A computational model for measuring discourse complexity
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5965545 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kun Sun (0000-0001-9766-269X, University of Tübingen, corresponding author), Wenxin Xiong (0000-0002-5707-0216, Beijing Foreign Studies University) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 690-712 |
| Publication date | 2019-12-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Discourse Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1461-4456 • E-ISSN: 1461-7080 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1461445619866985 |
| OpenAlex | W2965600433 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 57 |
In past studies, the few quantitative approaches to discourse structure were mostly confined to the presentation of the frequency of discourse relations. However, quantitative approaches should take into account both hierarchical and relational layers in the discourse structure. This study considers these factors and addresses the issue of how discourse relations and discourse units are related. It draws upon the available corpora of discourse structure (rhetorical structure theory-discourse treebank (RST-DT)) from a new perspective. Since an RST tree can be converted into a syntactic dependency tree, the data extracted from the RST-DT can be useful for calculating the discourse distance in much the same way as syntactic dependency distance is calculated. Discourse distance is also applicable to measuring the depth of the human processing of discourse. Furthermore, the data derived from the RST-DT are also easily converted into network data. This study finds that discourse structure has its discourse distance minimum and each type of RST relations has its range of discourse distance. The frequency distribution of discourse data basically follows the power law on several levels, while a network approach reveals how discourse units are arranged spatially in regular patterns. The two methods are mutually complementary in revealing the interaction between discourse relations and discourse units in a comprehensive manner, as well as in revealing how people process and comprehend discourse dynamically. Accordingly, we propose merging the two methods so as to yield a computational model for assessing discourse complexity and comprehension
Discourse analysis · Linguistics · Rhetorical question · Treebank · Complex Network Analysis Techniques · Computer Science · Language and cultural evolution · Topic Modeling · Artificial Intelligence
Introduction to Text Linguistics
Fast algorithm for detecting community structure in networks
Error and attack tolerance of complex networks
Data from eye-tracking corpora as evidence for theories of syntactic processing complexity
How Efficiency Shapes Human Language
Cognitive Network Science
Rhetorical Structure Theory
Dependency Distance as a Metric of Language Comprehension Difficulty
Linguistic complexity
Large-scale evidence of dependency length minimization in 37 languages
Dependency distance
Expectation-based syntactic comprehension
Network Robustness and Fragility
The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension
Strategies of discourse comprehension
Probability Distributions of Syntactic Units and Properties ∗
A survey of research on text simplification
Minimizing Syntactic Dependency Lengths
Analyzing and Integrating Dependency Parsers
A Dependency Perspective on RST Discourse Parsing and Evaluation
Integrating Memory-Based and Constructionist Processes in Accounts of Reading Comprehension
On the complexity of discourse complexity
Signalling of Coherence Relations in Discourse, Beyond Discourse Markers
A Performance Theory of Order and Constituency
Rhetorical relations revisited across distinct levels of discourse unit granularity
Comparing rhetorical structures in different languages
Rhetorical Structure Theory
Situation models in language comprehension and memory
Course in General Linguistics
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1 |
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |