Publishing Partner: Cambridge University Press CUP Extra Publisher Login
amazon logo
More Info


New from Oxford University Press!

ad

Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice

By Ingrid Piller

Linguistic Diversity and Social Justice "prompts thinking about linguistic disadvantage as a form of structural disadvantage that needs to be recognized and taken seriously."


New from Cambridge University Press!

ad

Language Evolution: The Windows Approach

By Rudolf Botha

Language Evolution: The Windows Approach addresses the question: "How can we unravel the evolution of language, given that there is no direct evidence about it?"


The LINGUIST List is dedicated to providing information on language and language analysis, and to providing the discipline of linguistics with the infrastructure necessary to function in the digital world. LINGUIST is a free resource, run by linguistics students and faculty, and supported primarily by your donations. Please support LINGUIST List during the 2016 Fund Drive.

Academic Paper


Title: Generating basic skills reports for low-skilled readers
Author: Sandra Williams
Email: click here TO access email
Homepage: http://mcs.open.ac.uk/sw6629/
Institution: The Open University
Author: Ehud Reiter
Institution: University of Aberdeen
Linguistic Field: Psycholinguistics
Abstract: We describe , a Natural Language Generation (NLG) system that generates a personalised feedback report for someone who has just completed a screening assessment of their basic literacy and numeracy skills. Because many users have limited literacy, the generated reports must be easily comprehended by people with limited reading skills; this is the most novel aspect of , and the focus of this paper. We used two approaches to maximise readability. First, for determining content and structure (document planning), we did not explicitly model readability, but rather followed a pragmatic approach of repeatedly revising content and structure following pilot experiments and interviews with domain experts. Second, for choosing linguistic expressions (microplanning), we attempted to formulate explicitly the choices that enhanced readability, using a constraints approach and preference rules; our constraints were based on corpus analysis and our preference rules were based on psycholinguistic findings. Evaluation of the system was twofold: it compared the usefulness of NLG technology to that of canned text output, and it assessed the effectiveness of the readability model. Results showed that NLG was more effective than canned text at enhancing users' knowledge of their skills, and also suggested that the empirical ‘revise based on experiments and interviews’ approach made a substantial contribution to readability as well as our explicit psycholinguistically inspired models of readability choices.

CUP AT LINGUIST

This article appears IN Natural Language Engineering Vol. 14, Issue 4, which you can READ on Cambridge's site or on LINGUIST .



Add a new paper
Return to Academic Papers main page
Return to Directory of Linguists main page