Skip to content
Review Open access

Theoretical implications of automated discourse parsing in student writing

2025 · Italian Journal of Computational Linguistics · 0 citations

TL;DR

Comparing human annotations with outputs from generative large language models and examining their alignment with theoretical models of textuality show how computational approaches can shed light on linguistic theories and, vice versa, how linguistic theories can guide the application of computational resources.

Abstract

This article presents a study on annotating explicit discourse relations in Italian student essays, comparing human annotations with outputs from generative large language models and examining their alignment with theoretical models of textuality. We review prior work on automatic discourse relation annotation in Italian, highlighting limitations in language coverage, especially in out-of-domain scenarios and how these have been addressed. Our experiments explore the use of generative models to mitigate the scarcity of domain-specific training data, while assessing their ability to reflect the intended theoretical framework. We evaluate two generative models in detecting connectives and classifying their senses, comparing results to human annotation. For our evaluation sample, we use a string-matching algorithm combined with a rule-based approach to pre-annotate essays with possible connective forms and their senses, based on their presence in the Lexicon of Italian Connectives (LICO). These annotations were manually corrected by two expert annotators, resulting in a publicly available evaluation sample. The study raises significant theoretical questions about the definition of connectives, its relationship to text segmentation and the challenges both human and machines face when annotating discourse relations. Our findings show how computational approaches can shed light on linguistic theories and, vice versa, how linguistic theories can guide the application of computational resources.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Jul 2026

Challenges in annotations by humans and LLMs: A case study of evaluative language

In this paper, we draw a comparison between linguists in training, a trained linguist, and annotations generated by large language models (LLMs) to find out if they struggle with complex linguistic phenomena in a similar way. For this purpose, we analyse evaluative language in spoken popular science discourse, with the...

Mirela Imamović, Aenne Knierim, Khushi Pitroda et al. · 0 citations
Open access Jul 2026

The Language of Affect Heuristic in Online Discourse: A Corpus Study with Human and Llm Coders

The affect heuristic is the most frequent heuristic pattern in the corpus, occurring more often than confirmation bias, availability heuristic, or representativeness heuristic, and agreement measures robust to prevalence effects indicate substantial consistency among annotators.

Paulina Żelewska, Barbara Konat · 0 citations
Open access Jul 2026

From newspapers to classrooms: Adapting an annotation scheme and automatic classifiers to mixed-quality argumentative school essays

This work shows that a common approach to representing argument structure as trees is not sufficient to capture the constellations of argument components in student essays, and proposes a suitable extension of that scheme, which is applied to an initial corpus of 50 essays.

Xiaoyu Bai, Kemal Afzal, Dietmar Benndorf et al. · 1 citation
Open access Aug 2026

Corpus linguistics in the age of generative AI: practical and theoretical considerations

It is argued that the notions of authenticity and representativeness as key features of linguistic corpora are compatible with the integration of AI-generated texts in linguistic corpora with a pragmatic practical suggestion for future corpus projects.

T. Bernaisch · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.