Abstract
TimeML is a specification language for the annotation of events and temporal expressions in natural language text. In addition, the language introduces three relational tags linking temporal objects and events to one another. These links impose both aspectual and temporal ordering over time objects, as well as mark up subordination contexts introduced by modality, evidentiality, and factivity. Given the richness of this specification, the TimeML working group decided not to include the arguments of events within the language specification itself. Full reasoning and inference over natural language texts clearly requires knowledge of events along with their participants. In this paper, we define the appropriate role of argumenthood within event markup and propose that TimeML should make a basic distinction between arguments that are events and those that are entities. We first review how TimeML treats event arguments in subordinating and aspectual contexts, creating event-event relations between predicate and argument. As it turns out, these constructions cover a large number of the argument types selected for by event predicates. We suggest that TimeML be enriched slightly to include causal predicates, such as lead to, since these also involve event-event relations. As such, causal relationships will be a relation type for the new Discourse Link that will also encode other discourse relations such as elaboration. We propose that all other verbal arguments be ignored by the specification, and any predicate-argument binding of participants to an event should be performed by independent means. In fact, except for the event-denoting arguments handled by the extension to TimeML proposed here, almost full temporal ordering of the events in a text can be computed without argument identification.
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Mani, I., Wilson, G.: Robust temporal processing of news. In: ACL 2000. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, New Brunswick, New Jersey, pp. 69–76 (2000)
Schilder, F., Habel, C.: From Temporal Expressions To Temporal Information: Semantic Tagging Of News Messages. In: ACL-EACL-2001, Toulose, France, pp. 65–72 (July 2001)
Ferro, L., Mani, I., Sundheim, B., Wilson, G.: Tides temporal annotation guidelines. Technical Report Version 1.0.2, MITRE Technical Report (2001) MTR 01W0000041
SaurĂ, R., Littman, J., Knippen, R., Gaizauskas, R., Setzer, A., Pustejovsky, J.: TimeML Annotation Guidelines (2005), http://www.timeml.org
Allen, J.: Towards a general theory of action and time. Artificial Intelligence 23, 123–154 (1984)
Verhagen, M., Mani, I., SaurĂ, R., Knippen, R., Littman, J., Pustejovsky, J.: Automating temporal annotation within TARSQI. In: Proceedings of the ACL 2005 (2005)
Davidson, D.: The logical form of action sentences. In: The Logic of Decision and Action (1967)
Parsons, T.: Events in the Semantics of English. MIT Press, Cambridge (1990)
Pustejovsky, J.: Current issues in computational lexical semantics. In: ACL 1989, pp. xvii–xxv (1989)
Pustejovsky, J.: The Generative Lexicon. MIT Press, Cambridge (1995)
Hobbs, J.: On the coherence and structure of discourse (1985)
Grosz, B., Sidner, C.: Attention, intentions, and the structure of discourse. Journal of Computational Linguistics 12(3), 175–204 (1986)
Mann, W., Thompson, S.: Rhetorical structure theory: Toward a funcitonal theory of text organization. Text 8(3), 243–281 (also available at USC/Information Sciences Institute Research Report RR-87-190) (1988)
Polanyi, L.: A formal model of the structure of discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 12, 601–638 (1985)
Kehler, A.: Coherence, Reference, and the Theory of Grammar. CSLI Publications (2002)
Asher, N., Lascarides, A.: Logics of Conversation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)
Hovy, E.H., Maeir, E.: Parsimonious or profligate: How many and which discourse structure relations? (1995)
Wolf, F., Gibson, E., Fisher, A.: meredith Knight: A procedure for collecting a database of texts annotated with coherence relations (2003)
Wolf, F., Gibson, E.: Representing discourse coherence: A corpus-based analysis. Computational Linguistics 31(2), 249–287 (2005)
Wellner, B., Pustejovsky, J., Havasi, C., Rumshisky, A., SaurĂ, R.: Classification of Discourse Coherence Relations: An Exploratory Study using Multiple Knowledge Sources. In: 7th SIGDIAL Workshop on Discourse and Dialogue, Sydney, Australia, pp. 117–125 (July 2006)
Pollard, C., Sag, I.: Head-Driven Phrase Structure Grammar. CSLI, Stanford, CA (1994)
Verhagen, M.: Times Between the Lines, PhD thesis. Brandeis University, Waltham, USA (2004)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2007 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pustejovsky, J., Littman, J., SaurĂ, R. (2007). Arguments in TimeML: Events and Entities. In: Schilder, F., Katz, G., Pustejovsky, J. (eds) Annotating, Extracting and Reasoning about Time and Events. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4795. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75989-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-75989-8_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-75988-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-75989-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)