David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Argument and Computation 3 (1):49 - 82 (2012)
In this article, we first present the platform and the Dislog language, designed for discourse analysis with a logic and linguistic perspective. The platform has now reached a certain level of maturity which allows the recognition of a large diversity of discourse structures including general-purpose rhetorical structures as well as domain-specific discourse structures. The Dislog language is based on linguistic considerations and includes knowledge access and inference capabilities. Functionalities of the language are presented together with a method for writing discourse analysis rules. Efficiency and portability of the system over domains and languages are investigated to conclude this first part. In a second part, we analyse the different types of arguments found in several document genres, most notably: procedures, didactic texts and requirements. Arguments form a large class of discourse relations. A generic and frequently encountered form emerges from our analysis: ?reasons for conclusion? which constitutes a homogeneous family of arguments from a language, functional and conceptual point of view. This family can be viewed as a kind of proto-argument. We then elaborate its linguistic structure and show how it is implemented in . We then investigate the cooperation between explanation and arguments, in particular in didactic texts where they are particularly rich and elaborated. This article ends with a prospective section that develops current and potential uses of this work and how it can be extended to the recognition of other forms of arguments
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Trevor Bench-Capon, Michał Araszkiewicz, Kevin Ashley, Katie Atkinson, Floris Bex, Filipe Borges, Daniele Bourcier, Paul Bourgine, Jack G. Conrad, Enrico Francesconi, Thomas F. Gordon, Guido Governatori, Jochen L. Leidner, David D. Lewis, Ronald P. Loui, L. Thorne McCarty, Henry Prakken, Frank Schilder, Erich Schweighofer, Paul Thompson, Alex Tyrrell, Bart Verheij, Douglas N. Walton & Adam Z. Wyner (2012). A History of AI and Law in 50 Papers: 25 Years of the International Conference on AI and Law. [REVIEW] Artificial Intelligence and Law 20 (3):215-319.
Similar books and articles
Catherine Lai & Steven Bird (2010). Querying Linguistic Trees. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 19 (1):53-73.
Anne S. Hsu & Nick Chater (2010). The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition: A Probabilistic Perspective. Cognitive Science 34 (6):972-1016.
Rush Rhees (1998). Wittgenstein and the Possibility of Discourse. Cambridge University Press.
D. Walton & C. A. Reed (2005). Argumentation Schemes and Enthymemes. Synthese 145 (3):339 - 370.
George Lakoff (1970). Linguistics and Natural Logic. Synthese 22 (1-2):151 - 271.
William J. Rapaport (1988). Syntactic Semantics: Foundations of Computational Natural Language Understanding. In James H. Fetzer (ed.), Aspects of AI. Kluwer
Nick Chater (2002). Is LF Really a Linguistic Level? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (6):680-680.
Martha Stone Palmer (2006). Semantic Processing for Finite Domains. Cambridge University Press.
Syed S. Ali & Stuart C. Shapiro (1993). Natural Language Processing Using a Propositional Semantic Network with Structured Variables. Minds and Machines 3 (4):421-451.
Jose M. Saguillo (1999). Domains of Sciences, Universes of Discourse and Omega Arguments. History and Philosophy of Logic 20 (3-4):267-290.
Sebastian Lutz (2009). Ideal Language Philosophy and Experiments on Intuitions. Studia Philosophica Estonica 2 (2):117-139.
Christopher Gauker (2007). On the Alleged Priority of Thought Over Language. In Savas L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), John Searle's Philosophy of Language: Force, Meaning, and Mind. Cambridge University Press 125.
David J. Cole (1999). I Don't Think So: Pinker on the Mentalese Monopoly. Philosophical Psychology 12 (3):283-295.
Added to index2012-03-14
Total downloads9 ( #290,390 of 1,778,413 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #291,352 of 1,778,413 )
How can I increase my downloads?