Advertisement

An Empirical Investigation of the Relation Between Coreference and Quotations: Can a Pronoun Located in Quotations Find Its Referent?

  • Shana Watters
  • Jeanette Gundel
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4410)

Abstract

Many reference resolution studies omit anaphoric forms found in quotations, assuming that they may need special handling as there is insufficient discourse context to determine the referent. This paper reports on an empirical study performed to evaluate this assumption. Specifically, the study addresses the following questions: Are anaphoric expressions found in quotations sufficiently different to justify ignoring them, and is there enough context available for a system to determine the referents of anaphoric expressions found within quoted text? The current study focuses on the pronoun it within the Givenness Hierarchy framework of Gundel, Hedberg, and Zacharski [13]. We find that this framework can be used in most cases to locate the antecedent for referential it found in quoted text.

Keywords

Computational Linguistics Focus Status Preceding Sentence Coreference Resolution Anaphora Resolution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Train Derails in Australia. Associated Press (Dec. 12, 2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagga, A.: Evaluation of Coreferences and Coreference Resolution Systems. In: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC ’98), May 1998, pp. 563–566 (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banbury, J.: How to Build a T.Rex. Discover 27(5) (2006)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Byron, D.K., Tetreault, J.R.: ’A Flexible Architecture for Reference Resolution. In: Proceedings of the 9th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (EACL ’99), pp. 229–232 (1999)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cardie, C., Wagstaff, K.: Noun Phrase Coreference as Clustering. In: Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing and Very Large Corpora, pp. 82–89. Association for Computational Linguistics (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Castaño, J., Zhang, J., Pustejovsky, J.: Anaphora Resolution in Biomedical Literature. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Reference Resolution, Alicante, Spain (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cherry, C., Bergsma, S.: An Expectation Maximization Approach to Pronoun Resolution. In: Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Computational Natural Language Learning (CoNLL), Ann Arbor, June 2005, pp. 88–95 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dimitrov, M., et al.: A Light-weight Approach to Coreference Resolution for Named Entities in Text. In: Proceedings of the 4th Discourse Anaphora and Anaphor Resolution Colloquium (DAARC), Lisbon, September 18-20 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Frommer, F.J.: Mental Health Bill to Face House Vote. Associated Press (Dec. 28, 2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Furst, R.: U, May Sue U.S. to Recover Residents’ Social Security Taxes. Star Tribune (Dec. 27, 2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ge, N., Hale, J., Charniak, E.: A Statistical Approach to Anaphora Resolution. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Workshop on Very Large Corpora, Montreal, Canada, pp. 161–170 (1998)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gundel, J.K., Hedberg, N., Zacharski, R.: Demonstrative Pronouns in Natural Discourse. In: Branco, A., McEnery, T., Mitkov, R. (eds.) Proceedings of the 5th Discourse Anaphora and Anaphor Resolution Colloquium (DAARC 2004), Ediçöes Colibri, Lisbon (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gundel, J., Hedberg, N., Zacharski, R.: Cognitive Status and the Form of Referring Expressions in Discourse. Language 69(2), 274–307 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gundel, J.K., Hedberg, N., Zacharski, R.: Definite Descriptions and Cognitive Status in English: Why Accommodation is Unnecessary. Journal of English Language and Linguistics 5(2), 273–295 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gundel, J.K.: Information Structure and Referential Givenness/Newness: ’How Much Belongs in the Grammar? In: Müller, S. (ed.) Proceedings of the HPSG03 Conference, CSLI Publications, Stanford (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gundel, J.K.: Coding Protocol for Status on the Givenness Hierarchy. Language and Cognition Class Handout (2004)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hitt, J.: CSI: Jurassic. Discover 27(9) (2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jesdanun, A. (ed.): Anti-Spam Tool Ceases As Spammers Evolve. Associated Press (Dec. 27, 2006)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Keath, L.: 3 Million Muslims Begin Annual Hajj. Associated Press (Dec. 28, 2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kennedy, C., Boguraev, B.: Anaphora for Everyone: Pronominal Anaphora Resolution without a Parser. In: Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Computational Linguistics, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 113–118 (1996)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kupść, A., et al.: Pronominal Anaphora Resolution for Unrestricted Text. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2004) (2004)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kunzig, R.: 20,000 Microbes Under the Sea. Discover 25(3) (2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Limjoco, V.: Vampire Weed. Discover, Web Exclusives (Oct. 26, 2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Matthews, K.: Murders Up in New York, Other Big Cities. Associated Press (Dec. 27, 2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mitkov, R.: Anaphora Resolution. Studies in Language and Linguistics. Pearson Longman, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mitkov, R.: Towards a More Consistent and Comprehensive Evaluation of Anaphora Resolution Algorithms and Systems. In: Proceedings of the Discourse Anaphora and Anaphora Resolution Colloquium (DAARC-2000), Lancaster, UK, pp. 96–107 (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Müller, C., Rapp, S., Strube, M.: Applying Co-Training to Reference Resolution. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Philadelphia, July 2002, pp. 352–359 (2002)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Neumeister, L.: Fans Honor ’Godfather of Soul’ at Apollo. Associated Press (Dec. 28, 2006)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Ng, V., Cardie, C.: Improving Machine Learning Approaches to Coreference Resolution. In: Proceedings of the 40th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Philadelphia, July 2002, pp. 104–111 (2002)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Robertson, J.: Online Shoppers Overwhelm iTunes Store. Associated Press (Dec. 28, 2006)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Salmon-Alt, S., Romary, L.: Data Categories for a Normalized Reference Annotation Scheme. In: Proceedings of the 5th Discourse Anaphora and Anaphor Resolution Colloquium (DAARC), S. Miguel, Azores, Portugal, September 23-24, 2004, pp. 145–150 (2004)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Shah, A.: Karzai: Border Fence Won. Associated Press (Dec. 28, 2006)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Soon, W.M., Ng, H.T., Lim, D.C.Y.: A Machine Learning Approach to Coreference Resolution of Noun Phrases. Computational Linguistics 27(4), 521–544 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tetreault, J.R.: Analysis of Syntax-Based Pronoun Resolution Methods. In: Proceedings of the 37th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), pp. 602–605 (1999)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tetreault, J.R.: A Corpus-Based Evaluation of Centering and Pronoun Resolution. Computational Linguistics 27(4), 507–520 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Torchia, C.: U.S. Military Death Toll in Iraq Exceeds Number of Deaths in 9/11 Attacks. Associated Press (Dec. 25, 2006)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Watters, S.: The Givenness Hierarchy and the Pronoun ’It’: An Empirical Study Investigating the Cognitive Status of Being ’In Focus’. Unpublished manuscript, M.A. in Linguistics project paper, University of Minnesota, MN (2006)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Weber, H.R.: US Airways CEO: Not Upping Delta Offer. Associated Press (Dec. 28, 2006)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yang, X., et al.: Coreference Resolution Using Competition Learning Approach. In: Proceedings of the 41st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL), Sapporo, Japan, pp. 176–183 (2003)Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zimmer, C.: Testing Darwin. Discover 26(2) (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shana Watters
    • 1
  • Jeanette Gundel
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and Engineering 
  2. 2.Department of Linguistics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, 55455USA

Personalised recommendations