Advertisement

Paraphrastic Reformulations in Spoken Corpora

  • Iris Eshkol-Taravella
  • Natalia Grabar
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8686)

Abstract

Our work addresses the automatic detection of paraphrastic reformulation in French spoken corpora. The proposed approach is syntagmatic. It is based on specific markers and the specificities of the spoken language. Manual multi-dimensional annotation performed by two annotators provides fine-grained reference data. An automatic method is proposed in order to decide whether sentences contain or not paraphrastic relations. The obtained results show up to 66.4% precision. Analysis of the manual annotations indicates that few paraphrastic segments show morphological modifications (inflection, derivation or compounding) and that the syntactic equivalence between the segments is seldom respected, as these segments usually belong to different syntactic categories.

Keywords

reformulation paraphrase spoken corpora 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    François, F.: La communication inégale. Heurs et malheurs de l’interaction verbale. In: Actualités pédagogiques et psychologiques. Delachaux & Niestlé, Neuchâtel-Paris (1990)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bouamor, H., Max, A., Vilnat, A.: Étude bilingue de l’acquisition et de la validation automatiques de paraphrases sous-phrastiques. TAL 53(1), 11–37 (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boucheron, S.: La langue de l’un, et celle de l’autre: l’entre parenthèses comme aire de reformulation. In: Répétition, Altération, Reformulation, pp. 113–118. Presses Universitaires Franc-Comtoises, Besançon (2000)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martin, R.: Inférence, antonymie et paraphrase. Klincksieck, Paris (1976)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vezin, L.: Les paraphrases: étude sémantique, leur rôle dans l’apprentissage. L’année Psychologique 76(1), 177–197 (1976)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fuchs, C.: Paraphrase et énonciation. Orphys, Paris (1994)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Melčuk, I.: Paraphrase et lexique dans la théorie linguistique sens-texte. Lexique et paraphrase Lexique 6, 13–54 (1988)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vila, M., Antònia Mart, M., Rodríguez, H.: Paraphrase concept and typology. a linguistically based and computationally oriented approach. Procesamiento del Lenguaje Natural 46, 83–90 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bhagat, R., Hovy, E.: What is a paraphrase? Computational Linguistics 39(3), 463–472 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Flottum, K.: Dire et redire. La reformulation introduite par ”c’est-à-dire”. Thèse de doctorat, Hogskolen i Stavanger, Stavanger (1995)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fujita, A.: Typology of paraphrases and approaches to compute them. In: CBA to Paraphrasing & Nominalization, Barcelona, Spain (2010) (Invited talk)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Milicevic, J.: La paraphrase: Modélisation de la paraphrase langagière. Peter Lang (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Elhadad, N., Sutaria, K.: Mining a lexicon of technical terms and lay equivalents. In: BioNLP, pp. 49–56 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rossari, C.: De l’exploitation de quelques connecteurs reformulatifs dans la gestion des articulations discursives. Pratiques 75, 111–124 (1992)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Blanche-Benveniste, C., Bilger, M., Rouget, C., Van Den Eynde, K.: Le français parlé. Études grammaticales. CNRS Éditions, Paris (1991)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hagège, C.: L’homme de paroles. Contribution linguistique aux sciences humaines. Fayard, Paris (1985)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gülich, E., Kotschi, T.: Les actes de reformulation dans la consultation La dame de Caluire. In: Bange, P. (ed.) L’analyse des Interactions Verbales. La Dame de Caluire: une Consultation, pp. 15–81. P Lang, Berne (1987)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kanaan, L.: Reformulations, contacts de langues et compétence de communication: analyse linguistique et interactionnelle dans des discussions entre jeunes Libanais francophones. Thèse de doctorat, Université d’Orléans, Orléans (2011)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rossari, C.: Les opérations de reformulation. Analyse du processus et des marques dans une perspective contrastive français-italien (1993)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Madnani, N., Dorr, B.J.: Generating phrasal and sentential paraphrases: A survey of data-driven methods. Computational Linguistics 36, 341–387 (2010)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Androutsopoulos, I., Malakasiotis, P.: A survey of paraphrasing and textual entailment methods. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 38, 135–187 (2010)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Malakasiotis, P., Androutsopoulos, I.: Learning textual entailment using SVMs and string similarity measures. In: ACL-PASCAL Workshop on Textual Entailment and Paraphrasing, pp. 42–47 (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lin, D., Pantel, L.: Dirt - discovery of inference rules from text. In: ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 323–328 (2001)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Paşca, M., Dienes, P.: Aligning needles in a haystack: Paraphrase acquisition across the Web. In: Dale, R., Wong, K.-F., Su, J., Kwong, O.Y. (eds.) IJCNLP 2005. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 3651, pp. 119–130. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Barzilay, R., McKeown, L.: Extracting paraphrases from a parallel corpus. In: ACL, pp. 50–57 (2001)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ibrahim, A., Katz, B., Lin, J.: Extracting structural paraphrases from aligned monolingual corpora. In: International Workshop on Paraphrasing, pp. 57–64 (2003)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Quirk, C., Brockett, C., Dolan, W.: Monolingual machine translation for paraphrase generation. In: EMNLP, pp. 142–149 (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shinyama, Y., Sekine, S., Sudo, K., Grishman, R.: Automatic paraphrase acquisition from news articles. In: Proceedings of HLT, pp. 313–318 (2002)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sekine, S.: Automatic paraphrase discovery based on context and keywords between NE pairs. In: International Workshop on Paraphrasing, pp. 80–87 (2005)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bannard, C., Callison-Burch, C.: Paraphrasing with bilingual parallel corpora. In: ACL, pp. 597–604 (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Madnani, N., Resnik, P., Dorr, B., Schwartz, R.: Applying automatically generated semantic knowledge: A case study in machine translation. In: NSF Symposium on Semantic Knowledge Discovery, Organization and Use, pp. 60–61 (2008)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Callison-Burch, C., Cohn, T., Lapata, M.: Parametric: An automatic evaluation metric for paraphrasing. In: COLING, pp. 97–104 (2008)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kok, S., Brockett, C.: Hitting the right paraphrases in good time. In: NAACL, pp. 145–153 (2010)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Eshkol-Taravella, I., Baude, O., Maurel, D., Hriba, L., Dugua, C., Tellier, I.: Un grand corpus oral disponible: le corpus d’Orléans 1968-2012. Traitement Automatique de Langues 52(3), 17–46 (2012)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hölker, K.: Zur Analyse von Markern. Franz Steiner, Stuttgart (1988)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Beeching, K.: La co-variation des marqueurs discursifs bon, c’est-à-dire, enfin, hein, quand même, quoi et si vous voulez: une question d’identité? Langue Française 154(2), 78–93 (2007)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hwang, Y.: Eh bien, alors, enfin et disons en français parlé contemporain. L’Information Grammaticale 57, 46–48 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Petit, M.: Discrimination prosodique et représentation du lexique: application aux emplois des connecteurs discursifs. Thèse de doctorat, Université d’Orléans, Orléans (2009)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Teston-Bonnard, S.: Je veux dire est-il toujours une marque de reformulation? In: Bot, M.L., Schuwer, M., Richard, E. (eds.) Rivages linguistiques. La Reformulation. Marqueurs linguistiques. Stratégies énonciatives, pp. 51–69. PUR, Rennes (2008)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Dupont, Y., Tellier, I., Courmet, A.: Un segmenteur-étiqueteur et un chunker pour le français. Technical report, LIFO, Université d’Orléans, demo (2012)Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Cohen, J.: A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement 20(1), 37–46 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Iris Eshkol-Taravella
    • 1
  • Natalia Grabar
    • 2
  1. 1.CNRS UMR 7270 LLL, Université d’OrléansOrléansFrance
  2. 2.CNRS UMR 8163 STL, Université Lille 3Villeneuve d’AscqFrance

Personalised recommendations

Cite paper

Buy options