DSA Faculty
API
← к списку преподавателей

Трнавац Радослава

Факультет гуманитарных наук

Профиль на hse.ru ↗ тел.: 00000 | +7(903)2116266
Публикаций
53
Языков
3
Наград
1
Конференций
0
Профиль Публикации (53) Курсы (1)

Профессиональные интересы

Корпусный дискурсивный анализ, эвалюация в тексте, когерентность текста, природный семантический метаязык

Должности

  • Научный сотрудник — Факультет гуманитарных наук, Научно-учебная лаборатория учебных корпусов
  • Доцент — Факультет гуманитарных наук, Школа лингвистики

Био

  • · Начала работать в НИУ ВШЭ в 2022 году.
  • · Научно-педагогический стаж: 3 года.

Образование

  • 2006 · PhD: Лейденский университет
  • 2002 · Магистратура: Белградский университет, квалификация «Магистр филологии»
  • 1998 · Магистратура: Московский государственный университет им. М.В. Ломоносова, специальность «Филология», квалификация «Магистр филологии»
  • — · 2011–2012 Постдокторский научный сотрудник, Факультет лингвистики, Университет Саймона Фрейзера, Ванкувер, Канада (название проекта: Анализ дискурса для суммаризации и определения сентимента. Главный исследователь: др Майте Табоада) 2002-2006 гг. Ph.D. Лингвистика, Лейденский университет, Нидерланды Название диссертации: Аспект и субъектность в модальных конструкциях. 1998-2001 гг. Магистр (русский язык и литература), филологический факультет Белградского университета. 1993-1998 Бакалавр+магистр (русский язык и литература), филологический факультет, МГУ им. М.В.Ломоносова
  • — · Ph.D. Лингвистика (Лейденский университет, Нидерланды)

Опыт работы

  • · Университет Лейдена (Нидерланды), Университет Саймона Фрейзера (Канада), Университет Нови-Сада (Сербия), Университет Белграда (Сербия)

Награды и поощрения

  • · Благодарность факультета гуманитарных наук НИУ ВШЭ (ноябрь 2024)

Гранты и проекты

  • — · магистерские диссертации
  • 2018 · 1. Лингвометодологические основы овладения видом глагола в русском языке старшеклассниками третьего и четвертого курсов, Мария Бакич, октябрь 2018 г., философский факультет Университета Нови-Сад.
  • 2019 · 2. Фразеосемантическое поле с гендерным компонентом в русском и сербском языках, Валентина Юхас, сентябрь 2019 г., Философский факультет Нови-Садского университета
  • 2022 · 3. Семантика лицемерия и его синонимов в русской религиозной литературе, Данка Радованович, февраль 2022 г., Филологический факультет Белградского университета.
  • 2022 · 4. Человек среди людей в сербском и русском языковом сознании, Яна Мандич, февраль 2022 г., филологический факультет Белградского университета
  • — · кандидатская диссертация
  • — · 1. Лексико-семантическое поле «образ государственного деятеля» в политическом дискурсе и языковом сознании общества, Мария Лапигина, Филологический факультет Белградского университета.
  • — · 2. Гендерные конструкции женщин-политиков в СМИ. Драгана Пантович, филологический факультет Черногорского университета.

Идентификаторы исследователя

Публикации (53)

Cataphora, backgrounding and accessibility in discourse.

2016 · ARTICLE · en

We examine discourse factors that are involved in the occurrence of intra/inter-sentential cataphora. On the basis of a corpus analysis of natural language, we test two cognitive theories that attempt to explain the phenomenon of cataphora: clausal backgrounding (Harris and Bates, 2002) and Accessibility Theory (Ariel, 1990). In the first part of the paper, we investigate the presence of cataphoric he, she, it and they in a corpus annotated with nucleus-satellite labels (Mann and Thompson, 1988), which are interpreted to be discourse correlates of the foreground-background distinction. The analysis shows that cataphora cannot be restricted to backgrounded parts of texts, and that backgrounding as an explanation for the occurrence of cataphora cannot be applied at the discourse level. In the second part of the paper, we investigate a cognitively related phenomenon to backgrounding: accessibility and its influence on cataphora. We demonstrate that in different conditions accessibility parameters such as Givenness, Distance and Unity do not show a clear influence (especially when an instance of cataphora and its antecedent are in different sentences), while Saliency and (non)Competition do play a role in the presence of cataphora (both intra- and inter-sententially).

DOI ↗

Semantic Descriptions of 24 Evaluational Adjectives, for Application in Sentiment Analysis.

2016 · ARTICLE · en

We apply the Natural Semantic Metalanguage (NSM) approach (Goddard & Wierzbicka 2014) to the lexical-semantic analysis of English evaluational adjectives and compare the results with the picture developed in the Appraisal Framework (Martin & White 2005). The analysis is corpus-assisted, with examples mainly drawn from film and book reviews, and supported by collocational and statistical information from WordBanks Online. We propose NSM explications for 24 evaluational adjectives, arguing that they fall into five groups, each of which corresponds to a distinct semantic template. The groups can be sketched as follows: “First-person thought-plusaffect”, e.g. wonderful; “Experiential”, e.g. entertaining; “Experiential with bodily reaction”, e.g. gripping; “Lasting impact”, e.g. memorable; “Cognitive evaluation”, e.g. complex, excellent. These groupings and semantic templates are compared with the classifications in the Appraisal Framework’s system of Appreciation. In addition, we are particularly interested in sentiment analysis, the automatic identification of evaluation and subjectivity in text. We discuss the relevance of the two frameworks for sentiment analysis and other language technology applications.

Теорија центрирања и реализација транзиција у српском језику

2015 · ARTICLE · sr

The purpose of this work is to compare the use of various types of anaphora in so-called transitions of Centring Theory (WALKER, JOSHI ET AL. 1998) in the corpus of Serbian newspaper texts. The Centring Theory is a theory of local consistency (coherence) of the text, in which four types of transitions are considered as parameters of this consistency. According to the hypotheses put forward in studies based on the material of different languages, the sequential transition is characterized by the minimum form of the topic (zero forms), and smooth and sharp transitions are combined with the full nominal phrase of the topic. Analysis reveals that the ‘rule of succession’ of the Centring Theory is not entirely observed in the written corpus of the Serbian language, since a soft transition is the most frequent type of transition in the corpus. As evidence of this statement, we demonstrate (a) the genre of a newspaper article and (b) the way in which simple sentences are combined into a complex sentence in the written Serbian language

Discourse relations and affective content in the expression of opinion in texts.

2014 · CHAPTER · en

The purpose of this paper is to determine the influence that the interaction of discourse structure expressed by discourse relations (Mann & Thompson 1988) and affective lexical items classified as Attitude (Martin & White 2005) have on the overall opinion in texts. We focus on the eight most frequent discourse relations in our data which we extracted from two corpora: the Simon Fraser University Review Corpus (Taboada 2008) and the Penn Discourse Treebank 2.0 (Prasad et al. 2008). The results show that “No change” of opinion polarity is the most frequent type of polarity that occurs with the analyzed discourse relations.

Discourse structure and attitudinal valence of opinion words in sentiment extraction

2014 · CHAPTER · en

Taboada et al. (2008) propose a word-based method for extracting sentiment from text that relies on the most relevant parts of a text. The method predicts that opinion words found in the nuclei (more important parts) of a document are more significant for the overall sentiment, whereas opinion words found in the satellites (less important parts) only potentially interfere with the overall sentiment. However, as pointed out by Taboada et al. (2008) and Narayanan et al. (2009), for certain discourse relations (for instance, Condition relations), the calculation of sentiment should involve both parts of the relation. Based on our analysis of the affective content expressed by automatically extracted discourse relations from the Simon Fraser University Corpus (Taboada 2008) and the Penn Discourse Treebank (Prasad et al. 2008), we propose to classify all the discourse relations into four categories: (1) relations that reverse polarity, (2) intensify polarity, (3) downtone polarity, or (4) produce no change in polarity. We compare the performance of a sentiment analysis system (SO-CAL, Taboada et al. 2011) when opinion words are detected only in the nuclei with its performance when both parts of the relation are analyzed in combination with the opinion words. The results of the experiment show that extraction of both the nucleus and the satellite parts of texts does not improve the performance of a sentiment extraction system.

Nonveridicality and evaluation: Theoretical, computational and corpus approaches.

2013 · BOOK · en

Edited volume

Nonveridicality and evaluation across disciplinary boundaries.

2013 · CHAPTER · en

This volume brings together a diverse group of researchers with interests in areas with connection to evaluation in discourse. The papers contained in the volume address issues having to do with how evaluation and subjectivity are interpreted in context, the context being sometimes determined by the pres- ence of nonveridical markers, and sometimes by other discourse phenomena such as coherence relations. Evaluation and nonveridicality engage in an obvious interaction. Evaluation may be expressed as definitive, or it may be tempered by a nonveridical ele- ment, in which case it tends to have a weaker effect. Consider the difference between (1) and (2). (1) He is a good student. (2) He could be a good student. The modal verb in (2) indicates that the positive evaluation is weakened, or downtoned, to a potentially negative appraisal of the student. We use evaluation as an umbrella term that can be instantiated as Apprais- al Theory (Martin & White, 2005), evaluation (Bednarek, 2006; Hunston & Thompson, 2000b), stance (Biber & Finegan, 1989), or subjectivity (Langacker, 1990; Lyons, 1982; von Fintel & Gillies, 2010). Nonveridicality (Giannakidou, 1998; Zwarts, 1995), or irrealis (Fleischman, 1995) refers to the expressions, such as modals and negation, that affect the truth conditions of elements in their scope, and, in particular, of evaluative elements.

Катафорски облици заменица ово, то, оно у расцепљеним (cleft) реченицама у српском језику.

2013 · ARTICLE · sr

The objective of the paper is to analyze Serbian impersonal genderless pronouns ovo, to, ono (this, it, that) from the perspective of their cataphoric use and different distribution within clefts and pseudoclefts. The author argues that the above pronouns have full semantic meaning in these constructions. Their cataphoric use is based on the parameters of minimal Distance and strong Unity (Accessibility Theory, ARIEL, 1990, 2001), while the difference in distribution within clefts/pseudoclefts is triggered by various cognitive statuses (GUNDEL, HEDBERG et al. 1993) that they create in the mind of conversational participants.

DOI ↗

The contribution of (non)veridical rhetorical relations to evaluation in discourse.

2012 · ARTICLE · en

We examine how nonveridical markers and rhetorical relations contribute to the expression of Appraisal (evaluation) in discourse. First, we define nonveridicality and nonveridical contexts, following Giannakidou (Polarity Sensitivity as (Non)Veridical Dependency. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, 1998). We then relate nonveridicality to modality, Appraisal and rhetorical relations, and present a map of all these concepts. Finally, we carry out a corpus study, where we examine all types of nonveridicality markers in the context of two different types of rhetorical relations, conditional and concessive relations, and how they influence the interpretation of some aspects of Appraisal.

DOI ↗

Cataphoric it and backgrounding from the point of view of coherence relations.

2012 · CHAPTER · en

In (1a) the pronoun cannot be coreferential with the subsequent noun, but in (1b) it can. (1) a. *He finished breakfast before John went to school. (from Carden & Dieterich 1980, cited in Harris & Bates 2002) b. After he finished breakfast, John went to school (he = John) Earlier accounts have suggested that pronouns cannot precede their referents when the pronoun is the subject of the clause (1a), but may when the pronoun appears in a syntactically subordinate clause (1b). Many cases, such as (1) are part of the same sentence. Other cases, however, involve reference across sentences. (2) And I just remember that movie was, had a lot of hype about being really scary and suspenseful and it's nothing like these movies that are out today like Scream and, what is it? Nightmare on Elm Street whatever it is, where they're actual horror movies. [OANC]1 2 Research questions We address two related questions. First of all, we would like to know why in some cases a pronoun is allowed to refer ahead to a subsequent noun, as in (1b). Secondly, we are interested in the discourse factors involved in inter‐sentential cataphora.

DOI ↗

Курсы (1)