Advanced search
Add to list

Reliability vs. granularity in discourse annotation : what is the trade-off?

Author
Organization
Abstract
We report on the results of an annotation experiment comparing naive and expert coders in a sense disambiguation task consisting in the assignment of function labels to discourse markers (e.g. well, but, I mean) in spoken French and English using a taxonomy specifically designed for speech. Our qualitative-quantitative assessment of its reliability led us to suggest fundamental revisions of the structure of the taxonomy, striving to find a better balance between reliability and granularity. The resulting model articulates two independent levels of annotation (domains and functions) which, once combined, provide a robust tool for the analysis of discourse markers and relate them to more general functions of spoken language.
Keywords
LANGUAGE, discourse markers, annotation, taxonomy, corpus-based, inter-rater, reliability

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Crible, Ludivine, and Liesbeth Degand. “Reliability vs. Granularity in Discourse Annotation : What Is the Trade-Off?” CORPUS LINGUISTICS AND LINGUISTIC THEORY, vol. 15, no. 1, 2019, pp. 71–99, doi:10.1515/cllt-2016-0046.
APA
Crible, L., & Degand, L. (2019). Reliability vs. granularity in discourse annotation : what is the trade-off? CORPUS LINGUISTICS AND LINGUISTIC THEORY, 15(1), 71–99. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0046
Chicago author-date
Crible, Ludivine, and Liesbeth Degand. 2019. “Reliability vs. Granularity in Discourse Annotation : What Is the Trade-Off?” CORPUS LINGUISTICS AND LINGUISTIC THEORY 15 (1): 71–99. https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0046.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Crible, Ludivine, and Liesbeth Degand. 2019. “Reliability vs. Granularity in Discourse Annotation : What Is the Trade-Off?” CORPUS LINGUISTICS AND LINGUISTIC THEORY 15 (1): 71–99. doi:10.1515/cllt-2016-0046.
Vancouver
1.
Crible L, Degand L. Reliability vs. granularity in discourse annotation : what is the trade-off? CORPUS LINGUISTICS AND LINGUISTIC THEORY. 2019;15(1):71–99.
IEEE
[1]
L. Crible and L. Degand, “Reliability vs. granularity in discourse annotation : what is the trade-off?,” CORPUS LINGUISTICS AND LINGUISTIC THEORY, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 71–99, 2019.
@article{8747328,
  abstract     = {{We report on the results of an annotation experiment comparing naive and expert coders in a sense disambiguation task consisting in the assignment of function labels to discourse markers (e.g. well, but, I mean) in spoken French and English using a taxonomy specifically designed for speech. Our qualitative-quantitative assessment of its reliability led us to suggest fundamental revisions of the structure of the taxonomy, striving to find a better balance between reliability and granularity. The resulting model articulates two independent levels of annotation (domains and functions) which, once combined, provide a robust tool for the analysis of discourse markers and relate them to more general functions of spoken language.}},
  author       = {{Crible, Ludivine and Degand, Liesbeth}},
  issn         = {{1613-7027}},
  journal      = {{CORPUS LINGUISTICS AND LINGUISTIC THEORY}},
  keywords     = {{LANGUAGE,discourse markers,annotation,taxonomy,corpus-based,inter-rater,reliability}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{1}},
  pages        = {{71--99}},
  title        = {{Reliability vs. granularity in discourse annotation : what is the trade-off?}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0046}},
  volume       = {{15}},
  year         = {{2019}},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: