Argumentative texts and clause types

Becker, Maria; Palmer, Alexis; Frank, Anette

doi:10.18653/v1/w16-2803

Cited by 14 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 The texts were written in German and translated to English; our analysis addresses the original German texts.…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Before annotating the microtexts, we first segment them into clauses (cf. [3]). As seen in Table 1, an argumentative component can in fact consist of several SE segments.…”

Section: Extending Argumentative Annotations Of Microtexts To Se Typementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The overall 188 modal verbs included in the microtexts occur in 31% of all argumentative segments (57% of conclusions and 26% of premises) and are thus at least partly responsible for the high number of STATES, due to the coercion of EVENTS to STATES when embedded under a modal verb. In comparison, only 5% of the segments of the mixed-genre subcorpus introduced in Section 4, including genres such as fiction, report, commentary and TED talks (see [3]), contain modal verbs. Due to this coercion, the contribution of modality indicators is orthogonal to SE types.…”

Section: Modal Verbs Within Argumentative and Non-argumentative Textsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In previous work [3], we have annotated the 112 microtexts in this corpus with semantic clause types in the form of situation entities [8]. 2 In this prior work, we observed striking differences in the distribution of semantic clause types in argumentative texts, as compared to other textual genres.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Semantic clause types and modality as features for argument analysis1

Becker

Palmer

Frank

2017

AAC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This work investigates the role of semantic clause types and modality in argumentative texts. We annotate argumentative microtexts with situation entity (SE) classes and additionally label the segments that contain modal verbs with their modal senses. We analyse the correlation both of SE classes and of modal verbs and senses with components of argument structures (such as premises and conclusions) and their functions (such as support and rebuttal). We find interesting tendencies in the correlations between both argument components and argumentative functions with SE types.We also see interesting differences in the distributions of modal verbs and senses within different argumentative components and functions, as well as evidence that modal senses can be helpful to distinguish conclusions and premises. We conclude that both semantic clause types and modal senses can be deployed for automatic recognition and fine-grained classification of argumentative text passages.

show abstract

“…3 The texts were written in German and translated to English; our analysis addresses the original German texts.…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Before annotating the microtexts, we first segment them into clauses (cf. [3]). As seen in Table 1, an argumentative component can in fact consist of several SE segments.…”

Section: Extending Argumentative Annotations Of Microtexts To Se Typementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Modal Verbs Within Argumentative and Non-argumentative Textsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Semantic clause types and modality as features for argument analysis1

Becker

Palmer

Frank

2017

AAC

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the semantics/argumentative interface, modals and evidentials always work as indicators of argumentative discourse relations by signaling the presence of premises-conclusion relations (Rocci 2008(Rocci , 2012Musi 2016a) and by constraining what types of standpoints and premises (Becker et al 2016;Musi 2016b) and argumentation schemes (Miecznikowski and Musi 2015) that might appear depending on their lexical semantics. These features indicate that that there is a Fig.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Discovering Argumentative Patterns in Energy Polylogues: A Macroscope for Argument Mining

Musi

Aakhus

2018

Argumentation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A macroscope is proposed and tested here for the discovery of the unique argumentative footprint that characterizes how a collective (e.g., group, online community) manages differences and pursues disagreement through argument in a polylogue. The macroscope addresses broader analytic problems posed by various conceptualizations of large-scale argument, such as fields, spheres, communities, and institutions. The design incorporates a two-tier methodology for detecting argument patterns of the arguments performed in arguing by an interactive collective that produces views, or topographies, of the ways that issues are generated in the making and defending of standpoints. The design premises for the macroscope build on insights about argument patterns from pragma-dialectical theory by incorporating research and theory on disagreement management and the Argumentum Model of Topics. The design reconceptualizes prototypical and stereotypical argument patterns for characterizing large-scale argumentation. A prototype of the macroscope is tested on data drawn from six threads about oil-drilling and fracking from the subreddit Changemyview. The implementation suggests the efficacy of the macroscope's design and potential for identifying what communities make controversial and how the disagreement space in a polylogue is managed through stereotypical argument patterns in terms of claims/premises, inferential relations, and presentational devices.

show abstract