Questions in monologues: an analysis grounded on ISO
-
Purificação Silvano
,
Giedrė Valūnaitė Oleškevičienė
Abstract
The present study analyzes the types of interrogative, such as yes/no questions, wh-questions, or alternative questions, and their semantic and pragmatic functions in a multilingual parallel corpus of spoken monologues extracted from the TED Talks transcripts in five languages: English, European Portuguese, Lithuanian, Bulgarian, and Hebrew. The corpus was developed with English as the pivot language, and the examples are aligned in all five languages based on the occurrence of an interrogative. To conduct this study, we designed an annotation scheme that harmonizes two parts of ISO 24617 – Part 8: Semantic relations and Part 2: Dialogue acts. This framework enabled us to determine the discourse relations that questions establish with the segments to which they are connected and that precede them and their communicative function. In our analysis, we observed that, despite the monologic nature of the corpus, interrogatives are very frequent and diversified across the five languages. Our findings also reveal that the questions are mostly used with a pragmatic function and that the range of discourse relations is less varied. Additionally, the analysis disclosed some pertinent differences between the five languages concerning the translation choices.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on earlier versions of this paper. This research was partially funded by the Centre of Linguistics of the University of Porto through FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P., within the project UIDB/00022/2020 (https://doi.org/10.54499/UIDB/00022/2020).
References
Asher, Nicholas, Julie Hunter, Mathieu Morey, Benamara Farah & Stergos Afantenos. 2016. Discourse structure and dialogue acts in multiparty dialogue: The STAC corpus. In Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Thierry Declerck, Sara Goggi, Marko Grobelnik, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Helene Mazo, Asuncion Moreno, Jan Odijk & Stelios Piperidis (eds.), Proceedings of the 10th international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’16), 2721–2727. Portorož, Slovenia: European Language Resources Association (ELRA). Available at: https://aclanthology.org/L16-1432.Suche in Google Scholar
Asher, Nicholas & Alex Lascarides. 1998. Questions in dialogue. Linguistics and Philosophy 21(3). 237–309. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005364332007.10.1023/A:1005364332007Suche in Google Scholar
Bonan, Caterina. 2021. The periphery of vP in the theory of wh-in situ. Glossa 6(1). https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5714.Suche in Google Scholar
Bunt, Harry. 2015. On the principles of semantic annotation. In Proceedings of the 11th joint ISO-ACL workshop on interoperable semantic annotation (ISA-11). London: Association for Computational Linguistics. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/W15-0201.Suche in Google Scholar
Bunt, Harry. 2019. Plug-ins for content annotation of dialogue acts. In Harry Bunt (ed.), The 15th joint ISO-ACL workshop on interoperable semantic annotation (ISA-15), 34–45. Available at: https://sigsem.uvt.nl/isa15/.Suche in Google Scholar
Bunt, Harry. 2024. Combining semantic annotation schemes through interlinking. In Harry Bunt, Nancy Ide, Kiyong Lee, Volha Petukhova, James Pustejovsky & Laurent Romary (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th joint ISO-ACL workshop on interoperable semantic annotation (ISA @ LREC-COLING 2024), 111–121. Torino: ELRA and ICCL. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/2024.isa-1.14.Suche in Google Scholar
Bunt, Harry, Volha Petukhova, Emer Gilmartin, Catherine Pelachaud, Alex Fang, Simon Keizer & Laurent Prevot. 2020. The ISO standard for dialogue act annotation. In Language resources and evaluation conference, 549–558. Available at: https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/2020.lrec-1.69.Suche in Google Scholar
Bunt, Harry, Volha Petukhova, Andrei Malchanau, Alex Fang & Kars Wijnhoven. 2019. The DialogBank: Dialogues with interoperable annotations. Language Resources and Evaluation 53. 213–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-018-9436-9.Suche in Google Scholar
Bunt, Harry & Rashmi Prasad. 2016. ISO DR-Ccore (ISO 24617-8): Core concepts for the annotation of discourse relations. In The joint ISO-ACL workshop on interoperable semantic annotation (ISA-12), 45–54. Available at: https://sigsem.uvt.nl/isa12/ISA12Proceedings.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar
Cardo, Michele & Agnès Celle. 2025. Question sequences in English TED talks. Linguistics Vanguard. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2025-0027.Suche in Google Scholar
Carlson, Lynn, Daniel Marcu & Mary Ellen Okurowski. 2003. Building a discourse-tagged corpus in the framework of rhetorical structure theory. In C. J. Jan van Kuppevelt & R. W. Smith (eds.), Current and new directions in discourse and dialogue, 85–112. Dordrecht: Springer.10.1007/978-94-010-0019-2_5Suche in Google Scholar
Celle, Agnès. 2009. Question, mise en question: La traduction de l’interrogation dans le discours the´orique. Revue française de linguistique appliquée 14(1). 39–52. https://doi.org/10.3917/rfla.141.0039.Suche in Google Scholar
Celle, Agnès. 2018. Questions as indirect speech acts in surprise contexts. In Dalila Ayoun, Agnès Celle & Laure Lansari (eds.), Tense, aspect, modality, and evidentiality: Crosslinguistic perspectives, 211–236. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Available at: https://u-paris.hal.science/hal-01774821.10.1075/slcs.197.10celSuche in Google Scholar
Ciardelli, Ivano. 2018. Questions as information types. Synthese 195(1). 321–365. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1221-y.Suche in Google Scholar
Eckardt, Regine & Gisela Disselkamp. 2019. Self-addressed questions and indexicality — The case of Korean. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 23(1). 383–398. https://doi.org/10.18148/sub/2019.v23i1.539.Suche in Google Scholar
Farkas, Donka F. 2020. Canonical and non-canonical questions. Unpublished manuscript. Available at: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:211548575.Suche in Google Scholar
Farkas, Donka F. & Kim B. Bruce. 2009. On reacting to assertions and polar questions. Journal of Semantics 27(1). 81–118. https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffp010.Suche in Google Scholar
Ginzburg, Jonathan & Ivan Sag. 2000. Interrogative investigations. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Suche in Google Scholar
Gómez González, María de los Ángeles & Purificação Silvano. 2022. A functional model for the tag question paradigm: The case of invariable tag questions in English and Portuguese. Lingua 272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2022.103255.Suche in Google Scholar
Guerzoni, Elena. 2004. Even-NPIs in yes/no questions. Natural Language Semantics 12. 319–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-004-8739-0.Suche in Google Scholar
Han, Chung-Hye. 1998. Deriving the interpretation of rhetorical questions. In E. Curis, J. Lyle & G. Webster (eds.), Proceedings of West Coast conference in formal linguistics, Vol. 16, 237–253. Stanford: CSLI.Suche in Google Scholar
Heinemann, Trine. 2008. Questions of accountability: Yes-no interrogatives that are unanswerable. Discourse Studies 10. 55–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445607085590.Suche in Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney. 1994. The contrast between interrogatives and questions. Journal of Linguistics 30(2). 411–439. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0022226700016704.Suche in Google Scholar
ISO. 2016a. Language resource management – Semantic annotation framework (SemAF), Part 6: Principles of semantic annotation (SemAF Principles). ISO Standard no. 24617-6:2016.Suche in Google Scholar
ISO. 2016b. Language resource management – Semantic annotation framework (SemAF), Part 8: Semantic relations in discourse, core annotation schema (DR-core). ISO Standard no. 24617-8:2016.Suche in Google Scholar
ISO. 2020. Language resource management – Semantic annotation framework (SemAF), Part 2: Dialogue acts. ISO Standard no. 24617-2:2020.Suche in Google Scholar
Iwata, Seizi. 2003. Echo questions are interrogatives? Another version of a metarepresentational analysis. Linguistics and Philosophy 26. 185–254.10.1023/A:1022851819941Suche in Google Scholar
Karttunen, Lauri. 1977. Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy 1. 3–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00351935.Suche in Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 2001. For a structured meaning account of questions and answers. In Manfred Krifka (ed.), Audiatur vox sapientia: A Festschrift for Arnim von Stechow, 287–320. Berlin: Academie Verlag.10.1515/9783050080116.287Suche in Google Scholar
Lascarides, Alex & Nicholas Asher. 2009. The interpretation of questions in dialogue. Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 13(1). 17–30.Suche in Google Scholar
Leal, António, Purificação Silvano, Evelin Amorim, Inês Cantante, Fátima Silva, Alípio Mario Jorge & Ricardo Campos. 2022. The place of ISO-space in Text2Story multilayer annotation scheme. In Proceedings of the 18th joint ACL-ISO workshop on interoperable semantic annotation within LREC2022, 61–70. Marseille: European Language Resources Association. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/2022.isa-1.8.Suche in Google Scholar
Mackenzie, J. Lachlan. 2009. Content interrogatives in a sample of 50 languages. Lingua 119. 1131–1163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.12.005.Suche in Google Scholar
Mendes, Amália & Pierre Lejeune. 2022. CRPC-DB – A discourse bank for Portuguese in computational processing of the Portuguese language PROPOR 2022. In Vládia Pinheiro, Pablo Gamallo, Raquel Amaro, Carolina Scarton, Fernando Batista, Diego Silva, Catarina Magro & Hugo Pinto (eds.), Computational processing of the Portuguese language, 79–89. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-030-98305-5_8Suche in Google Scholar
Moniz, Helena, Fernando Batista, Isabel Trancoso & Ana Isabel Mata. 2011. Analysis of interrogatives in different domains. In Anna Esposito, Antonietta M. Esposito, Raffaele Martone, Vincent C. Müller & Gaetano Scarpetta (eds.), Toward autonomous, adaptive, and context-aware multimodal interfaces: Theoretical and practical issues, 134–146. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-18184-9_12Suche in Google Scholar
Prasad, Rashmi, Nikhil Dinesh, Alan Lee, Eleni Miltsakaki, Livio Robaldo, Aravind Joshi & Bonnie Webber. 2008. The Penn discourse TreeBank 2.0. In Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Jan Odijk, Stelios Piperidis & Daniel Tapias (eds.), Proceedings of the sixth international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’08). Marrakech: European Language Resources Association (ELRA). Available at: http://www.lrec-conf.org/proceedings/lrec2008/pdf/754_paper.pdf.Suche in Google Scholar
Rohde, Hannah. 2006. Rhetorical questions as redundant interrogatives. San Diego Linguistics Papers 2. 134–168.Suche in Google Scholar
Rosemeyer, Malte. 2022. Modeling the discourse pragmatics of interrogatives. Functions of Language 29. 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.00041.int.Suche in Google Scholar
San Roque, Lila, Simeon Floyd & Elisabeth Norcliffe. 2017. Evidentiality and interrogativity. Lingua 186. 120–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.11.003.Suche in Google Scholar
Santos, Ana Lúcia. 2003. The acquisition of answers to yes-no questions in European Portuguese: Syntactic, discourse and pragmatic factors. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 2(1). 61–91. https://doi.org/10.5334/jpl.36.Suche in Google Scholar
Scholman, Merel & Ted Sanders. 2012. Categories of coherence relations in discourse annotation. Paper presented at the International Workshop on Discourse Annotation, Utrecht Institute of Linguistics, Universiteit Utrecht.Suche in Google Scholar
Siemund, Peter. 2013. Varieties of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Suche in Google Scholar
Silvano, Purificação & Mariana Damova. 2023. ISO-DR-core plugs into ISO-dialogue acts for a cross-linguistic taxonomy of discourse markers. In Sara Carvalho, Anas Fahad Khan, Ana Ostroški Anić, Blerina Spahiu, Jorge Gracia, John P. McCrae, Dagmar Gromann, Barbara Heinisch & Ana Salgado (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th conference on language, data and knowledge, 440–448. Vienna: NOVA CLUNL, Portugal. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/2023.ldk-1.47.Suche in Google Scholar
Silvano, Purificação, Mariana Damova, Giedrė Valūnaitė Oleškevičienė, Chaya Liebeskind, Christian Chiarcos, Dimitar Trajanov, Ciprian-Octavian Truică, Elena-Simona Apostol & Anna Baczkowska. 2022. ISO-based annotated multilingual corpus for discourse markers. In Proceedings of the 13th edition language resources and evaluation conference (LREC 2022), European Language Resources Association (ELRA), 2739–2749. Marseille: European Language Resources Association. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/2022.lrec-1.293.Suche in Google Scholar
Silvano, Purificação, António Leal, Fátima Silva, Inês Cantante, Fatima Oliveira & Alípio Mario Jorge. 2021. Developing a multilayer semantic annotation scheme based on ISO standards for the visualization of a newswire corpus. In Harry Bunt (ed.), Proceedings of the 17th joint ISO-ACL workshop on interoperable semantic annotation (ISA-17), 1–13. Groningen: Association for Computational Linguistics. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/2021.isa-1.1.Suche in Google Scholar
Stoyanchev, Svetlana & Paul Piwek. 2010. Constructing the CODA corpus: A parallel corpus of monologues and expository dialogues. In Nicoletta Calzolari, Khalid Choukri, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Jan Odijk, Stelios Piperidis, Mike Rosner & Daniel Tapias (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th international conference on language resources and evaluation (LREC’10), 19–21. Valletta: European Language Resource Association.Suche in Google Scholar
Thompson, Sandra A. & William C. Mann. 1987. Rhetorical structure theory: A framework for the analysis of texts. IPRA Papers in Pragmatics 1(1). 79–105.10.1075/iprapip.1.1.03thoSuche in Google Scholar
Tomaszewska, Aleksandra, Purificação Silvano, António Leal & Evelin Amorim. 2024. ISO 24617-8 applied: Insights from multilingual discourse relations annotation in English, Polish, and Portuguese. In Harry Bunt, Nancy Ide, Kiyong Lee, Volha Petukhova, James Pustejovsky & Laurent Romary (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th joint ISO-ACL workshop on interoperable semantic annotation (ISA @ LREC-COLING 2024), 99–110. Torino: ELRA and ICCL. Available at: https://aclanthology.org/2024.isa-1.13.Suche in Google Scholar
Zeyrek, Deniz & Amália Mendes. 2025. Questions in the TED-multilingual discourse bank and the development of an annotation scheme. Linguistics Vanguard. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2025-0035.Suche in Google Scholar
© 2025 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
