If you can't read please download the document
Upload
sadah
View
69
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Coherence structure and lexical cohesion in expository and persuasive texts. Constraints in Discourse III 30 July – 1 August 2008 Ildikó Berzlánovich, Markus Egg, Gisela Redeker University of Groningen Center for Language and Cognition. The MTO Project. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Coherence structure and lexical cohesion in expository and persuasive textsConstraints in Discourse III30 July 1 August 2008
Ildik Berzlnovich, Markus Egg, Gisela RedekerUniversity of GroningenCenter for Language and Cognition
Modelling Textual Organisation (MTO)financed by a grant from NWOproject leaders: Markus EggGisela Redeker
http://www.let.rug.nl/mto/The MTO Project
Lexical cohesion is more closely aligned with coherence in thematically organised texts than in intentionally organised texts.
Specifically:close alignment in expository textsless or no alignment in persuasive textsAlignment hypothesis
Discourse organisationCorpusMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion)Results (coherence, cohesion, alignment)ConclusionFuture work Outline
GENRE 1 GENRE 2 COHERENCE COHERENCE COHESION COHESION text 1 text 1 COHERENCE COHERENCE COHESION COHESION text 2 text 2 Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
GENRE 1 GENRE 2 COHERENCE COHERENCE COHESION COHESION text 1 text 1 COHERENCE COHERENCE COHESION COHESION text 2 text 2 Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
GENRE 1 GENRE 2 COHERENCE COHERENCE COHESION COHESION text 1 text 1 COHERENCE COHERENCE COHESION COHESION text 2 text 2 Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
GENRE 1 GENRE 2 COHERENCE COHERENCE COHESION COHESION text 1 text 1 COHERENCE COHERENCE COHESION COHESION text 2 text 2 Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Genreclass of communicative events with common communicative purposes shared in a discourse community (Swales 1990)global schematic structure moves
Coherenceunderlying relations between propositions in text
Cohesionsemantic relations between surface elements in textDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Corpus in the MTO projectexpository texts- encyclopedia entries- short news storiespersuasive texts- fundraising letters - advertisementsmixed genres- news analyses, commentaries, editorials (?)- reviewsDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Texts for pilot studyexpository texts: encyclopedia entries (EE01, EE02)persuasive texts: fundraising letters (FL01, FL02)
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Encyclopedia entriesname the objectdefine the objectdescribe in general (e.g., size, age, category)describe details (e.g., surface, past/future development, discovery)
Fundraising letters - seven moves (Upton 2002)get attentionintroduce the cause and/or establish credentials of organisationsolicit responseoffer incentivereference insertexpress gratitudeconclude with pleasantriesDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Fragment from EE01 (De Zon)Na vorming van de zon en het zonnestelsel is onze ster begonnen aan een lang bestaan als zogenaamde dwergster. In de dwergfase van het leven van de zon wordt de energie die ze uitstraalt in het centrum geproduceerd door fusie van waterstof tot helium. De zon is nu ongeveer vijf miljard jaar oud en heeft nog brandstof voor nog eens vijf miljard jaar.
After the forming of the sun and the solar system, our star began its long existence as a so-called dwarf star. In the dwarf phase of its life, the energy that the sun gives off is generated in its core through the fusion of hydrogen into helium. The sun is about five billion years old now and it still has enough fuel for another five billion years.Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Rhetorical Structure Theory (Mann & Thompson 1988)functional relations between propositionsreconstruction of writers purposessubject-matter vs. presentational relationsmononuclear relations multinuclear relations
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
hierarchy
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
hierarchyDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
lexical cohesion network of relationslexical semantic relations (Halliday & Matthiessen 2004, Morris & Hirst 1991 )- repetition- systematic semantic relationshyponymy (hyperonymy, co-hyponymy)meronymy (holonymy, co-meronymy)synonymyantonymy- collocationDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Repetition
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Hyponymy
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Meronymy
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Synonymy
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Collocation
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Centrality of discourse unitsDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future workin coherence structure
in lexical cohesionEDUs Moves smallest units top level in RST tree of RST tree
lexical cohesive links average lexical per EDU cohesive density
EE01 NAME DEFINE DESCRIBE IN GENERALDESCRIBE DETAILSDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
FL01GETATTENTION GETATTENTION INTRODUCE CAUSECREDENTIALS OF ORGANISATION SOLICIT RESPONSE EXPRESS GRATITUDEDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Discourse organisation Results (coherence, cohesion, alignment)Corpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Coherence relationsEE01 EE02FL01FL02Subject-matter (incl. multinuclear) relations28261010Presentational relations 0 11210
Discourse organisation Results (coherence, cohesion, alignment)Corpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Discourse organisation Results (coherence, cohesion, alignment)Corpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
EE011NAME2-4DEFINE5-16DESCRIBE IN GENERAL17-31DESCRIBE DETAILSDiscourse organisation Results (coherence, cohesion, alignment)Corpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Chart5
20
315
1619
2818
269
129
85
31
00
170
11
11
01
01
01
01
136
12
53
05
22
84
106
14
30
00
22
20
11
01
10
external links
internal links
Number of external and internal cohesive links
FL01 external vs internal links
EDUs123456789101112131415161718192021222324
external links1210501725292031154105110005
internal links337155041101327421222110
total links151312122761030443128317312115
X5X
XXX
FL01 external vs internal links
external links
internal links
Number of external and internal cohesive links
EE01 external vs internal links
EDUs12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031
external links23162826128301711000013150281013022101
internal links0151918995100111111623524640020110
total21835463521134017221111193854121653042211
EE01 external vs internal links
external links
internal links
Number of external and internal cohesive links
Sheet3
FL011-8GET ATTENTION9-11INTRO-DUCECAUSE12-19ESTABLISHCREDENTIALS OFORGANISATION20-23SOLICIT RESPONSE24EXPRESSGRATITUDEDiscourse organisation Results (coherence, cohesion, alignment)Corpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
Diagramm2
123
103
57
01
175
25
50
24
91
21
00
31
13
12
57
44
12
01
52
12
102
01
01
50
external links
internal links
Number of external and internal cohesive links
FL01 external vs internal links
EDUs123456789101112131415161718192021222324
external links1210501725292031154105110005
internal links337155041101327421222110
total links151312122761030443128317312115
X5X
XXX
FL01 external vs internal links
external links
internal links
Number of external and internal cohesive links
EE01 external vs internal links
EDUs12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031
external links23162826128301711000013150281013022101
internal links0151918995100111111623524640020110
total21835463521134017221111193854121653042211
EE01 external vs internal links
external links
internal links
Number of external and internal cohesive links
Sheet3
EE01Discourse organisation Results (coherence, cohesion, alignment)Corpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
FL01Discourse organisation Results (coherence, cohesion, alignment)Corpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
EE: Define is the central move both in coherence and in lexical cohesionFL: Solicit response is the central move in coherence, but no central move was found for lexical cohesion
alignment much closer for EE than for FLDiscourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work
corpus building- more texts- more genres (e.g., advertisements, reviews)
refinement of centrality measurescomparison of RST trees and tree structures based on lexical cohesion
Discourse organisation ResultsCorpus ConclusionMethod (genre, coherence, cohesion) Future work