JoLIE 10:2/2017

AN ANNOTATION SCHEMA FOR METAPHORS[1]

Giacomo Ferrari

Università del Piemonte Orientale, Vercelli, Italy

Liana Boca

Technical University, Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Abstract

This article proposes a tag-set for the annotation of cognitive metaphors in running texts. After having introduced the general notion of language resource, strictly connected with corpus-based approaches, it sketches the project “Universals and variants of English and Romanian business metaphors. A corpus-based conceptual mapping of contemporary journalese”, comparing the approach adopted in this project with similar projects in which metaphor identification is crucial. Also, the further steps of annotating and tagging are described. Paragraph 4 proposes and discusses an annotation schema and the corresponding tag-set. Scientific and technical motivations for the chosen formalism are also discussed. An example illustrates the use of the proposed tag-set. The final paragraph presents the computer architecture that has been developed to support tagging of the corpus to be annotated.

Key words: linguistic resources, text annotation, tagging, mark-up, tag-sets.

References

Abney, S. (1991). Parsing by Chunks. In R.C. Berwick, S.P. Abney, & C. Tenny (Eds.), Principle-Based parsing (pp. 257-278). Dordrecht: Springer.

Anderson, A., Bader, M., Bard, E., Boyle, E., Doherty, G. M., Garrod, S., Isard, S., Kowtko, J., McAllister, J., Miller, J., Sotillo, C., Thompson, H. S., & Weinert, R. (1991). The HCRC Map Task Corpus. Language and Speech, 34, 351-366. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099103400404

Burnard, L. (2013). The Evolution of the Text Encoding Initiative: From Research Project to Research Infrastructure. Journal of the Text Encoding Initiative [Online], Issue 5, June 2013, Retrieved 10 May 2017, from http://jtei.revues.org/811; DOI: 10.4000/jtei.811

Carletta, J. (1996). Assessing agreement on classification tasks: the kappa statistic. Computational Linguistics, 22, 249-254.

Charteris-Black, J. (2004). Corpus approaches to critical metaphor analysis. Palgrave. MacMillan.

Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27(1), 3-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060024

Core, M.G., & Allen, J.F. (1997). Coding Dialogs with the DAMSL Annotation Scheme. In AAAI Fall Symposium on Communicative Action in Humans and Machines, Boston, MA.

EAGLES (1996). Recommendations for the Morphosyntactic Annotation of Corpora. EAGLES Documents EAG-TCWG-MAC/R, available at the website http://home.uni-leipzig.de/burr/Verb/htm/LinkedDocuments/annotate.pdf

Gross, D., Allen, J., & Traum, D. (1993). The TRAINS 91 dialogues. TRAINS Technical Note 92-1 Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627-0226.

Ide, N., & Véronis, J. (1995). Text Encoding Initiative. Background and Context. Dordrecht / Boston / London: Kluwer Academic Press.

Heeman, P., & Allen, J. (1995). The TRAINS 93 dialogues. TRAINS Technical Note 94-2, Department of Computer Science, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627-0226.

Hofstede, G. (1997). Cultures and organizations: software of the mind. New York: McGraw-Hill USA.

Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: comparing values, behaviors, institutions and organizations across nations (2nd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Jurafsky, D., & Martin, J. (2000). Speech and language processing. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.

Lakoff, G., Espenson, J., Goldberg, A., & Schwartz, A. (1991). Master Metaphor List. Second Draft Copy. Retrieved 25 June 2017, from http://araw.mede.uic.edu/~alansz/metaphor/METAPHORLIST.pdf

Manning, C.D., & Schütze, H. (1999). Foundations of statistical natural language processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Mitkov, R. (2005). The Oxford handbook of computational linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Popescu, T. (2015). Business Metaphors Explained. In T. Popescu, & G.-D. Iordăchescu, (Eds.), Universals and Variants of English and Romanian Business Metaphors: A Corpus-based Conceptual Mapping of contemporary Journalese from a Pedagogical Approach: Proceedings of Project Kick-off Meeting: 23-24 November 2015 - Alba Iulia (13-21). București: Editura Didactică și Pedagogică.

Popescu, T. (2017, in press). Metaphorical conceptualisations of money in English and Romanian business press. Journal of Linguistic and Intercultural Education – JoLIE, 10(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.29302/jolie.2017.10.2.2

Pragglejaz Group (2007). MIP: A Method for Identifying Metaphorically used Words in Discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1-39. DOI: 10.1080/10926480709336752

Sperberg-McQueen, C.M., & Burnard, L. (1994). A gentle introduction to SGML. In Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange. TEI Working Committees. University of Michigan Libraries, Chapter 2. Retrieved from: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/t/tei/

Stefanowitsch, A. (2006). Corpus-based approaches to metaphor and metonymy. In A. Stefanowitsch & S.T. Gries (Eds.), Corpus-based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy (1-16). Berlin/New York: Mouton-DeGruyter.

Stefanowitsch, A., & Gries, S. (Eds.) (2006). Corpus-Based Approaches to Metaphor and Metonymy. Berlin/New York: Mouton-DeGruyter.

Wallington, A.M., Barnden P., Buchlovsky, P., Fellows, L., & Glasbey, S.R. (2004). Metaphor Annotation: A Systematic Study. TR CSRP-03-04.

How to cite this article: Ferrari, G., & Boca, L. (2017). On tropes and the rhetoric of death in Divanul by Dimitrie Cantemir. Journal of Linguistic and Intercultural Education – JoLIE, 10(2), 19-34. DOI: https://doi.org/10.29302/jolie.2017.10.2.2

For details on subscription, go to: http://jolie.uab.ro/index.php?pagina=-&id=19&l=en

[1] This work was supported by a grant of the Romanian National Authority for Scientific Research and Innovation, CNCS – UEFISCDI, project number PN-II-RU-TE-2014-4-2785.