User menu

Toward automatic determination of the semantics of connectives in large newspaper corpora

Bibliographic reference Bestgen, Yves ; Degand, Liesbeth ; Spooren, W. Toward automatic determination of the semantics of connectives in large newspaper corpora. In: Discourse Processes : a multidisciplinary journal, Vol. 41, no. 2, p. 175-193 (2006)
Permanent URL
  1. Berry M. W., International Journal of Supercomputer Application, 6, 13 (1992)
  2. Berry, M., Do, T., O'Brien, G., Krishna, V. & Varadhan, S. (1993).SVDPACKC: Version1.0 user's guide (Tech. Rep. No. CS-93-194). Knoxville: University of Tennessee.
  3. Bestgen, Y. (2002). Determination de la valence affective de termes dans de grands corpus de textes [Determining the affective valence of words in large scale text corpora]. In Y. Toussaint & C. Nedellec (Eds.), Actes du Colloque International sur la Fouille de Texte CIFT`02 (pp. 81-94). Nancy, France: INRIA.
  4. Biber, D. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
  5. Burgess C., Discourse Processes, 25, 211 (1998)
  6. Caenepeel, M. (1989). Aspect, temporal ordering and perspective in narrative fiction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland.
  7. Choi, F., Wiemer-Hastings P. & Moore J. (2001). Latent Semantic Analysis for text segmentation. In L. Lee & D. Harman (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2001 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing (pp. 109-117). Pittsburg, PA: Carnegie Mellon University.
  8. Conrad, S. & Biber, D. (Eds.). (2001). Variation in English: Multidimensional studies. Harlow, England: Longman.
  9. Daelemans, W., Zavrel, J., Berck, P. & Gillis, S. (1996). MBT: A memory-based part of speech tagger-generator. In E. Ejerhed & I. Dagan (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Very Large Corpora (pp. 14-27). Copenhagen, Denmark.
  10. Degand L., Nederlandse Taalkunde, 4, 309 (1998)
  11. Degand L., Functions of Language, 7, 173 (2000)
  12. Degand, L. (2001). Form and function of causation. A theoretical and empirical investigation of causal constructions in Dutch [Studies op het gebied van de Nederlandse taalkunde 5]. Leuven, The Netherlands: Peeters.
  13. Degand, L. (2005). De l'analyse contrastive a la traduction: le cas de la paire puisque aangezien [From contrastive analysis to translation: the case of the pair puisque-aangezien]. In G. Williams (Ed.), La linguistique de corpus (pp. 155-168). Rennes, France: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
  14. Degand, L., Spooren, W. & Bestgen, Y. (2004). On the use of automatic tolls for large-scale semantic analyses of causal connectives. In B. Webber & D. Byron (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2004 ACL Workshop on Discourse Annotation, Barcelona (pp. 25-32). East Stroudsberg, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics
  15. Deerwester Scott, Dumais Susan T., Furnas George W., Landauer Thomas K., Harshman Richard, Indexing by latent semantic analysis, 10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(199009)41:6<391::aid-asi1>;2-9
  16. Degand, L. & Pander Maat, H. (2003). A contrastive study of Dutch and French causal connectives on the Speaker Involvement Scale. In A. Verhagen & J. van de Weijer (Eds.), Usage based approaches to Dutch (pp. 175-199). Utrecht, The Netherlands: Landelijke Onderzoeksschool Taal.
  17. Foltz P. W., Discourse Processes, 25, 285 (1998)
  18. Kintsch W., Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 257 (2000)
  19. Kintsch Walter, Predication, 10.1207/s15516709cog2502_1
  20. Landauer Thomas K., Dumais Susan T., A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge., 10.1037//0033-295x.104.2.211
  21. Landauer T. K., Discourse Processes, 25, 259 (1998)
  22. Lemaire, B., Bianco, M., Sylvestre, E. & Noveck, I. (2001). Un modele de comprehension de textes fonde sur l'analyse de la semantique latente [A text comprehension model based on latent semantic analysis]. In H. Paugam Moisy, V. Nyckees, & J. Caron-Pargue (Eds.), La Cognition entre Individu et Societe: Actes du Colloque de l'ARCo (pp. 309-320). Paris: Hermes.
  23. Lofberg, L., Archer, D., Piao, S., Rayson, P., McEnery, T., Varantola, K., etal (2003). Porting an English semantic tagger to the Finnish language. In D. Archer, P. Rayson, A. Wilson, & T. McEnery (Eds.), Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2003 conference (pp. 457-464; UCREL Tech. Rep. No. 16). Lancaster, England: Lancaster University, UCREL.
  24. Oversteegen L., Discourse Processes, 24, 51 (1997)
  25. Pennebaker James W., Mehl Matthias R., Niederhoffer Kate G., Psychological Aspects of Natural Language Use: Our Words, Our Selves, 10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145041
  26. Pierard, S., Degand, L. & Bestgen Y. (2004). Vers une recherche automatique des marqueurs de la segmentation du discours [Towards automated retrieval of discourse segmentation markers]. Actes des 7esJournees internationales d'Analyse statistique des Donnees Textuelles. Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium.
  27. Pit, M. (2003). How to express yourself with a causal connective. Subjectivity and causal connectives in Dutch, German and French. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
  28. Pit M., Taalbeheersing, 19, 238 (1997)
  29. Popping, R. (2000). Computer-assisted text analysis. London: Sage.
  30. Rayson, P., Archer, D., Piao, S. L. & McEnery, T. (2004, May). The UCREL semantic analysis system. In Proceedings of the workshop on Beyond Named Entity Recognition Semantic labelling for NLP tasks in association with 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (pp. 7-12). Lisbon, Portugal.
  31. Renkema, J. (1996). Cohesion analysis and information flow: The case of "Because" versus "because". In C. Cremers & M. den Dikken (Eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 1996 (pp. 233-244). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
  32. Spooren, W. P. M. S. (1989). Some aspects of the form and interpretation of global contrastive coherence relations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
  33. Spooren W., Gramma, 14, 195 (1990)
  34. Stone, P. J. (1997). Thematic text analysis: New agendas for analyzing text content. In C. W. Roberts (Eds.), Text analysis for the social sciences: Methods for drawing statistical inferences from texts and transcripts (pp. 35-54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  35. Stone, P. J., Dunphy, D. C., Smith, M. S. & Ogilvie, D. M. (1966). The general inquirer: A computer approach to content analysis in the behavioral science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  36. van den Bosch, A. & Daelemans, W. (1999). Memory-based morphological analysis. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ACL'99 (pp. 285-292). New Brunswick, NJ: Association of Computational Linguistics.
  37. Wilson, A. & Rayson, P. (1993). Automatic content analysis of spoken discourse. In C. Souter & E. Atwell (Eds.), Corpus based computational linguistics (pp. 215-226). Amsterdam: Rodopi.