Mutual reconstruction of arguments in dialogue

Analyzing argumentative discourse is not a an activity exclusively reserved for scholars in argumentation theory, rhetoric, and philosophy of language. This paper proposes that the faculty of analyzing argument structure is a basic precondition of und erstanding one another in argumentational interactions. Based on an examination of televised debates, it is demonstrated how participants employ quasi-logical schemata to reconstruct implicit elements in other participants\u27s argument structures for purpo ses of clarification and criticism. This very descriptive approach entrusts, as it were, the actual argument analysis to the language users themselves

Verbal Indicators of Argumentation and Explanation

Linguistic descriptions of (markers of) textual relations are not always immediately relevant for providing guidelines to the analysis of argumentative discourse. This is partly due to the fact that these descriptions usually do not distinguish between argumentative and explanatory relations. The paper argues that the identification of argumentative and explanatory relations can benefit from combining insight into the use of certain specific linguistic expressions with insight into the contextual preconditions for performing the speech acts of arguing and explaining

Crowdsourcing Argumentation Structures in Chinese Hotel Reviews

Argumentation mining aims at automatically extracting the premises-claim discourse structures in natural language texts. There is a great demand for argumentation corpora for customer reviews. However, due to the controversial nature of the argumentation annotation task, there exist very few large-scale argumentation corpora for customer reviews. In this work, we novelly use the crowdsourcing technique to collect argumentation annotations in Chinese hotel reviews. As the first Chinese argumentation dataset, our corpus includes 4814 argument component annotations and 411 argument relation annotations, and its annotations qualities are comparable to some widely used argumentation corpora in other languages.Comment: 6 pages,3 figures,This article has been submitted to "The 2017 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC2017)

Дискурсивний інструментарій аналізу англомовної реклами

The article presents discursive tools of analysis of English advertising. It defines advertising discourse as impelling in accordance with the communicative intention of its global strategy. The paper establishes the main types of the communicative impelling on the basis of advertising discourse local strategies – rational and emotional argumentation and suggestion – and introduces lingual-cognitive means of the strategies realization.У статті запропоновано дискурсивний інструментарій аналізу англомовної реклами. За комунікативним наміром глобальної стратегії мовленнєвого впливу рекламний дискурс визначено як спонукальний. На ґрунті поняття локальної стратегії встановлено основні різновиди спонукального мовленнєвого впливу в рекламі – раціональну й емоційну аргументацію та сугестію, а також визначено лінгвокогнітивні засоби їх реалізації.В статье предложен дискурсивный инструментарий анализа англоязычной рекламы. В соответствии с коммуникативным намерением глобальной стратеги речевого воздействия рекламный дискурс определен как побудительный. На базе понятия локальной стратегии установлены основные виды побудительного речевого воздействия в рекламе – рациональная и эмоциональная аргументация и суггестия – и выявлены лингвокогнитивные средства их реализации

An Analysis of Structure of Argumentation in the Articles of the Jakarta Post Newspaper from 20 August until 22 September 2010

This research analyzes the structure of argumentation used in the articles of the Jakarta Post newspaper from 20 August until 22 September 2010. It also has the purpose to find out the way the journalist constructs the argumentation in his article.This research uses a descriptive method. The researcher takes the data from the articles of the Jakarta Post newspaper dated from 20 August until 22 September 2010. The researcher collects the data using text observation. After that, the researcher analyzes the data using related theories in order to find out the structure of argumentation in the headlines of the Jakarta Post newspaper.After the writer analyzes the data using the related theories, the writer finds each elements of argumentation that exists in the articles of the Jakarta Post newspaper.In conclusion, the structure of argumentation used by the journalist from the Jakarta Post newspaper in the article about terrorism dated from August 20, 2010 until September 22, 2010 can be ordered into: first the journalist gives the probability claims. After that, the journalist provides the second order data and first order data. To make the data and claim related, the journalist gives the authoritative warrants. Then, to advocate the warrant the journalist gives the backing and the qualifiers for the restricted data if the data uses foundation and the claim is not clear and accurate. Keywords: argumentative discourse, structure of argumentation

Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse

The goal of argumentation mining, an evolving research field in computational linguistics, is to design methods capable of analyzing people's argumentation. In this article, we go beyond the state of the art in several ways. (i) We deal with actual Web data and take up the challenges given by the variety of registers, multiple domains, and unrestricted noisy user-generated Web discourse. (ii) We bridge the gap between normative argumentation theories and argumentation phenomena encountered in actual data by adapting an argumentation model tested in an extensive annotation study. (iii) We create a new gold standard corpus (90k tokens in 340 documents) and experiment with several machine learning methods to identify argument components. We offer the data, source codes, and annotation guidelines to the community under free licenses. Our findings show that argumentation mining in user-generated Web discourse is a feasible but challenging task.Comment: Cite as: Habernal, I. & Gurevych, I. (2017). Argumentation Mining in User-Generated Web Discourse. Computational Linguistics 43(1), pp. 125-17