@article{scholman-demberg-2017-examples,
    title = "Examples and Specifications that Prove a Point: Identifying Elaborative and Argumentative Discourse Relations",
    author = "Scholman, Merel C.J.  and
      Demberg, Vera",
    editor = "Stent, Amanda  and
      Taboada, Maite  and
      Fern{\'a}ndez, Raquel  and
      Traum, David  and
      Poesio, Massimo  and
      Eugenio, Barbara Di  and
      Stede, Manfred",
    journal = "Dialogue {\&} Discourse",
    volume = "8",
    year = "2017",
    url = "https://preview.aclanthology.org/ingest-dnd/2017.dnd-8.8/",
    doi = "10.5087/dad.2017.203",
    pages = "56--83",
    abstract = "Examples and specifications occur frequently in text, but not much is known about how they function in discourse and how readers interpret them. Looking at how they{'}re annotated in existing discourse corpora, we find that annotators often disagree on these types of relations; specifically, there is disagreement about whether these relations are elaborative (additive) or argumentative (pragmatic causal). To investigate how readers interpret examples and specifications, we conducted a crowdsourced discourse annotation study. The results show that these relations can indeed have two functions: they can be used to both illustrate/specify a situation and serve as an argument for a claim. These findings suggest that examples and specifications can have multiple simultaneous readings. We discuss the implications of these results for discourse annotation."
}