--- title: "A recognition-based meta-scheme for dialogue acts annotation" description: "From the second view they build an annotation meta-scheme with four independent taxonomies, one for… 12 references, cited by 1 paper here." authors: ["Claudia Soria", "Vito Pirrelli"] year: 1999 venue: "Towards Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging" source: "https://aclanthology.org/W99-0310/" licence: "CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)" licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/" summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License" canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/soria-1999-recognition-based-meta-scheme-dialogue/" --- [Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/soria-1999-recognition-based-meta-scheme-dialogue/) [home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [1999](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/1999/) / A recognition-based meta-scheme for dialogue acts annotation # A recognition-based meta-scheme for dialogue acts annotation **Authors:** [Claudia Soria](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/claudia-soria/) and [Vito Pirrelli](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/authors/vito-pirrelli/) · **Year:** 1999 · **Venue:** Towards Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging · **Licence:** [CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/) **Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/W99-0310/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/W99-0310.pdf) · [OpenAlex](https://openalex.org/W2799678284) **Citations:** 1 citations (OpenAlex, 2026-10-14) · 1 in our library, of the 149,439 papers whose bibliographies we read ## Summary Dialogue-act tag sets vary a great deal, and earlier ways of comparing them, such as DAMSL's layered design and Larsson's mapping between tag hierarchies, never say which evidence each tag depends on. Soria and Pirrelli, working in the MATE project, separate two views of tagging. A generation-based view asks what intention produced an utterance. A recognition-based view asks which observable linguistic or contextual cues let a hearer infer that intention. From the second view they build an annotation meta-scheme with four independent taxonomies, one for each orthogonal dimension of analysis. Each tag then becomes a point in a multidimensional space rather than an indivisible label. The dimensions run from grammatical form up to illocutionary force and a task-versus-communication split. In a pilot study, the authors compare dialogues tagged with DAMSL, SWITCHBOARD, MAP TASK and VERBMOBIL. They show that tag correspondences are often many-to-many, and that comparing tags dimension by dimension explains these overlaps. This makes tag sets easier to compare, port, customize and check for consistency. ## Key points - The same utterance can carry several readings, each tied to a different evidence source. A stated wish to travel to Boston reads as a claim from its declarative form, as an answer after an earlier request, and as an order when spoken to a taxi driver. - Larsson's method allows only one-to-one, one-to-many and one-to-none links between tags. One example links DAMSL Info-request to MAP TASK Check, Align, Query-yn and Query-w. The authors argue this wrongly assumes schemes split the same phenomena at different granularities; for instance, placing Reply-y under Answer narrows its real scope. - Dimension D4.1 holds Searle's four top classes: Representative, Directive, Commissive and Expressive. D4.2 separates task utterances from communication-management ones, such as asking whether the other person can hear you. - In the pilot, five dialogues were compared, along with a table of per-dimension matches, mismatches and "not applicable" marks. It shows why MAP TASK Explain is the closest match for DAMSL Assert: Assert lacks a stable initiative force. Because Explain leaves D4.1 unspecified, it may also stand in for Open-option, Offer and Info-Request. - The authors list the limitations themselves. The meta-scheme is not a practical annotation scheme, since its tags are underspecified and full multidimensionality hurts reliability. Its dimensions are treated as equals and are neither exhaustive nor minimal; a kinesic dimension for nods or pointing could be added. ## Interesting ideas - Attach every label to the type of evidence that supports it, such as surface form, previous turn or situation, instead of guessing one "true" intention. - Treat a category as a vector over independent dimensions and measure how similar two categories are by counting per-dimension matches and mismatches. - Keep "this dimension does not apply" separate from "the values disagree" when comparing two annotations. - Re-express an existing annotation in a richer neutral scheme to expose inconsistencies in the original tagging. - Keep dimensions on an equal footing so that a scheme can be adapted by merging some of them in a controlled way. ## For Mova How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests: - **I1** (frames): speech-act frames in prag could store one reading per evidence source, so that an explanation states which cue triggered "request" versus "assertion". - **I2** (tree): when converting between UD dialects or treebanks, splitting labels into feature dimensions would show the real many-to-many correspondences instead of forcing one-to-one relabeling. - **I3** (learn): when witness parsers vote on silver data, a parser that says nothing about a feature should not count as one that contradicts it. - **I4** (learn): projecting imported treebank or teacher-LLM labels into Mova's frame dimensions could flag inconsistent items before training, which also gives a cheap quality check. - **I5** (world): knowledge-layer categories drawn from WordNet, FrameNet and Wikidata could be stored per dimension and collapsed only for a given reader or task, without losing the finer distinctions. *Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.* 📚 Shelves (4): [🖥️ Computer Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/) · 16,667 works · [🤖 Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/artificial-intelligence/) · 16,194 works · [🎭 Arts and Humanities](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/) · 16,039 works · [🗣️ Language and Linguistics](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/arts-and-humanities/language-and-linguistics/) · 15,891 works 🧭 Topics (2): [🗨️ Dialogue systems](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/topics/dialogue-systems/) · 624 works · [💬 Speech act theory](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/topics/speech-act-theory/) · 229 works ## Cite Cite as: Claudia Soria and Vito Pirrelli. 1999. A recognition-based meta-scheme for dialogue acts annotation. Towards Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging. The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. ```bibtex @inproceedings{soria1999recognition, title = {{A recognition-based meta-scheme for dialogue acts annotation}}, author = {Claudia Soria and Vito Pirrelli}, booktitle = {Towards Standards and Tools for Discourse Tagging}, year = {1999}, url = {https://aclanthology.org/W99-0310/} } ``` - [← previous Speech repains, intonational phrases, and discourse markers: modeling speakers' utterances in spoken dialogue](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/heeman-1999-speech-repains-intonational-phrases-discourse/) - [next → Linguistic change: the grammatical environment of participial non-finite clauses in Old English and in present-day English](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/drobnak-1999-linguistic-change-grammatical-environment-participial/) - [↑ back to papers of 1999](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/1999/) ## References 12 references, 1 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet. 1. Alexandersson, J., B. Buschbeck-Wolf, T. Fujinami, M. Kipp, S. Koch, E. Maier, N. Reithinger, B. Schmitz, and M. Siegel. 1998. Dialogue Acts in Verbmobil-2, Second Edition. Verbmobil Report 226, DFKI Saarbruecken, Universitaet Stuttgart, TU Berlin, Universitaet des Saarlandes. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Alexandersson%2C+J%2E%2C+B%2E+Buschbeck%2DWolf%2C+T%2E+Fujinami%2C+M%2E+Kipp%2C+S%2E+Koch%2C+E%2E+Maier%2C+N%2E+Reithinger%2C+B%2E+Schmitz%2C+and+M%2E+Siegel%2E+1998%2E+Dialogue+Acts+in+Verbmobil%2D2%2C+Second+Edition%2E+Verbmobil+Report+226%2C+DFKI+) 2. Allen, J. and M. Core. 1997. Draft of DAMSL: Dialog Act Markup in Several Layers. Technical report, Rochester. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Allen%2C+J%2E+and+M%2E+Core%2E+1997%2E+Draft+of+DAMSL%3A+Dialog+Act+Markup+in+Several+Layers%2E+Technical+report%2C+Rochester%2E) 3. Carletta, J., A. Isard, S. Isard, J. Kowtko, G. Doherty-Sneddon, and A. Anderson. 1996. HGRC Dialogue Structure Coding Manual. Technical Report HCRC TR-82, Human Communication Research Centre, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Carletta%2C+J%2E%2C+A%2E+Isard%2C+S%2E+Isard%2C+J%2E+Kowtko%2C+G%2E+Doherty%2DSneddon%2C+and+A%2E+Anderson%2E+1996%2E+HGRC+Dialogue+Structure+Coding+Manual%2E+Technical+Report+HCRC+TR%2D82%2C+Human+Communication+Research+Centre%2C+Univers) 4. Core, M. and J. Allen. 1997. "Coding Dialogs with the DAMSL Annotation Scheme". In Proceedings of the A A A I Fall 1997 Symposium. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Core%2C+M%2E+and+J%2E+Allen%2E+1997%2E+%22Coding+Dialogs+with+the+DAMSL+Annotation+Scheme%22%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+A+A+A+I+Fall+1997+Symposium%2E) 5. di Eugenic, B., P. W. Jordan, and L. Pylkkaenen. 1997. The COCONUT project: dialogue annotation manual Technical report. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=di+Eugenic%2C+B%2E%2C+P%2E+W%2E+Jordan%2C+and+L%2E+Pylkkaenen%2E+1997%2E+The+COCONUT+project%3A+dialogue+annotation+manual+Technical+report%2E) 6. Ichikawa, A., M. Araki, M. Ishizaki, S. Itabashi, T. Itch, H. Kashioka, K. Kato, H. Kikuehi, T. Kumagai, A. Kurematsu, H. Koiso, M. Tamoto, S. Tutiya, S. Nakazato, Y. Horiuchi, K. Maekawa, Y. Yamashita, and T. Yoshimura. 1998. "Standardising Annotation Schemes for Japanese Discourse". In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, Granada, Spain, pp. 731-736. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ichikawa%2C+A%2E%2C+M%2E+Araki%2C+M%2E+Ishizaki%2C+S%2E+Itabashi%2C+T%2E+Itch%2C+H%2E+Kashioka%2C+K%2E+Kato%2C+H%2E+Kikuehi%2C+T%2E+Kumagai%2C+A%2E+Kurematsu%2C+H%2E+Koiso%2C+M%2E+Tamoto%2C+S%2E+Tutiya%2C+S%2E+Nakazato%2C+Y%2E+Horiuchi%2C+K%2E+Maekawa%2C+Y%2E+Yamashit) 7. Jurafsky, D., L. Shriberg, and D. Biasea. 1997. Switchboard SWBD-DAMSL, Shallow-Discourse-Function Annotation; Coders Manual, Drab 13. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jurafsky%2C+D%2E%2C+L%2E+Shriberg%2C+and+D%2E+Biasea%2E+1997%2E+Switchboard+SWBD%2DDAMSL%2C+Shallow%2DDiscourse%2DFunction+Annotation%3B+Coders+Manual%2C+Drab+13%2E) 8. Klein, M., N. O. Bemsen, S. Davies, L. Dybkjaer, J. Garrido, H. Kaseh, A. Mengel, V. Pirrelli, M. Poesio, S. Quazza, and C. Sofia. 1998. Supported Coding Schemes. Technical Report DI.1, MATE. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Klein%2C+M%2E%2C+N%2E+O%2E+Bemsen%2C+S%2E+Davies%2C+L%2E+Dybkjaer%2C+J%2E+Garrido%2C+H%2E+Kaseh%2C+A%2E+Mengel%2C+V%2E+Pirrelli%2C+M%2E+Poesio%2C+S%2E+Quazza%2C+and+C%2E+Sofia%2E+1998%2E+Supported+Coding+Schemes%2E+Technical+Report+DI%2E1%2C+MATE%2E) 9. Larsson, S. 1998. Coding schemas ]or dialogue moves. Technical report, Department of Linguistics, Goeteborg University. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Larsson%2C+S%2E+1998%2E+Coding+schemas+%5Dor+dialogue+moves%2E+Technical+report%2C+Department+of+Linguistics%2C+Goeteborg+University%2E) 10. Poesio, M. and D. Traum. 1998. "Towards an Axiomatization of Dialogue Acts". In Proceedings of the Twente Workshop on the Formal Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogues, Enschede, The Netherlands, pp. 207-222. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Poesio%2C+M%2E+and+D%2E+Traum%2E+1998%2E+%22Towards+an+Axiomatization+of+Dialogue+Acts%22%2E+In+Proceedings+of+the+Twente+Workshop+on+the+Formal+Semantics+and+Pragmatics+of+Dialogues%2C+Enschede%2C+The+Netherlands%2C+pp%2E+2) 11. Poesio, M., Cooper, R., Larsson, S., Traum, D. and C. Matheson. 1999. "Annotating Conversations for Information State Updates". Paper presented at Amstelogue99. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Poesio%2C+M%2E%2C+Cooper%2C+R%2E%2C+Larsson%2C+S%2E%2C+Traum%2C+D%2E+and+C%2E+Matheson%2E+1999%2E+%22Annotating+Conversations+for+Information+State+Updates%22%2E+Paper+presented+at+Amstelogue99%2E) 12. Searle, J. 1969. [Speech Acts](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/searle-1969-speech-acts/). Cambridge University Press *Updated 29 October 2026*