Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  discourse relations
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Exemplification in academic discourse structure

100%
Kucelman E.
Linguistics Beyond and Within
|
2016
|
vol. 2
111-125
EN
The study examines the role that exemplification plays in academic discourse. As the latest approaches emphasize, discourse is an interactional activity involving as participants both the writer and the reader. In order to ensure the proper understanding of his/her message, writers make use of different discourse strategies such as reformulation, specification, generalization or elaboration. We focus on how exemplification, viewed as the satellite, contributes to the better recognition of the subject matter, which is understood as the nucleus. In the first two sections of the study, we present an overview of discourse relations which call for the use of constructions applied in exemplification. The second part, which is based on the linguistic material obtained from a close scrutiny of two classic articles from the field of linguistics and one linguistic textbook, is devoted to the description of how exemplification contributes to specification and elaboration. We try to find and describe the specific relations, for example set-member, whole-part, process-step and object-attribute which hold between the nucleus and the satellite. Finally, we attempt at listing discourse areas which call for exemplification. The study illustrates that what are known as separate discourse relations are in fact closely related.
2

Zachycení výstavby textu v Pražském závislostním korpusu

63%
Zikánová Š., Poláková L., Jínová P., Nedoluzhko A., Rysová M., Mírovský J., Hajičová E.
Slovo a slovesnost: časopis pro otázky teorie a kultury jazyka (Slovo a slovesnost: A journal for the theory of language and language cultivation)
|
2015
|
vol. 76
|
issue 3
163-198
EN
Language corpora annotation schemes cover various layers of sentence description nowadays – from morphology to semantics. Annotation projects concerning phenomena beyond the sentence boundaries, however, started to attract the attention of corpus linguists only recently. In the present contribution, we describe a unified approach to analysis of discourse phenomena, aimed and developed for a large-scale annotation of Czech empirical data of the Prague Dependency Treebank. This approach is based on two fundamental pillars: (i) it exploits the results of one of the first complex schemes for discourse annotation proposed and realized in the Penn Discourse Treebank for English; (ii) it follows the Praguian Functional Generative Description and treebanking tradition, taking advantage of the tectogrammatical (underlying) layer of sentence analysis and extending it to a full discourse-level description. Our analysis concentrates on two major aspects of discourse coherence: (i) on discourse relations (semantic relations between discourse segments) and discourse connectives as their lexical anchors; and (ii) on coreference and the so-called bridging anaphora. We present a detailed description of the annotation scheme and procedure, address individual problematic issues and offer basic corpus statistics and annotation evaluation.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Eksplicytność a implicytność w świetle analizy korpusowej (meta)tekstu

51%
Heliasz-Nowosielska C., Ogrodniczuk M.
Linguistica Copernicana
|
2019
|
vol. 16
EN
The article analyzes differences in the description of discourse relations in corpus research, in particular with the reference to the use of discourse markers – expressions that tie together subsequent fragments of the text and provide information about the nature of these relations. The text presents three concepts of the description of explicitness and implicitness of the content: Rhetorical Structure Theory, Penn Discourse Treebank and the author’s original proposal and indicates the consequences of each solution. The analysis of relations with particles as metatexual expressions defined in accordance with The Nest Dictionary of Polish reveals the possibility of expressing explicitness as a representation of elements of informational structure shaped by the use of a given particle, and implicitness as a lack of representation of certain elements of this type.
PL
W niniejszym artykule zostały poddane analizie różnice w opisie powiązań tekstowych (relacji dyskursywnych) w badaniach korpusowych, w szczególności w odniesieniu do kwestii użycia ustanawiających je markerów dyskursywnych – wyrażeń wiążących ze sobą kolejne fragmenty tekstu i niosących informacje o charakterze tych powiązań. Tekst przedstawia trzy koncepcje opisu eksplicytności i implicytności przekazu treści: Rhetorical Structure Theory, Penn Discourse Treebank i propozycję autorską oraz wskazuje konsekwencje poszczególnych rozwiązań. Analiza relacji z partykułami jako wyrażeniami metatekstowymi zdefiniowanymi zgodnie ze „Słownikiem gniazdowym partykuł polskich”, przeprowadzona na potrzeby korpusu polskiego ujawnia możliwość ujęcia eksplicytności jako obecności w tekście reprezentacji elementów struktury informacyjnej ukształtowanej przez użycie danej partykuły, a implicytności jako braku reprezentacji pewnych elementów tego typu.
4
Content available remote

K možnostem korpusového zpracování nadvětných jevů:

45%
Poláková L.
Naše řeč (Our Speech)
|
2014
|
vol. 97
|
issue 4-5
241-258
EN
The present contribution is a theoretical and methodological study of the possibilities of processing discourse through the use of corpus methods. Despite the description complexity of phenomena “beyond the sentence boundary”, we argue that even more ways of systematic analysis are possible. Taking into account various attempts during the last decade to create discourse-annotated corpora, a reliable way to proceed in any such analysis is shown to be to distinguish between different layers of discourse analysis (in particular between “semantic” and “pragmatic” aspects) and to stick with the linguistic form as opposed to classifying phenomena with no surface realization.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.