Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization
What it is about
Not read: this card is written from what is reliably known about the paper, and every idea is marked to check against the text. The paper is the founding statement of Rhetorical Structure Theory (RST). A text is analysed as a tree of spans joined by relations, most of them asymmetric: a nucleus, which is more central to the writer's purpose, and a satellite, which supports it. Each relation (Evidence, Elaboration, Background, Concession, Antithesis, Condition, Purpose, Circumstance, Solutionhood and others, about two dozen in the original set) is defined by constraints on the nucleus, on the satellite, on their combination, and by the effect the writer intends on the reader. A few relations (Sequence, Contrast, Joint) are multinuclear. The analysis must cover the whole text with one connected tree, and the authors observe that removing satellites tends to leave a coherent, shorter text.
Ideas
- I1. Nuclearity as a field on Mova's discourse relations: each relation that
pragorworldrecords between clauses or sentences gets a nucleus side, so the explain output can say which part carries the main point. (to check: the exact definitions of nucleus and satellite in the paper) - I2. Relation definitions as constraints plus an intended effect: write each relation in 36. Discourse relations and coherence as a short checklist (what must hold of N, of S, of N+S, and what the reader should come to believe or do), so a rule can be tested condition by condition and the explanation names the failed condition. (to check: the paper's definition format)
- I3. Nucleus-only summaries of tale paragraphs: drop satellites and test whether the world's tale readers still answer the main-event questions. Negative control: drop nuclei instead; the answers must get worse. (to check: the paper's claim on satellite deletion)
- I4. Map RST relations to PDTB senses and to the connectives already cued in
prag, as a table in the chapter, and list relations with no cue word (Elaboration, Background), which need structure rather than a lexical trigger. (to check)
For Mova
The chapter is 36. Discourse relations and coherence; the code is prag (frames, rules) and the tale readers in world. RST-annotated corpora (RST-DT is LDC-licensed; GUM has RST layers) are for tests only unless their licence allows more. The card holds only our summary.
Cite
@article{mann1988rhetorical,
title = {{Rhetorical Structure Theory: Toward a functional theory of text organization}},
author = {Mann, William C. and Thompson, Sandra A.},
journal = {Text - Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 8(3)},
year = {1988},
doi = {10.1515/text.1.1988.8.3.243},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1515/text.1.1988.8.3.243}
}This page in Markdown → https://md.mova.elamur.ai/free/en/docs/papers/enud-1988-mann-rhetorical-structure-theory-functional/