.g., the instantiation of the RST relation CON-TRAST in the text plan below (this plan is also highly simplified):", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Establishing the Initial Link", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "1\u00b0Case frames are considered to be unrelated if between them or one of their roles no identity, is-a, causer, location, etc. relation holds. :actee (village /location : part-of: Gaul :negation +) : obligatory-roles (: actor, : actee, : situation)) This text plan may be realized either as contrastive claxification: Gaul is entirely occupied by the Romans; well, not entirely.., one small village still holds out.; or as contrastive enhancement: Gaul is almost entirely occupied by the Romans; but one small village still holds out, In this case, a sufficiently general lexical discourse structure relation which subsumes both contrastive clarification and contrastive enhancement is chosen. (iii) An RUT relation is not captured by our taxonomy (as, e.g., CONCESSION). Then, the corresponding case frames are treated as unrelated (see above).", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Establishing the Initial Link", |
| "sec_num": "3.2" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "One of the first proposals for how to take linguistic resources into account during the process of text planning was Danlos' Discourse Grammar [Danlos, 1987] , where acceptable clause pattern sequences were presented explicitly. The basic difference between Danlos' work and ours is that in the Discourse Grammar, clause pattern sequences are represented as concrete valency schemata while in our model, they are represented as functional distinctions that encode sequences of LFS. ~S a result, we do not face the problem of being restricted to a concrete small domain as Danlos does.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 143, |
| "end": 157, |
| "text": "[Danlos, 1987]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF3" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Related Work", |
| "sec_num": "4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Meteer's text planner [Meteer, 1992] is another proposal for the organization of lexical resources that incorporate lexically biased discourse relations. But while we argue that lexically biased discourse relations are to be realized by a functionally motivated lexical choice model, Meteer sugggests a single structurally motivated model for text planning, which also subsumes lexical choice.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 22, |
| "end": 36, |
| "text": "[Meteer, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Related Work", |
| "sec_num": "4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Further, for example, [Rubinoff, 1992] ensures the expressability of discourse relations provided by a conventional text planner by annotating linguistic structures. Dob~ and Novak [Dob~ and Novak, 1992] use RST structure relations and the Ted Structure representation proposed by Meteer in parallel: via RST relations, the content selection and discourse organization is done; the representation of the arguments of the RST relations chosen in terms of Tezt Structures ensures the linguistic realization and provides constraints for the guidance of the process of content selection and discourse organization. [Vander Linden et at., 1992] suggest subclausal RUT relations for sentence organization. Neither Dob~ and Novak nor Vander Linden et al. address lexical phenomena explicitly, however.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 22, |
| "end": 38, |
| "text": "[Rubinoff, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF9" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 166, |
| "end": 203, |
| "text": "Dob~ and Novak [Dob~ and Novak, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 611, |
| "end": 639, |
| "text": "[Vander Linden et at., 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF11" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Related Work", |
| "sec_num": "4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Elhadad's proposal [Elhadad, 1992] to use Topoi (i.e. inference rules that encode relations between propositions incorporating lexical material) as discourse structure relations is aimed at exploiting lexical phenomena for discourse organization. Elhadad focuses, however, on the 'argumentative potential' of lexical items rather than on a comprehensive model of lexical resources.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 19, |
| "end": 34, |
| "text": "[Elhadad, 1992]", |
| "ref_id": "BIBREF5" |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Related Work", |
| "sec_num": "4" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "In this paper, we argued that in order to build up the link between discourse structure relations in the text plan and linguistic resources, it is useful to distinguish between two levels of discourse organization: a global discourse organization, which is not affected by linguistic means; and a finer discourse organization, which is clone in accordance with the linguistic materiM that is available for the meaning communicated. We reported on an ongoing attempt to define a situation-specific, multilayered model of lexical resources that is based on Mel'~uk's Lezical Functions. We have shown that the lexical phenomena represented at the most global layer of this model are suitable to serve as lexically biased discourse relations, and that these relations can be tailored to relations as specified in the output of an RST style text planner.", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Concluding Remarks", |
| "sec_num": "5" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "The following distinctive features characterize the model proposed:", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Concluding Remarks", |
| "sec_num": "5" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "\u2022 it makes sure that all relations defined are expressable in language, * it allows for a realization of lexical relations as intraclausal relations between discourse segments, \u2022 it is sensitive to lexical and syntactic variations during the realization of discourse relations. Although we decompose the LF information and represent it in a systemic framework, we think that we have shown that LFS as introduced in MTT can be used as constraints not only at the level of words (as argued in [Meteer, 1991, p. 302] ). However, it should also be noted that the proposal we suggest works only if the arguments of a discourse relation communicate information on the same situation or on related situations.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 491, |
| "end": 513, |
| "text": "[Meteer, 1991, p. 302]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Concluding Remarks", |
| "sec_num": "5" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "7th International Generation Workshop \u2022 Kennebunkport, Maine * June [21] [22] [23] [24] 1994 discussions about lexical phenomena in discourse. I am also very grateful to Elisabeth Maier and Owen Rambow for valuable comments on an earlier draft.", |
| "cite_spans": [ |
| { |
| "start": 68, |
| "end": 72, |
| "text": "[21]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 73, |
| "end": 77, |
| "text": "[22]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 78, |
| "end": 82, |
| "text": "[23]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 83, |
| "end": 87, |
| "text": "[24]", |
| "ref_id": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "start": 88, |
| "end": 92, |
| "text": "1994", |
| "ref_id": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Concluding Remarks", |
| "sec_num": "5" |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "Recent developments of this planner are described in[Hovy et al., 1992].", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| }, |
| { |
| "text": "7thInternational Generation Workshop \u2022 Kennebunkport, Maine \u2022 June 21-24, 1994", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "back_matter": [ |
| { |
| "text": "Many thanks are due to John Bateman for reading the various versions of this paper and for the long (phone)", |
| "cite_spans": [], |
| "ref_spans": [], |
| "eq_spans": [], |
| "section": "Acknowledgements", |
| "sec_num": null |
| } |
| ], |
| "bib_entries": { |
| "BIBREF2": { |
| "ref_id": "b2", |
| "title": "Towaxds an Architecture for Situated Text Generation", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "A", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Bateman", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "E", |
| "middle": [ |
| "A" |
| ], |
| "last": "Maler", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "E", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Teach", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "L", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Wanner", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1991, |
| "venue": "ICCICL", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "A. Bateman, E. A. Maler, E. TeAch, and L. Wanner. Towaxds an Architecture for Situated Text Generation. In ICCICL, Penang, Malaysia, 1991.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF3": { |
| "ref_id": "b3", |
| "title": "The Linguistic Basis of Text Generation", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": ";", |
| "middle": [ |
| "L" |
| ], |
| "last": "Danlos", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Dallas", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1987, |
| "venue": "", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Danlos, 1987] L. Dallas. The Linguistic Basis of Text Generation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF4": { |
| "ref_id": "b4", |
| "title": "Controlling Content Realization with Functional Unification Grammaxs", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "S", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Dob~", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "H.-J", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Novak", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1992, |
| "venue": "Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "[Dob~ and Novak, 1992] S. Dob~ and H.-J. Novak. From Constituent Planning to Text Planning. In H. Horacek and M. Zock, editors, New Concepts in Natural Lan- guage Generation. Pinter Publishers, London, 1992. [Elhadad and Robin, 1992] M. Elhadad emd J. Robin. Controlling Content Realization with Functional Unifi- cation Grammaxs. In R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. RSsner, and O. Stock, editors, Aspects of Automated Natural Lan- guage Generation. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/HeAdelberg, 1992.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF5": { |
| "ref_id": "b5", |
| "title": "Generating Coherent Argumentative Paragraphs", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Elhadad", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1992, |
| "venue": "Proceedings of COLING '92", |
| "volume": "II", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "638--644", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Elhadad, 1992] M. Elhadad. Generating Coherent Argu- mentative Paragraphs. In Proceedings of COLING '92, volume II, pages 638 -644, 1992.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF6": { |
| "ref_id": "b6", |
| "title": "How a Systemic Functional Grammar Works: The Role of Realization in Realization", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [ |
| "C" |
| ], |
| "last": "Emele", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Fawcett", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1985, |
| "venue": "A Typed-Feature Structure Unification-Based Approach to Generation", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Emele, 1989] M. C. Emele. A Typed-Feature Structure Unification-Based Approach to Generation. In Pro- ceedings of the WGNLC of the IECE, Oita University, Japan, 1989. [Fawcett et al., 1992] R. F. Fawcett, G. H. Tucker, and Y. Q. Lin. How a Systemic Functional Grammar Works: The Role of Realization in Realization. In H. Horacek and M. Zock, editors, New Concepts in Natural Lan- guage Generation. Pinter Publishers, London, 1992. [Halliday, 1985] M. A.K. Ha~liday. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. Edward Arnold, London, 1985. [Hovy et al., 1992] E. Hovy, J. Lavid, E. Maler, V. Mit- tal, and C. Paris. Employing Knowledge Resources in a New Text Planner Architecture. In R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. RSsner, and O. Stock, editors, Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation, Trento, Italy, 1992. Springer-Verlag.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF7": { |
| "ref_id": "b7", |
| "title": "Unresolved Issues in Paxagraph Planning", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "E", |
| "middle": [ |
| "H" |
| ], |
| "last": "Hovy", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1991, |
| "venue": "Current Research in Natural Language Generation", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": ", 1991] E. H. Hovy. Unresolved Issues in Paxagraph Planning. In R. Dale, C. Mellish, and M. rock, editors, Current Research in Natural Language Generation. Aca- demic Press, London, 1991.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF8": { |
| "ref_id": "b8", |
| "title": "Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": ";", |
| "middle": [ |
| "E H" |
| ], |
| "last": "Hovy", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [ |
| "C" |
| ], |
| "last": "Hovy ; W", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "S", |
| "middle": [ |
| "A" |
| ], |
| "last": "Mann", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [ |
| "D" |
| ], |
| "last": "Thompson ; D", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [ |
| "R" |
| ], |
| "last": "Mcdonald ; K", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "W", |
| "middle": [ |
| "R" |
| ], |
| "last": "Mckeown", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Swaxtout ; Mckeown", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1987, |
| "venue": "Automated Discourse Generation Using Discourse Structure Relations. Artificial Intelligence", |
| "volume": "63", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "341--386", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Hovy, 1993] E. H. Hovy. Automated Discourse Genera- tion Using Discourse Structure Relations. Artificial In- telligence, 63(1-2):341-386, 1993. [Mann and Thompson, 1987] W. C. Mann and S. A. Thompson. Rhetorical Structure Theory: A Theory of Text Organization. In L. Polanyi, editor, The Structure of Discourse. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood, New Jersey, 1987. [McDonald, 1991] D. D. McDonald. On the Place of Words in the Generation Process. In C. L. Paris, W. R. Swaxtout, mad W. C. Mann, editors, Natural Language Generation in Artificial Intelligence and Computational Linguistics. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991. [McKeown and Swaxtout, 1987] K. R. McKeown and W. R. Swaxtout. Language Generation and Explana- tion. In Annual Reviews in Computer Science, 1987. [McKeown et al., 1991] K. McKeown, M. EI- hadad, Y. Fukumoto, J. Lira, C. Lombaxdi, J Robin, and F. Smadja. Natural Language Generation in COMET.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF9": { |
| "ref_id": "b9", |
| "title": "Integrating Textplanning and Linguistic Choice by Annotating Linguistic Structures", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "In", |
| "middle": [ |
| "R" |
| ], |
| "last": "Dale", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "C", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Mellish", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "M", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Zock", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": ";", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Euk", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "Polgu~re ; I", |
| "middle": [ |
| "A" |
| ], |
| "last": "", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "A", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Polgu~re ; Marie", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "W", |
| "middle": [ |
| "W" |
| ], |
| "last": "Meteer ; M", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "; R", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Mercer", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Rubinoff", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1987, |
| "venue": "Current Research in Natural Language Generation", |
| "volume": "13", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "296--304", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "In R. Dale, C. Mellish, and M. Zock, editors, Current Research in Natural Language Generation. Academic Press, London, 1991. [Mel'euk and Polgu~re, 1987] I. A. Mel'euk and A. Polgu~re. A Formal Lexicon in the Meanlng-Text Theory (or How to Do Lexica with Words). Computa- tional Linguistics, 13(3-4):276-289, 1987. [Meteer, 1991] Marie W. Meteer. Bridging the generation gap between text pla~ming and linguistic realization. Computational Intelligence, 7(4):296 -304, 1991. [Meteer, 1992] M.W. Mercer. Ezpressability and the Prob- lem of Efficient Text Planning. Pinter, London, 1992. [Rubinoff, 1992] R. Rubinoff. Integrating Textplanning and Linguistic Choice by Annotating Linguistic Struc- tures. In R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. RSsner, and O. Stock, editors, Aspects of Automated Natural Language Gener- ation, Trento, Italy, 1992. Spfinger-Verlag.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF10": { |
| "ref_id": "b10", |
| "title": "Getting the Message across in RsT-Based Generation", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Scott", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": ";", |
| "middle": [ |
| "D" |
| ], |
| "last": "Souza", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "C", |
| "middle": [ |
| "S" |
| ], |
| "last": "Scott", |
| "suffix": "" |
| }, |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Souza", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1991, |
| "venue": "Current Research in Natural Language Generation", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "47--73", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "[Scott and de Souza, 1991] D. Scott and C. S. de Souza. Getting the Message across in RsT-Based Generation. In R. Dale, C. Mellish, and M. Zock, editors, Current Research in Natural Language Generation, pages 47-73. Academic Press, London, 1991. [TeAch, 1992] E. TeAch. Komet: 'Grammax Documenta- tion. Technical report, GMD/IPSI, Dexmstadt, Ger- many, 1992.", |
| "links": null |
| }, |
| "BIBREF11": { |
| "ref_id": "b11", |
| "title": "Aspects of Automated Natural Language Generation. Sprlnger-Vedag, Berlin/Heidelberg, 1992", |
| "authors": [ |
| { |
| "first": "", |
| "middle": [], |
| "last": "Vander Linden", |
| "suffix": "" |
| } |
| ], |
| "year": 1990, |
| "venue": "Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial Intelligence", |
| "volume": "", |
| "issue": "", |
| "pages": "", |
| "other_ids": {}, |
| "num": null, |
| "urls": [], |
| "raw_text": "Vander Linden et al., 1992] K. Vander Linden, S. Cure- ruing, and J. Martin. Using System Networks to Build Rhetorical Relations. In R. Dale, E. Hovy, D. Rfsner, and O. Stock, editors, Aspects of Auto- mated Natural Language Generation. Sprlnger-Vedag, Berlin/Heidelberg, 1992. [Wanner and Bateman, 1990] L. Wanner and J. A. Bate- man. Lexical Cooccurrence Relations in Text Genera- tion. In Proceedings o.t the 5th. Natural Language Gen- eration Workshop, Dawson, PA., 1990. [Wanner, 1992] L. Wanner. Lexical Choice and the Or- ganization of Lexical Resources in Text Generation. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Artificial In- telligence, Vienna, Austria, 1992. [Wanner, 1994] L. Wanner. On Lexically Biased Discourse Organization in Text Generation. In Proceedings of COLING '9~, Kyoto, Japan, 1994.", |
| "links": null |
| } |
| }, |
| "ref_entries": { |
| "FIGREF0": { |
| "text": "PGS structure for the sentence Opa schofl auf den Einbrecher und verwundete ihn tSdlich lit 'Grandpa shot at the burglax and wounded him deadly' module has to construct an input to the grammar (in KOMET m a systemic grammar of German [Te", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF1": { |
| "text": "be about to' So(to shoot) = shot Sl(tO ShOOt) = 9=nman, marksman Sinstr(to shoot) = r/fie, ann .... Ao(death) = mortal Vo(,ho0 = [to] ~hoot, [to] ~,, Anti(to hit) = [to] miss Gener( rifl,) = fire-arm Magn( injury) = ,e~ere mcep(com=) = [to] tap,~ It,to] (corn,0 Operl(shot) = [to] take (a shot) Prepar(to ,hoot) = [to] charge Prox(to shoot) = [to] aim at", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF2": { |
| "text": "gl. succ.eeainl ..\u00b0 eausatioa-~lt performzaee: 2:\" F ~or-saue~| I~':. ,ao~-re,aizaao,[ Note the difference between PGS (i.e. grammatical) roles and situation roles: the feature set { . .. actor's performance, situation-oriented, actor-salience} triggers the realization of the label of the situation (So) in the grammar as ACTEE; and the situational role ACTEE --aS GOAL.", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "FIGREF3": { |
| "text": "Caus2Operl A (Magn o) SynV0 (as in She commands respect --I (really) think highly of her); 2. V0 ^ because of o SUBJECT (as in I respect her because off her work); 3. CaussOperx (as in Her work makes me respect her).", |
| "num": null, |
| "uris": null, |
| "type_str": "figure" |
| }, |
| "TABREF0": { |
| "text": "......... A ..... [spe].ling: \"t~illch'] ................", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "content": "<table><tr><td colspan=\"2\">7th International Generation Workshop * Kennebunkport, Maine \u2022 June 21-24, 1994</td><td/><td/></tr><tr><td>\"</td><td colspan=\"2\">spelling: ~schiellen ~</td><td colspan=\"2\">\"~</td></tr><tr><td>(R1/coNsCqUZRCZ :ac\u00a2ion (SROOT / SITUATION :actor (GRAmDFATXER/ PERSON : in-focus '+) : actee (BURGLAR/ PERSON) : obligal;ory-roles ( : acl;or, : acl;ee, : sitllat ion ) ) :consequence (BZIIIG-DEAD / SITUATION :carrier (BURGLAR/ PERSON) : obligatory-roles ( : carrier,</td><td colspan=\"3\">/ [actor: I~LEX-OPAlperson: + [sp~tUag: \"Op-\"l ] / Lsin~'.da~: + J | [spelling: \"Zlnbrecher ] ,, [ actee: LEX-EINBRECHER[person: + | / L n\u00b0un: Ltheme: la] \u2022 \"~'0 .... -~pe].ling: ~verwunden ~] ,. ..... Lv~b: \u00f7 ]</td><td>1 ',</td></tr><tr><td>: situation)))</td><td>[qutdJty: \u00f7</td><td>]</td><td/></tr><tr><td/><td>[spellihg: \"Opa '~]</td><td/><td/></tr><tr><td>Figure 1: A simplified text plan for sentences with the meaning 'Grandfather shoots at a burglar; in conse-quence, the burglar is dead.'</td><td colspan=\"2\">actor: actee: .theme: [] LEX-OPA.I person: \u00f7 Lsi\"v ai~'-+ [spelling: \"Einbrecher\"] [ ,i LEX-EINBRECHERI person: \u00f7 Lsms~.l~: +</td><td>| J</td><td>.~</td></tr></table>", |
| "html": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF1": { |
| "text": ") are then given by all possible wordings of the entities this situation is defined by. For example, SHOOTING is a situation with the predicate named shooting, shot, etc.; with the participants ACTOR (named gunman, marksman, etc.) and ACTEE (named target, victim, ...);with the obligatory circumstantials INSTRUMENT (r/fie, gun, etc.) and MEANS (bullet), and optional circumstantials LOCATION, TIME, etc., which do not have a situation-specific lexicalization. Among the ACTOR'S actions are shoot, fire, kill, wound, etc. The lexicalizations of the relations between ACTOR and the predicate include, e.g., the performance of the situation (fire (a shot), take (a shot), etc.); those between AC-TOR and ACTEE --aim (at), hit, etc. The features of ACTOR include skilled, good, lousy, .... And so on.", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "content": "<table><tr><td colspan=\"4\">The various LFs --with the label of a situation</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">as keyword --supply us with all lexical expressions</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">that communicate the entities this situation is defined</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"4\">by; see the list above for examples with respect to</td></tr><tr><td colspan=\"2\">SHOOTING .4</td><td/></tr><tr><td>2.3</td><td>Organization</td><td colspan=\"2\">of Lexical Resources</td></tr><tr><td/><td colspan=\"2\">as a Multilayered</td><td>Model</td></tr></table>", |
| "html": null |
| }, |
| "TABREF5": { |
| "text": "Functional content of some LF sequences al", |
| "num": null, |
| "type_str": "table", |
| "content": "<table/>", |
| "html": null |
| } |
| } |
| } |
| } |
