Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

International Conference on Speech and Computer

SPECOM 2016: Speech and Computer pp 491–498Cite as

Modeling Imperative Utterances in Russian Spoken Dialogue: Verb-Central Quantitative Approach

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 9811))

Abstract

The study is aimed at detecting stable wording patterns of the utterances with directive function in Russian, and based on the material of speech corpus containing long-term audio recordings of everyday spoken communication. The lemmatized and morphologically annotated mini-corpus in question includes 2030 utterances with 2nd person Sg and Pl verb forms in imperative mood and consists of 11075 word forms. The research involves the data on frequencies of (co-)occurrences of word forms, lemmas, parts of speech within the mini-corpus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For details, see [15]. In the listing the so called «whimperatives» and other indirect ways of expressing commands, as well as verbless directives are not taken into account.

  2. 2.

    See [18] for a detailed overview of the approaches to dialogue act recognition, based on intra-utterance features or on inter-utterance context.

  3. 3.

    Morphological annotation is carried out using the analyzer MyStem, developed for Russian by I. Segalovich and V. Titov at «Yandex». The list of POS-tags includes: S = noun, A = adjective, NUM = numeral, ANUM = numeral adjective, V = verb, ADV = adverb, PRAEDIC = predicative, SPRO = pronoun, APRO = adjectival pronoun, ADVPRO = adverbial pronoun, PR = preposition, CONJ = conjunction, PART = particle, INTJ = interjection, СOM = part of compound word; «foreign» means a word of a foreign language. The abbreviations NEG = negative (negation), IRR = irrealis are used in the glosses above.

  4. 4.

    The sequences слушай слушай ‘listen listen’(#148), подожди подожди ‘wait wait’(#33) and слушайте слушайте ‘listen-Pl listen-Pl’(#17) are not under consideration, as their presence in the data is caused by the multiplicity of single-word utterances слушай, слушайте, подожди.

  5. 5.

    The asterisk marks unacceptable sentences.

References

  1. Asinovsky, A., Bogdanova, N., Rusakova, M., Ryko, A., Stepanova, S., Sherstinova, T.: The ORD speech corpus of russian everyday communication “one speaker’s day’’: creation principles and annotation. In: Matoušek, V., Mautner, P. (eds.) TSD 2009. LNCS, vol. 5729, pp. 250–257. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  2. Austin, J.L.: How to Do Things with Words, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1976)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bunt, H.: The dit++ taxonomy for functional dialogue markup. In: Decker, S., Sichman J., Sierra, C., Castelfranchi, C. (eds.) Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS 2009), pp. 13–20 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Searle, J.R., Vanderveken, D.: Speech acts and illocutionary logic. In: Vanderveken, D. (ed.) Logic, Thought and Action, pp. 109–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Weisser, M.: Landmarks in ‘Traditional’ Pragmatics. http://martinweisser.org/courses/intro/pragmatics.html

  6. Flöck, I., Geluykens, R.: Speech acts in corpus pragmatics a quantitative contrastive study of directives in spontaneous and elicited discourse. In: Romero-Trillo, J. (ed.) Yearbook of Corpus Linguistics and Pragmatics 2015: Current Approaches to Discourse and Translation Studies, pp. 7–37. Springer, Heidelberg (2015)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  7. Jurafsky, D.: Pragmatics and computational linguistics. In: Horn, L., Ward, G. (eds.) The Handbook of Pragmatics, pp. 578–604. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Sadock, J.M., Zwicky, A.M.: Speech acts distinctions in syntax. In: Shopen, T. (ed.) Language Typology and Syntactic Description, pp. 155–196. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Aikhenvald, AYu.: Imperatives and Commands. Oxford University Press, New York (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Searle, J.R.: Expression & Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Act. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1979)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  11. Fortuin, E.L.J., Boogaart, R.J.U.: Imperative as conditional: from constructional to compositional semantics. Cogn. Linguist. 20(4), 641–673 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fortuin, E.L.J.: Polysemy or monosemy: Interpretation of the imperative and the dative-infinitive construction in Russian, Ph.D. thesis, Amsterdam, Institute for Logic, Language and Computation (2000). https://www.illc.uva.nl/Research/Publications/Dissertations/

  13. Russkaya Grammatika, t.2: Sintaksis [The Russian Grammar, vol. 2: Syntax] (1980). http://rusgram.narod.ru/

  14. Russian National Corpus. http://www.ruscorpora.ru/

  15. Khrakovskij, V.S., Volodin, A.P.: Semantika i Tipologija Imperativa: Russkij Imperativ [Semantics and Typology of Imperative: Russian Imperative]. Nauka, Leningrad (1986)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Stojnova, N.: Pobuditel’nye upotreblenija form nastojashhego i budushhego vremeni [imperative use of forms of present and future tense]. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Conference «Issues of the language: The view of young scientists», pp. 227–243. Kanzler, Moscow (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Stolcke, A., Ries, K., Coccaro, N., Shriberg, E., Bates, R., Jurafsky, D., Taylor, P., Martin, R., Van Ess-Dykema, C., Meteer, M.: Dialogue act modeling for automatic tagging and recognition of conversational speech. Comput. Linguist. 26(3), 339–373 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kral, P., Cerisara, Ch.: Dialogue act recognition approaches. Comput. Inform. 29(2), 227–250 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The research is supported by the Russian Science Foundation (RSF), project #14-18-02070 «Everyday Russian Language in Different Social Groups».

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Saint Petersburg State University, 7/9 Universitetskaya nab., St. Petersburg, 199034, Russia

    Olga Blinova

Authors
  1. Olga Blinova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Olga Blinova .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. SPIIRAS , Saint-Petersburg, Russia

    Andrey Ronzhin

  2. Moscow State Linguistic University , Moscow, Russia

    Rodmonga Potapova

  3. Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary

    Géza Németh

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this paper

Cite this paper

Blinova, O. (2016). Modeling Imperative Utterances in Russian Spoken Dialogue: Verb-Central Quantitative Approach. In: Ronzhin, A., Potapova, R., Németh, G. (eds) Speech and Computer. SPECOM 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9811. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43958-7_59

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43958-7_59

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-43957-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-43958-7

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation