Discourse Representation Theory
A Discourse Representation Theory is a framework for dealing with semantics and pragmatics problems.
- AKA: DRT.
- Context:
- It requires the following:
- a set Discourse Representation Structures.
- a theoretical semantics model for defining the members of DRS set;
- a procedure that will extend a given DRS set to the input sentence.
- It requires the following:
- See: Discourse-level Analysis Task, Irene Heim, Linguistics, Formal Semantics (Linguistics), Montagovian, Mental Representation, Hans Kamp.
References
2017
- (Wikipedia, 2017) ⇒ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discourse_representation_theory Retrieved:2017-6-18.
- In formal linguistics, discourse representation theory (DRT) is a framework for exploring meaning under a formal semantics approach. One of the main differences between DRT-style approaches and traditional Montagovian approaches is that DRT includes a level of abstract mental representations (discourse representation structures, DRS) within its formalism, which gives it an intrinsic ability to handle meaning across sentence boundaries. DRT was created by Hans Kamp in 1981. A very similar theory was developed independently by Irene Heim in 1982, under the name of File Change Semantics (FCS).
2016
- (Guerts et at., 2016) ⇒ Geurts, Bart, Beaver, David I. and Maier, Emar, "Discourse Representation Theory", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.) URL https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/discourse-representation-theory
- In the early 1980s, Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) was introduced by Hans Kamp as a theoretical framework for dealing with issues in the semantics and pragmatics of anaphora and tense (Kamp 1981); a very similar theory was developed independently by Irene Heim (1982). The distinctive features of DRT, to be discussed below, are that it is a mentalist and representation a list theory of interpretation, and that it is a theory of the interpretation not only of individual sentences but of discourse, as well. In these respects DRT made a clear break with classical formal semantics, which during the 1970s had emanated from Montague's pioneering work (Thomason 1974), but in other respects it continued the tradition, e.g., in its use of model-theoretical tools. In the meantime, DRT has come to serve as a framework for explaining a wide range of phenomena, but we will confine our attention to fewer than a handful: anaphora, tense, presupposition, and propositional attitudes. For references to work on other topics, see the “Further reading” section.
(...)
Section: Introduction This article concerns Discourse Representation Theory narrowly defined as work in the tradition descending from Kamp (1981). The same term is sometimes used more broadly, occasionally embracing Heim's (1982) work and the developments initiated by Groenendijk and Stokhof (1989, 1991). However, the more common common label for the extended DRT family is “dynamic semantics”, and that is the term we will use, too.
Two features that set DRT apart from other varieties of dynamic semantics is that it is representational and non-compositional. In the 1980s, the founding years of dynamic semantics, these features made DRT a controversial theory, though by now those controversies have abated. DRT's main innovation, beyond the Montagovian paradigm which was then considered orthodox, is that it introduced a level of mental representations, called “discourse representation structures” (DRSs). The basic idea is rather straightforward. It is that a hearer builds up a mental representation of the discourse as it unfolds, and that every incoming sentence prompts additions to that representation. This picture has always been commonplace in the psychology of language. DRT's principal tenet is that it should be the starting point for semantic theory, too.
A theory of the DRT family consists of the following ingredients:
- A formal definition of the representation language, consisting of:
- a recursive definition of the set of all well-formed DRSs, and
- a model-theoretic semantics for the members of this set;
- a construction procedure, which specifies how to extend a given DRS when a sentence comes in.
- A formal definition of the representation language, consisting of:
- In the early 1980s, Discourse Representation Theory (DRT) was introduced by Hans Kamp as a theoretical framework for dealing with issues in the semantics and pragmatics of anaphora and tense (Kamp 1981); a very similar theory was developed independently by Irene Heim (1982). The distinctive features of DRT, to be discussed below, are that it is a mentalist and representation a list theory of interpretation, and that it is a theory of the interpretation not only of individual sentences but of discourse, as well. In these respects DRT made a clear break with classical formal semantics, which during the 1970s had emanated from Montague's pioneering work (Thomason 1974), but in other respects it continued the tradition, e.g., in its use of model-theoretical tools. In the meantime, DRT has come to serve as a framework for explaining a wide range of phenomena, but we will confine our attention to fewer than a handful: anaphora, tense, presupposition, and propositional attitudes. For references to work on other topics, see the “Further reading” section.
- Technically, this is very similar to earlier work in formal semantics, with two exceptions: the interpretation process always takes the previous discourse into account, and the level of semantic representations is claimed to be essential. What has worried some semanticists is not so much the fact that DRSs are mental representations, but that an additional level is needed, and used in ways that render the theory non-compositional; we will return to this issue in Section 6.
2008
- (Arakawa, 2008) ⇒ Naoya Arakawa. (2008). “Semantic Analysis based on Ontologies with Semantic Web Standards.” In: Computer-aided Acquisition of Semantic Knowledge (CASK 2008).
- (Arakawa, 2008) ⇒ Naoya Arakawa. (2008). “Semantic Analysis based on Ontologies with Semantic Web Standards.” In: Computer-aided Acquisition of Semantic Knowledge (CASK 2008).
- Section 2, Semantic Representation in Graphs: Our semantic representation draws most upon DRT (Discourse Representation Theory) [2] and SDRT [3] (“S” stands for “Segmented”). (S)DRT uses semantic representation called DRS (Discourse Representation Structure), which is a nested structure in which logical terms and predicates are placed. SDRT is a theory in dynamic semantics and purports to explain various discourse phenomena as well as semantics of simple sentences (and the versatility is the reason for our adoption). Another feature of our semantic representation is that it has a graph representation. The reason for this is that we want our system to work with the Semantic Web, whose data representation model is in the graph form (i.e., RDF). While a DRS is not normally considered as a graph, there are theories that use semantic representations in graph forms. One example is Conceptual Graphs proposed by Sowa [4]. Conceptual Graphs represent a set of predicate logic formulas as a graph. Another example is CDL (Conceptual Description Language) proposed by Yokoi et al [5]. To be more specific, both Conceptual Graphs and CDL are hyper-graphs, i.e., nested graphs having sub-graphs as their nodes. Such nested structure or hyper-graphs are required, for example, for representing nested sentences.
Now, as a DRS is nested structure containing predicate logic formulas, it can be converted into graphs in a fairly straightforward way. To represent predicate logic formulas in graphs, we can draw upon Conceptual Graphs. The nested structure of a DRS can be represented as a hypergraph.
- Section 2, Semantic Representation in Graphs: Our semantic representation draws most upon DRT (Discourse Representation Theory) [2] and SDRT [3] (“S” stands for “Segmented”). (S)DRT uses semantic representation called DRS (Discourse Representation Structure), which is a nested structure in which logical terms and predicates are placed. SDRT is a theory in dynamic semantics and purports to explain various discourse phenomena as well as semantics of simple sentences (and the versatility is the reason for our adoption). Another feature of our semantic representation is that it has a graph representation. The reason for this is that we want our system to work with the Semantic Web, whose data representation model is in the graph form (i.e., RDF). While a DRS is not normally considered as a graph, there are theories that use semantic representations in graph forms. One example is Conceptual Graphs proposed by Sowa [4]. Conceptual Graphs represent a set of predicate logic formulas as a graph. Another example is CDL (Conceptual Description Language) proposed by Yokoi et al [5]. To be more specific, both Conceptual Graphs and CDL are hyper-graphs, i.e., nested graphs having sub-graphs as their nodes. Such nested structure or hyper-graphs are required, for example, for representing nested sentences.
2002
- Massimo Poesio. (2002). “Annotating a Corpus to Develop and Evaluate Discourse Entity Realization Algorithms: issues and preliminary results.” In: Proceedings of LREC-2000.
- "As part of the project, we have been annotating a corpus with the syntactic, semantic and discourse information that is needed for different subtasks of NP realization, including the task of deciding on the most appropriate NP type to be used to realize a certain discourse entity (proper name, definite description, pronoun, etc.), and the task of organizing the additional information to be expressed with that discourse entity."
- "Noun phrases appear in the generated text as the realization of at least three different types of logical form constituents: TERMS, which include referring expressions, as in Jessie M. King or the hour pieces here, but also nonreferring terms such as jewelry or different types of creative work. Terms are called DISCOURSE ENTITIES in Discourse Representation Theory.