Abstract
This paper presents a first attempt at using Walton’s argumentation schemes for annotating arguments in Swedish political text and assessing the feasibility of using this particular set of schemes with two linguistically trained annotators. The texts are not pre-annotated with argumentation structure beforehand. The results show that the annotators differ both in number of annotated arguments and selection of the conclusion and premises which make up the arguments. They also differ in their labeling of the schemes, but grouping the schemes increases their agreement. The outcome from this will be used to develop guidelines for future annotations.- Anthology ID:
- W19-4520
- Volume:
- Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Argument Mining
- Month:
- August
- Year:
- 2019
- Address:
- Florence, Italy
- Venue:
- ArgMining
- SIG:
- Publisher:
- Association for Computational Linguistics
- Note:
- Pages:
- 177–186
- Language:
- URL:
- https://aclanthology.org/W19-4520
- DOI:
- 10.18653/v1/W19-4520
- Cite (ACL):
- Anna Lindahl, Lars Borin, and Jacobo Rouces. 2019. Towards Assessing Argumentation Annotation - A First Step. In Proceedings of the 6th Workshop on Argument Mining, pages 177–186, Florence, Italy. Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Cite (Informal):
- Towards Assessing Argumentation Annotation - A First Step (Lindahl et al., ArgMining 2019)
- PDF:
- https://preview.aclanthology.org/ingestion-script-update/W19-4520.pdf