In this paper, I explore the interaction among several factors argued to constrain discourse anaphoric expressions: the local centering context consisting of successive pairs of utterances; the informational content of a discourse anaphoric expression relative to the set of entities that need to be discriminated; the choice among different kinds of discriminating information; and the global attentional state that derives from the structure of an entire discourse. Specifications for the model are based on analysis of such factors in a corpus of spontaneous oral narratives. Then I use a reserved set of narratives for evaluating a simplified version of the generation model. The model integrates informational constraints, based on Dale's (1992) model, with centering. I show that by integrating centering constraints, the integrated model can account for two types of violation of informational constraints: informationally inadequate pronouns where the pronoun realizes the current backward-looking center, and certain full noun phrases in utterances where the backward-looking center is not overtly mentioned, and use of a pronoun would produce garden-path effects. I argue that for generation, centering constraints take precedence over informational constraints. The evaluation tests three conditions: informational constraints (1) with no focus structure imposed on the discourse, (2) with an empirically derived global focus structure, and (3) with global focus plus centering. Results improve dramatically under each subsequent condition.
ALLEN, J. (1987). Natural language understanding.Menlo Park, CA: The Benjamin/Cummings Publishing Company.
2.
BRENNAN, S.E., FRIEDMAN, M.W., & POLLARD, C.J. (1987). A centering approach to pronouns. In Proceedings of the 25th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 155--162). Stanford, CA.
3.
CHAFE, W.L. (1980). The Pear Stories: Cognitive, cultural and linguistic aspects of narrative production.Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
4.
COCHRAN, W.G. (1950). The comparison of percentages in matched samples. Biometrika, 37, 256–266.
5.
DALE, R. (1989). Cooking up referring expressions. In Proceedings of the 27th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 68--75). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., June 26--29.
6.
DALE, R. (1992). Generating referring expressions: Constructing descriptions in a domain of objects and processes.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7.
DALE, R., & HADDOCK, N. (1991). Generating of referring expressions involving relations. In Proceedings of the 5th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 161--166). Berlin, April 9–11.
8.
DALE, R., & REITER, E. (1995). Computational interpretations of the Gricean maxims in the generation of referring expressions. Cognitive Science, 19, 233–263.
9.
DI EUGENIO, B.D. (1990). Centering theory and the Italian pronominal system. Proceedings of COLING-90: The 13th International Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 270--275), Helsinki.
10.
GRICE, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Syntax and semantics, Vol. 3: Speech acts (pp. 41–58). New York: Academic Press.
11.
GROSZ, B.J. (1977). The representation and use of focus in dialogue understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
12.
GROSZ, B. & HIRSCHBERG, J. (1992). Some intonational characteristics of discourse structure. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Spoken Language Processing (ICSLP) (pp. 429--432). Banff, Canada.
13.
GROSZ, B.J., JOSHI, A.K., & WEINSTEIN, S. (1983). Providing a unified account of definite noun phrases in discourse. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 44--50). Cambridge, MA.
14.
GROSZ, B.J., JOSHI, A.K., & WEINSTEIN, S. (1995). Centering: A framework for modeling the local coherence of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 21 (2), 203–226.
15.
GROSZ, B.J., & SIDNER, C.L. (1986). Attention, intentions and the structure of discourse. Computational Linguistics, 12, 175–204.
16.
HEARST, M.A. (1994). Multi-paragraph segmentation of expository text. Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 9--16). Las Cruces, NM.
17.
HEIM, I. (1983). File change semantics and the familiarity theory of definiteness. In R. Bauerle, C. Schwarze, & A. von Stechow (eds.), Meaning, use, and interpretation of language (pp. 164–189). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
18.
HIRSCHBERG, J., & GROSZ, B. (1992) Intonational features of local and global discourse structure. Proceedings of the Darpa Workshop on Spoken Language (pp. 441--446). Harriman, New York, February 23–26.
19.
HOBBS, J.R. (1985). On the coherence and structure of discourse (Tech. Rep. No. CSLI-8537).California, U.S.A.: Stanford University, Center for the Study of Language and Information.
20.
HOBBS, J.R., STICKEL, M., MARTIN, P., & EDWARDS, D. (1988). Interpretation as abduction. Proceedings of the 26th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 95--103). Buffalo, New York.
21.
HUDSON-D'ZMURA, S.B. (1988). The structure of discourse and anaphor resolution: The discourse center and the roles of nouns and pronouns. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester, NY.
22.
JACKENDOFF, R. (1990). Semantic structures.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
JOSHI, A., & WEINSTEIN, S. (1981). Control of inference: Role of some aspects of discourse structure-centering. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 385--387). Vancouver, Canada.
24.
KAMEYAMA, M. (1985). Zero anaphora: The case of Japanese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Stanford University, U.S.A.
25.
KAMEYAMA, M. (1986). A property-sharing constraint in centering. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 200--206). New York, U.S.A.
26.
KAMEYAMA, M., PASSONNEAU, R., & POESIO, M. (1993). Temporal centering. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 70--77). Columbus, Ohio.
27.
KAMP, H. (1981). A theory of truth and semantic representation. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen, & M. Stokhof (eds.), Formal methods in the study of language, Part I (pp. 277–322). Amsterdam: Mathematisch Centrum.
28.
KARTTUNEN, L. (1976). Discourse referents. In J. McCawley (ed.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. 7: Notes from the Linguistic Underground (pp. 363–385). New York: Academic Press.
29.
KRONFELD, A. (1986). Donnellan's distinction and a computational model of reference. Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 186--191). New York, U.S.A.
30.
LASCARIDES, A., & OBERLANDER, J. (1993). Temporal coherence and defeasible knowledge. Theoretical Linguistics, 19, 1–37.
31.
LITMAN, D., & PASSONNEAU, R. (1995a). Combining multiple knowledge sources for discourse segmentation. Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 108--115). Cambridge, MA.
32.
LITMAN, D., & PASSONNEAU, R. (1995b). Developing algorithms for discourse segmentation. Working Notes of AAAI Spring Symposium Series on Empirical Methods in Discourse Interpretation and Generation (pp. 85--92). Palo Alto, California.
33.
MARSLEN-WILSON, W., LEVY, E., & TYLER, L.K. (1982). Producing interpretable discourse: The establishment and maintenance of reference. In R. J. Jarvella & W. Klein (eds.), Speech, place and action (pp. 339–378). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
34.
MOORE, J.D. & POLLACK, M.E. (1992). A problem for RST: The need for multilevel discourse analysis. Computational Linguistics, 18, 537–544.
35.
MORRIS, J., & HIRST, G. (1991). Lexical cohesion computed by thesaural relations as an indicator of the structure of text. Computational Linguistics, 17, 21–48.
36.
NAKATANI, C.H., HIRSCHBERG, J., & GROSZ, B.J. (1995). Discourse structure in spoken language: Studies on speech corpora. AAAI 1995 Spring Symposium Series: Empirical Methods in Discourse Interpretation and Generation (pp. 106--112).
37.
PASSONNEAU, R.J. (1991). Some facts about centers, indexicals, and demonstratives. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 63--70). Berkeley, California.
38.
PASSONNEAU, R.J. (1993). Getting and keeping the center of attention. In R. Weischedel & M. Bates (eds.), Challenges in natural language processing (Ch.7). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. (Also available as Tech. Rep. No. CUCS-060--90. Columbia University, Dept. of Computer Science).
39.
PASSONNEAU, R.J. (1994a). Frame shifts: Perlocutionary meaning and discourse reference. Conference on Focus and Natural Language Processing (pp. 563--579). Kassel, Germany.
40.
PASSONNEAU, R.J. (1994b). Protocol for coding discourse referential noun phrases and their antecedents. Columbia University, Dept. of Computer Science.
41.
PASSONNEAU, R.J. (1995). Integrating Gricean and attentional constraints. Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (pp. 1267--1273). Montreal, Canada.
42.
PASSONNEAU, R. J. (To appear). Interaction of the segmental structure of discourse with explicitness of discourse anaphora. In E. Prince, A. Joshi, & M. Walker (Eds.), Proceedings of the Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse. London: Oxford University Press.
43.
PASSONNEAU, R.J., & LITMAN, D. (1993). Intention-based segmentation: Reliability and correlation with linguistic cues. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 148--155). Columbus, Ohio.
44.
PASSONNEAU, R. J., & LITMAN, D. (To appear). Discourse segmentation by human and automated means. Submitted for publication.
45.
PASSONNEAU, R.J., & LITMAN, D. (1996). “Empirical analysis of three dimensions of spoken discourse: Segmentation, coherence, and linguistic devices.” In E. Hovy & D. Scott, (eds.), Computational and Conversational Discourse.Berlin: Springer Verlag.
46.
POLANYI, L. (1988). A formal model of discourse structure. Journal of Pragmatics, 12, 601–638.
47.
PRINCE, E., JOSHI, A., & WALKER, M. (Eds.). (To appear). Proceedings of the Workshop on Centering Theory in Naturally Occurring Discourse. London: Oxford University Press.
48.
REICHMAN, R. (1985). Getting computers to talk like you and me.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
49.
REITER, E. (1990a). The computational complexity of avoiding conversational implicatures. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 97--104). Pittsburgh, PA., June 7--10.
50.
REITER, E. (1990b). Generating appropriate natural language object descriptions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University.
51.
ROBIN, J. (1994). Revision-based generation of natural language summaries providing historical background: Corpus-based analysis, design, implementation, and evaluation (Tech. Rep. No. CU-CS-034--94). New York: Columbia University, Computer Science Dept. (Also doctoral dissertation.)
52.
WALKER, M. A. (1995). Limited attention and discourse structure. Unpublished manuscript.
53.
WALKER, M.A., IIDA, M., & COTE, S. (1994). Japanese discourse and the process of centering. Computational Linguistics, 20, 194–231.
54.
WEBBER, B.L. (1978). A formal approach to discourse anaphora (Tech. Rep. No. 3761). Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc.
