Nina Vikhrova, Johannes Kühling, Sebastian Haunss +1cs.CL
Deliberation, involving the formulation and exchange of arguments, forms an integral part of political decision making in democracies. Argumentation patterns however differ substantially across different political arenas, such as plenary speeches and committee meetings. However, despite a lot of interest in argumentation, there is comparatively little computational work on analyzing differences in patterns of political argumentation between arenas. Our work addresses this research gap. First, we present a 17k-sentence corpus with annotation for argumentative passages (argument and their justifications, both their boundaries and their categories) across three German political arenas (plenary speeches, committee meetings, and press conferences), keeping the topic (COVID-19) constant. Our analysis of the corpus finds that contrary to expectations, justification by domain-specific expertise is more frequent in press conferences than in committee meetings. Second, we present a pilot study on automatically identifying such argumentative passages. The results show that boundaries are hard to pin down, and models predictions additionally suffer from confirmation bias.
In this work we present the first morphologically annotated corpus for Iron Ossetic that conforms to the Universal Dependencies schema. The corpus includes 5454 manually annotated sentences from the Iron Ossetic Corpus of Oral Texts, containing 74032 tokens. We use this corpus to train a BERT-based morphological analyzer. The analyzer achieves tag accuracy of 95.60%.
The Korean adnominal ending \texttt{ETM} occurs in diverse noun-modifying constructions, including relative-clause-like modifiers, adjectival and copular forms, bound-noun constructions, and lexicalized expressions. This paper argues that \texttt{ETM} is not a direct marker of relative-clause structure, but a morphological exponent shared by several adnominal constructions. We propose a corpus-based typology that distinguishes these constructions using predicate type, auxiliary structure, argument-structural compatibility, head-noun restriction, and lexicalized patterns. We operationalize the typology as a construction-sensitive annotation layer for the KLUE dependency treebank, implemented through an ordered rule-based procedure and evaluated by manual validation. Productive relative-clause-like uses account for 39.4\% of the analyzed instances; the remainder consists mainly of adjectival, copular, bound-nominal, modal, temporal, and collocational constructions. The findings show that Korean relative-clause-like modification cannot be identified from adnominal morphology alone.