Advertisement

The Text Simplification in TERENCE

  • Barbara Arfé
  • Jane Oakhill
  • Emanuele Pianta
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 292)

Abstract

In this paper we present the TERENCE system of text simplification. The TERENCE simplification system is intended for use by researchers, educators and policy makers. The method is innovative in the field for two reasons. Firstly, differently from other methods of automatic or manual simplification, it offers a graded, cumulative, simplification of texts. Secondly, differently from other existing methods, it offers a system tailored for two groups of poor comprehenders (deaf and hearing). This paper illustrates the process of text simplification used in TERENCE and presents preliminary results of its testing with elementary school children.

Keywords

Readability text simplification reading difficulties 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Arfé, B., Boscolo, P.: Causal coherence in deaf and hearing students’ written narratives. Discourse Processes 42, 271–300 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arfé, B., Oakhill, J., Pianta, E., Alrifai, M.: Story simplification user guide. Technical report D.2.2, TERENCE Project (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arfé, B., Perondi, I.: Deaf and hearing students’ referential strategies in writing: What referential cohesion tells us about deaf students’ literacy development. First Language 28, 355–374 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Benjamin, R.G.: Reconstructing readability: Recent developments and reccommendations in the Analysis of text difficulty. Educational Psychology Review 24, 63–88 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Britton, B., Gülgöz, S., Glynn, S.: Impact of good and poor writing on learners: Research and theory. In: Learning from Textbooks: Theory and Practice, pp. 1–46. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1993)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cain, K., Oakhill, J.V.: Profiles of children with specific comprehension difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology 76(4), 683–696 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carroll, J., Minnen, G., Pearce, D., Canning, Y., Devlin, S., Tait, J.: Simplifying text for language-impaired readers. In: Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the European Chapter of the ACL (EACL 1999), Bergen, Norway (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cornoldi, C., Colpo, G.: Prove di lettura MT per la scuola elementare (Tests of reading MT for primaryschool). Organizzazioni Speciali, Firenze (1998)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crossley, S.A., Allen, D., McNamara, D.S.: Text readability and intuitive simplification: A comparison of readability formulas. Reading in a Foreign Language 23, 86–101 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    De Belder, J., Moens, M.F.: Text simplification for children. In: Proceedings of the SIGIR Workshop on Accessible Search Systems, Geneva, July 23, pp. 19–26. ACM (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gunning, T.G.: The role of readability in today’s classrooms. Topics in Language Disorders 23(3), 175–189 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kintsch, W.: The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction–integration model. Psychological Review 95, 163–182 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kintsch, W.: The Construction-Integration model of text comprehension and its implications for instruction. In: Ruddell, R., Unrau, N. (eds.) Theroretiocal Models and Processes of Reading, 5th edn. International Reading Association (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Larsen-Freeman, D.: Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    McNamara, D., Kintsch, W.: Learning from texts: Effects of prior knowledge and text coherence. Discourse Processes 22, 247–288 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McNamara, D., Kintsch, E., Songer, N., Kintsch, W.: Are good texts always better? Interactions of text coherence, background knowledge, and levels of understanding in learning from text. Cognition and Instruction 14, 1–43 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Meyer, B.J.F.: Text coherence and readability. Topics in Language Disorders 23(3), 204–224 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mich, O., Vettori, C.: E-Stories for Educating Deaf Children in Literacy. Description and Evaluation of the DAMA procedure. Technical Report, LODE project (2011), http://lode.fbk.eu/pubblicazioni.html
  19. 19.
    Oakhill, J.V.: Inferential and memory skills in children’s comprehension of stories. British Journal of Educational Psychology 54, 31–39 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Young, D.: Linguistic simplification of SL reading material: Effective instructional practice? The Modern Language Journal 83, 350–366 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Developmental Psychology and SocializationUniversity of PadovaPadovaItaly
  2. 2.School of PsychologyUniversity of SussexBrightonUK
  3. 3.FBKPovoItaly

Personalised recommendations