Refining our Notion of What Text Really Is: The Problem of Overlapping Hierarchies (original) (raw)
Related papers
Hierarchical or Non-hierarchical? A Philosophical Approach to a Debate in Text Encoding
2021
Is hierarchical XML apt for the encoding of complex manuscript materials? Some scholars have argued that texts are non-hierarchical entities and that XML therefore is inadequate. This paper argues that the nature of text is such that it supports both hierarchical and non-hierarchical representations. The paper distinguishes (1) texts from documents and document carriers, (2) writing from "texting", (3) actions that can be performed by one agent only from actions that require at least two agents to come about (“shared actions”), (4) finite actions from potentially infinitely ongoing actions. Texts are described as potentially infinitely ongoing shared actions which are co-produced by author and reader agents. This makes texts into entities that are more akin to events than to objects or properties, and shows, moreover, that texts are dependent on human understanding and thus mind-dependent entities. One consequence from this is that text encoding needs to be recognized as a...
Proceedings of the International Symposium on Quality Assurance and Quality Control in XML, 2000
Textual Relations and Topic-Projection: Issues in Text Categorization
2017
Categorization of text is done on the basis of its aboutness. Understanding what a text is about often involves a subjective dimension. Developments in linguistics, however, can provide some important insights about what underlies the process of text categorization in general and topic spotting in particular. More specifically, theoretical underpinnings from formal linguistics and systemic functional linguistics may give some important insights about the way challenges can be dealt with. Under this situation, this paper seeks to present a theoretical framework which can take care of the categorization of text in terms of relational hierarchies embodied in the overall organization of the text.
Ordering and structuring ideas in text: From conceptual organization to linguistic formulation
European Journal of Psychology of Education, 2002
The goal of this study was to analyze the development of the relationship between conceptual and linguistic processes as regards idea ordering and structuring (linearizing), when composing a text. Participants (from 7 th graders to University students) were required to compose a text using a list of eleven scrambled ideas. Conceptual rules allow to a priori determine an optimal ordering of these ideas. Results showed a significant increase, with grade level, in the establishment of the postulated conceptual order, and in the linguistic elaboration of the text structure. A large autonomy was observed between conceptual and linguistic processes. The discussion considers the following points: The relevance of the notion of text optimal order; the unequal development with grade level of the varied linguistic skills; the dissymmetry in conceptual-linguistic relationships; the usefulness of the experimental paradigm; some consequences for education.
Introduction to Text Linguistics
Contents 0 Foreword vi I Basic notions Textuality. The seven standards of textuality: cohesion; coherence; intentionality; acceptability; informativity; situationality; intertextuality. Constitutive versus regulative principles: efficiency; effectiveness; appropriateness. II. The evolution of text linguistics Historical background of text linguistics: rhetoric; stylistics; literary studies; anthropology; tagmemics; sociology; discourse analysis; functional sentence perspective. Descriptive structural linguistics: system levels; Harris's discourse analysis; Coseriu's work on settings; Harweg's model of substitution; the text as a unit above the sentence. Transformational grammar: proposals of Heidolph and Isenberg; the Konstanz project; Petöfi's text-structure/worldstructure theory; van Dijk's text grammars; Mel'cuk's text-meaning model; the evolving notion of transformation. III. The procedural approach Pragmatics. Systems and systemization. Description and explanation. Modularity and interaction. Combinatorial explosion. Text as a procedural entity. Processing ease and processing depth. Thresholds of termination. Virtual and actual systems. Cybernetic regulation. Continuity. Stability. Problem solving: depth-first search, breadth-first search, and means-end analysis. Mapping. Procedural attachment. Pattern-matching. Phases of text production: planning; ideation; development; expression; parsing;
This paper discusses aspects of the theoretical and methodological confusion around the notions of language function, text type and genre, and proposes a restructuring of the purported relationship among them. Taxonomical biases regarding genre have led to the postulation of superordinate classes, variously labeled prototypical text categories, text prototypes, deep structure genres, or text types, which are typically defined on the basis of linguistic criteria; however, in practice, classifications of text types involve a strong functional component. The result of such mixing is a disparate set of analytical categories labeling text types. Rather than doing away with the problematic construct of text type, we propose a different approach whereby text type is reconceptualized as what we term the overall force of a text. Borrowing insights from speech act theory and Relevance theory we define force as an overarching textual function and argue that force is arrived at by processes of inference deploying contextual knowledge. Such an inferential approach allows for preserving the dynamism of this intuitively necessary superordinate construct.