Accounting for Discourse Relations: Constituency and Dependency
B. Webber. Intelligent Linguistic Architectures, (2006)
Abstract
At the start of my career, I had the good fortune of working with
Ron Kaplan on Bill Woods’ Lunar system (Woods et al., 1972). One
day, in talking with Ron, I marvelled to him over the range of syntac-
tic constructions I was able to implement in Lunar’s ATN grammar
formalism. Ron replied was that you could implement anything in an
ATN: the point was, rather, to identify the minimal machinery required
for a task. This sensible advice I subsequently sought to follow, and in
this paper for Ron’s festschrift, I try to apply it to understanding and
comparing accounts of discourse relations.
%0 Journal Article
%1 CNWebber01
%A Webber, Bonnie
%C Stanford
%D 2006
%E Butt, M.
%E Dalrymple, M.
%E King, T.
%I CSLI Publications
%J Intelligent Linguistic Architectures
%K Diskursanalyse Syntax
%P 339-360
%T Accounting for Discourse Relations: Constituency and Dependency
%U http://www.iccs.inf.ed.ac.uk/~bonnie/webber.pdf
%X At the start of my career, I had the good fortune of working with
Ron Kaplan on Bill Woods’ Lunar system (Woods et al., 1972). One
day, in talking with Ron, I marvelled to him over the range of syntac-
tic constructions I was able to implement in Lunar’s ATN grammar
formalism. Ron replied was that you could implement anything in an
ATN: the point was, rather, to identify the minimal machinery required
for a task. This sensible advice I subsequently sought to follow, and in
this paper for Ron’s festschrift, I try to apply it to understanding and
comparing accounts of discourse relations.
@article{CNWebber01,
abstract = {At the start of my career, I had the good fortune of working with
Ron Kaplan on Bill Woods’ Lunar system (Woods et al., 1972). One
day, in talking with Ron, I marvelled to him over the range of syntac-
tic constructions I was able to implement in Lunar’s ATN grammar
formalism. Ron replied was that you could implement anything in an
ATN: the point was, rather, to identify the minimal machinery required
for a task. This sensible advice I subsequently sought to follow, and in
this paper for Ron’s festschrift, I try to apply it to understanding and
comparing accounts of discourse relations.},
added-at = {2009-07-06T12:01:16.000+0200},
address = {Stanford},
author = {Webber, Bonnie},
biburl = {https://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/21e53918b21c7cd89434b2419dda75094/derchief},
editor = {Butt, M. and Dalrymple, M. and King, T.},
interhash = {faa44e59d68bf805b1081c6e4f724c7f},
intrahash = {1e53918b21c7cd89434b2419dda75094},
journal = {Intelligent Linguistic Architectures},
keywords = {Diskursanalyse Syntax},
pages = {339-360},
publisher = {CSLI Publications},
timestamp = {2009-07-06T12:01:16.000+0200},
title = {Accounting for Discourse Relations: Constituency and Dependency},
url = {http://www.iccs.inf.ed.ac.uk/~bonnie/webber.pdf},
year = 2006
}