Revue semestrielle de linguistique et littératures romanes

Écho des études romanes 2012, 8(1):51-64 | DOI: 10.32725/eer.2012.004

What we have learned from complex annotation of topic-focus articulation in a large Czech corpusEnglish

Eva HAJIČOVÁ
Charles University in Prague

After a short summary of the theory of Topic-Focus Articulation (TFA) the present contribution documents on several examples illustrating the annotation of the basic features of TFA on a large corpus (the Prague Dependency Treebank) that corpus annotation brings an additional value to the corpus if the following two conditions are being met: (i) the annotation scheme is based on a sound linguistic theory, and (ii) the annotation scenario is carefully (i.e. systematically and consistently) designed. Such an annotation is important not only for the surface shape of the sentence but even more for the underlying sentence structure: it may elucidate phenomena hidden on the surface but unavoidable for the representation of the meaning and functioning of the sentence.

Keywords: topic-focus articulation; corpus annotation; Prague Dependency Treebank

Published: June 11, 2012  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
HAJIČOVÁ, E. (2012). What we have learned from complex annotation of topic-focus articulation in a large Czech corpus. Écho des études romanes, 8(1), 51-64. doi: 10.32725/eer.2012.004
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. BRANTS Sabine, Stefanie DIPPER, Silvia HANSEN, Wolfgang LEZIUS, and George SMITH (2002), The TIGER treebank, in: Erhard HINRICHS and Kiril SIMOV (eds.), Proceedings of the First Workshop on Treebanks and Linguistic Theories (TLT 2002), Sozopol, Bulgaria.
    2. CHOMSKY Noam (1957), Syntactic Structures, The Hague, Mouton. Go to original source...
    3. CHOMSKY Noam (1965), Aspects of the Theory of Syntax, Cambridge, Mass., The M.I.T. Press. Go to original source...
    4. DANEŠ František (1985), Věta a text, Praha, Academia.
    5. FIRBAS Jan (1959), Thoughts on the Communicative Function of the Verb in English, German and Czech, Brno Studies in English, Brno.
    6. FIRBAS Jan (1964), On defining the theme in functional sentence perspective, Travaux Linguistique de Prague 1, Prague, 267-280.
    7. FIRBAS Jan (1992), Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication, Cambridge/London, Cambridge - London University Press. Go to original source...
    8. FIRBAS Jan (1957), K otázce nezákladových podmětů v současné angličtině. Příspěvek k teorii aktuálního členění větného, ČMF 39, p. 22-42; p. 165-173. (An abbreviated and modified English version of this contribution was published as Non-thematic subjects in Contemporary English, TLP 2, 1966, p. 239-256.)
    9. HAJIČ J., PANEVOVÁ J., HAJIČOVÁ E., SGALL P., PAJAS P., ŠTĚPÁNEK J., HAVELKA J., MIKULOVÁ M., ŽABOKRTSKÝ Z. and M. ŠEVČÍKOVÁ-RAZÍMOVÁ (2006), Prague Dependency Treebank 2.0. CD-ROM, Linguistic Data Consortium, Philadelphia, PA, USA. LDC Catalog No. LDC2006T01 URL.
    10. HAJIČ Jan (1998), Building a syntactically annotated corpus: The Prague Dependency Treebank, in: Issues of Valency and Meaning. Studies in Honour of Jarmila Panevová, ed. by E. HAJIČOVÁ, Prague, Karolinum, p. 106-132.
    11. HAJIČOVÁ Eva, MÍROVSKÝ Jiří and BRANKATSCHK Katya (2011), A contrastive look at information structure: A corpus probe. 6th Congrès de la Société Linguistique Slave, Aix-en-Provence, 1-3 September, Univ. de Provence, pp. 47-51.
    12. HAJIČOVÁ Eva, PARTEE Barbara and SGALL Petr (1998), Topic-Focus Articulation, Tripartite Structures and Semantic Content, Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers. Go to original source...
    13. HAJIČOVÁ Eva, SGALL Petr and VESELÁ Kateřina (2007), Contextual Boundness and Contrast in the Prague Dependency Treebank, In: Language Context and Cognition: Interfaces and Interface Conditions, ed. Andreas Spaeth, Berlin - New York, Walter de Gruyter, p. 231-243.
    14. HAJIČOVÁ Eva (1984), Presupposition and allegation revisited. Journal of Pragmatics 8, p. 155-167; amplified as "On presupposition and allegation" in: Contributions to functional syntax, semantics and language comprehension, ed. by SGALL P., Amsterdam, Benjamins - Prague, Academia, p. 99-122. Go to original source...
    15. HAJIČOVÁ Eva (1972), Some Remarks on Presuppositions. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 17, p. 11-23.
    16. HAJIČOVÁ Eva (1973), Negation and topic vs. comment. Philologica Pragensia 17, p. 18-25.
    17. HAJIČOVÁ Eva (1975), Negace a presupozice ve významové stavbě věty. Praha, Academia.
    18. HAJIČOVÁ Eva (1995), Postavení rematizátorů v aktuálním členění věty. Slovo a slovesnost 56, p. 241-251.
    19. HALLIDAY M. A. K. (1967), Intonation and Grammar in British English. The Hague, Mouton. Go to original source...
    20. HALLIDAY M.A.K. (1967-8), Notes on transitivity and theme in English. Journal of Linguistics 3 (1967), p. 37-81, p. 199-244; 4 (1968), p. 179-215. Go to original source...
    21. KOKTOVÁ Eva (1999), Word-Order Based Grammar. Berlin, Mouton De Gruyter. Go to original source...
    22. KRAAK Albert (1966), Negative Zinnen. Een Methodologishe Analyse, Hilversum.
    23. LAKOFF George (1971), On generative semantics, in: Steinberg and Jakobovits (1971), p. 232-296. Go to original source...
    24. MARCUS Mitch, SANTORINI B. and MARCINKIEWICZ M-A. (1993), Building a large annotated corpus of English: the Penn Treebank, Computational Linguistics, 19:2, p. 313-330. Go to original source...
    25. MARCUS Mitch, KIM G., MARCINKIEWICZ M. A., MACINTYRE R., BIES A., FERGUSON M., KATZ K., and SCHASBERGER B. (1994): The Penn Treebank: annotating predicate argument structure, in: Proceedings of the human language technology workshop. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc. Go to original source...
    26. MATHESIUS Vilém (1929), Zur Satzperspektive im modernen Englisch, Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 155, p. 202-210.
    27. MATHESIUS Vilém (1939), O tak zvaném aktuálním členění větném, Slovo a slovesnost 5, p. 171-174; translated as: On information-bearing structure of the sentence, in: S. KUNO (ed.): Harvard Studies in Syntax and Semantics, 1975, p. 467-480.
    28. MIKULOVÁ M., A. BÉMOVÁ, J. HAJIČ, E. HAJIČOVÁ, J. HAVELKA, V. KOLÁŘOVÁ, L. KUČOVÁ, M. LOPATKOVÁ, P. PAJAS, J. PANEVOVÁ, M. RAZÍMOVÁ, P. SGALL, J. ŠTĚPÁNEK, Z. UREŠOVÁ, K. VESELÁ, Z. ŽABOKRTSKÝ (2006), Annotation on the tectogrammatical level in the Prague Dependency Treebank. Annotation manual. Tech. Report 30 ÚFAL MFF UK, Prague.
    29. ROOTS Mats (1985), Association with Focus. PhD Thesis, Univ. of Massachusetts, Amherst.
    30. RYSOVÁ Kateřina (2011a), The unmarked word ordedof free verbal modifications in Czech (with the main reference to the influence of verbal valency in the utterance, in: ARISTA Javier Martin (eds). 44th Meeting of SLE 2011, Book of abstracts, Logrono, p. 277-278.
    31. RYSOVÁ Kateřina (2011b), The unmarked word order of inner participants, with the focus on the systemin ordering of Actor and Patient, in: GERDES Kim, HAJIČOVÁ E. and WANNER L. (eds), Int. Conference on Dependency Linguistics (Depling 2011), Barcelona, p. 183-192.
    32. SGALL Petr (1967), Functional Sentence Perspective in a generative description of language. Prague Studies in Mathematical Linguistics 2, Prague, Academia, p. 203-225.
    33. SGALL Petr (1979), Towards a definition of Focus and Topic. Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 31, p. 3-25; 32, 1980, p. 24-32; printed in Prague Studies in Mathematical Linguistics 78, 1981, p. 173-198.
    34. SGALL Petr, HAJIČOVÁ Eva and PANEVOVÁ Jarmila (1986), The Meaning of the Sentence in Its Semantic and Pragmatic Aspects, Prague, Academia and Dordrecht, Reidel.
    35. STEINBERG Danny D. and JAKOBOVITS Leon A. (eds., 1971), Semantics, Cambridge, Mass., The M.I.T. Press.
    36. VACHEK Josef (1947), Obecný zápor v angličtině a češtině. Příspěvky k dějinám řeči a literatury anglické (Prague Studies in English), Vol. 6, Prague, Filosofická fakulta Univerzity Karlovy, p. 7-72.
    37. VESELÁ Kateřina, PETEREK, Nino and HAJIČOVÁ Eva (2003), Topic-Focus articulation in PDT: Prosodic characteristics of contrastive topic. The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics 79-80, Praha, Univerzita Karlova, p. 5-22.
    38. ZEMB Jean-Marie (1968), Les structures logiques de la proposition allemande. Paris, O.C.D.L.
    39. ZIKÁNOVÁ Šárka and TÝNOVSKÝ Miroslav (2009), Identification of Topic and Focus in Czech: Comparative Evaluation on Prague Dependency Treebank, in: Studies in Formal Slavic Phonology, Morphology, Syntax, Semantics and Information Structure. Formal Description of Slavic Languages 7, Peter Lang, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, p. 343-353.
    40. ZIKÁNOVÁ Šárka, TÝNOVSKÝ Miroslav and HAVELKA Jiří (2007), Identification of Topic and Focus in Czech: Evaluation of Manual Parallel Annotations, in: The Prague Bulletin of Mathematical Linguistics, No. 87, p. 61-70.

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content