Cover not available

In:Corpora in Translation and Contrastive Research in the Digital Age: Recent advances and explorations
Edited by Julia Lavid-López, Carmen Maíz-Arévalo and Juan Rafael Zamorano-Mansilla
[Benjamins Translation Library 158] 2021
► pp. 209–232

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 8
The discourse markers well and so and their equivalents in the Portuguese and Turkish subparts of the TED-MDB corpus

ORCiD logo with link | CLUL – Centre of Linguistics, School of Arts and Humanities, University of Lisbon
ORCiD logo with link | Graduate School of Informatics, Cognitive Science Department, Middle East Technical UniversityAnkara
Published online: 8 December 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/btl.158.08men
Abstract
The present research describes how the PDTB style of discourse annotation has been applied to transcribed TED Talks in the TED-MDB corpus, which include multifunctional elements such as well and so. The occurrence of these two markers is analyzed in English in comparison to the way they are conveyed in Portuguese and Turkish translations of TED-MDB. Their presence in discourse relations, as well as in question-response pairs found in TED Talks, are investigated. The implicitation of well and so in translation is shown to be related to their function in the context. Results also point to differences in the target languages regarding implicitation, especially when the discourse marker doesn’t fulfil a connective function.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Research aims and method of analysis
  • The TED-MDB corpus
  • Related work: The view from speech annotation
    • A scheme for spoken language (Crible 2017)
    • Treatment of question-response sequences in various frameworks and TED-MDB
  • Data analysis
    • The case of well and its translations to Portuguese and Turkish in TED-MDB
    • The case of so and its translations to Portuguese and Turkish in TED-MDB
      • Cases of so omitted and kept in the translation
      • Cases of so translated and annotated
      • Cases of ommitted so where the pragmatic function survives in the translation
    • Discourse markers in question-response pairs
  • Conclusion and future work
  • Acknowledgements
  • Note
  • References
References (34)
References
Aijmer, Karin, and Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen. 2011. “Pragmatic markers.” Discursive pragmatics 8: 223–247. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Al-Saif, Amal, and Katja Markert. 2011. “Modelling Discourse Relations for Arabic.” In Proceedings of the Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Proceedings of EMNLP ’11, Stroudsburg, PA, USA, 736–747. ACL.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asher, Nicholas. 2012. Reference to Abstract Objects in Discourse. Volume 50. Springer Science & Business Media.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asher, Nicholas, Julie Hunter, and Kate Thompson. 2019. “Comparing Discourse Structures between Purely Linguistic and Situated Messages in an Annotated Corpus.” Dialogue & Discourse 11(1): 89–121. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asher, Nicolas, and Alex Lascarides. 1988. “The Semantics and Pragmatics of Presupposition.” Journal of Semantics 15(2): 239–299. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asher, Nicolas, Philippe Muller, Myriam Bras, Lydia Mai Ho-Dac, Farah Benamara, Stergos Afantenos, and Laure Vieu. 2017. “ANNODIS and Related Projects: Case Studies on the Annotation of Discourse Structure.” In Handbook of Linguistic Annotation, ed. by Nancy Ide, and James Pustejovsky, 1241–1264. Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Asher, Nicolas, Julie Hunter, Mathieu Morey, Farah Benamara, and Stergos Afantenos. 2016. “Discourse Structure and Dialogue Acts in Multiparty Dialogue: the STAC Corpus.” In The Tenth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC 2016), 2721–2727. ELDA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel. 1996. Pragmatic markers in English. Grammaticalization and discourse function. Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buysse, Lieven. 2015. ‘Well it’s not very ideal …’ The pragmatic marker well in learner English. Intercultural Pragmatics 12(1): 59–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlson, Lynn, and Daniel Marcu. 2001. Discourse Tagging Reference Manual. Technical Report ISI-TR-545.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cettolo, Mauro, Christian Girardi, and Marcello Federico. 2012. “WIT3: Web Inventory of Transcribed and Translated Talks”. In Proceedings of EAMT, Trento, Italy, 261–268.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crible, Ludivine. 2017. Discourse Markers and (Dis)fluency across Registers: A Contrastive Usage-based Study in English and French. Ph.D. Dissertation. [URL]
Crible, Ludivine, and Liesbeth Degand. 2017. “Reliability vs. Granularity in Discourse Annotation: What is the Trade-off?” Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 15(1): 71–99. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crible, Ludivine, Ágnes Abuczki, Nijolė Burkšaitienė, Péter Furkó, Anna Nedoluzhko, Giedre Valunaite Oleskeviciene, Sigita Rackevičienė, and Šárka Zikánová. 2019. “Functions and Translations of Underspecified Discourse Markers in TED Talks: A Parallel Corpus Study on five Languages.” Journal of Pragmatics 142: 139–155. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuenca, Maria Josep. 2008. “Pragmatic markers in contrast: The case of well.” Journal of Pragmatics 40(8): 1373–1391. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cuenca, Maria Josep, and Maria Josep Marín. 2009. “Co-occurrence of Discourse Markers in Catalan and Spanish Oral Narrative.” Journal of Pragmatics 41: 899–914. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Grésillon, A., J.-L. Lebrave. 1984. “Qui interroge qui et pourquoi?”. In La langue au ras du texte. Lille: Presses Universitaires de Lille, 57–132.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoek, Jet, Zufferey, Sandrine, Evers-Vermeul, Jacqueline, Sanders, Ted. 2017. “Cognitive complexity and the linguistic marking of coherence relations: a parallel corpus study.” Journal of Pragmatics 121: 113–131. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. 1997. “The discourse marker well in the history of English.” English Language & Linguistics 1, 91–110. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lanham, Richard. 1991. A Handlist of Rhetorical Terms. University of California Press, Berkeley. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lee, Alan, Rashmi Prasad, Bonnie Webber, and Aravind Joshi. 2016. “Annotating Discourse Relations with the PDTB Annotator.” In Proceedings of COLING (Demos), 121–125.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mayoral, José António. 1994. Figuras Retóricas. Madrid: Editorial Sintesis.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oleskeviciene, Giedre V., Deniz Zeyrek, Viktorija Mazeikiene, and Murathan Kurfalı. 2018. “Observations on the Annotation of Discourse Relational Devices in TED Talk Transcripts in Lithuanian.” In Proceedings of the workshop on annotation in digital humanities co-located with ESSLLI, vol. 2155, 53–58.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Oza, Umangi, Rashmi Prasad, Sudheer Kolachina, Dipti M. Sharma, and Aravind Joshi. 2009. “The Hindi Discourse Relation Bank.” In Proceedings of the third linguistic annotation workshop, 158–161. ACL. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prasad, Rashmi, Eleni Miltsakaki, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Aravind Joshi, Livio Robaldo, and Bonnie Webber. 2007. The Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0 Annotation Manual. [URL]
Prasad, Rashmi, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Eleni Miltsakaki, Livio Robaldo, Aravind Joshi, and Bonnie Webber. 2008. “The Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0.” In Proceedings of LREC, 2961–2968. ELRA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schiffrin, Deborah. 2001. “Discourse markers: Language, meaning, and context.” In Deborah Schiffrin, Deborah Tannen, and Heidi E. Hamilton (Eds.) The handbook of discourse analysis 1, 54–75. Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spooren, W., and Degand, L. 2010. Coding coherence relations: Reliability and validity. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 6(2):241–266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tonelli, Sara, Giuseppe Riccardi, Rashmi Prasad, and Aravind Joshi. 2010. “Annotation of Discourse Relations for Conversational Spoken Dialogs.” In Proceedings of LREC, 2084–2090. ELRA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Webber, Bonnie, Rashmi Prasad, Alan Lee, and Aravind Joshi. 2019. The Penn Discourse Treebank 3.0 Annotation Manual. Technical Report, Institute for Research in Cognitive Science. University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeyrek, Deniz, Işın Demirsahin, Ayışığı Sevdik Callı, and Ruket Çakıcı. 2013. “Turkish Discourse Bank: Porting a Discourse Annotation Style to a Morphologically Rich Language.” Dialogue and Discourse 4(2): 174–184. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeyrek, Deniz, Amália Mendes, and Murathan Kurfalı. 2018. “Multilingual Extension of PDTB-Style Annotation: The Case of TED Multilingual Discourse Bank.” In Proceedings of the 11th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference – LREC’2018, 7–12 May 2018, Miyazaki, Japan, 1913–1919.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeyrek, Deniz, Amália Mendes, Yulia Grishina, Murathan Kurfalı, Samuel Gibbon, and Maciej Ogrodniczuk. 2019. “TED Multilingual Discourse Bank (TED-MDB): A Parallel Corpus Annotated in the PDTB Style.” Language Resources and Evaluation. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zhou, Yuping, and Nianwen Xue. 2015. “The Chinese Discourse Treebank: a Chinese Corpus Annotated with Discourse Relations.” Language Resources and Evaluation, 49(2):397–431. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Özer, Sibel, Murathan Kurfalı, Deniz Zeyrek, Amália Mendes, Giedrė Valūnaitė Oleškevičienė, Julia Bosque-Gil, Milan Dojchinovski, Philipp Cimiano, Julia Bosque-Gil, Philipp Cimiano & Milan Dojchinovski
2022. Linking discourse-level information and the induction of bilingual discourse connective lexicons. Semantic Web 13:6 ► pp. 1081 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue