DOCSLIB.ORG

ASSESSING POETRY MARKUP with NUSCHOLAR by MEGHA JYOTI

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ASSESSING POETRY MARKUP with NUSCHOLAR by MEGHA JYOTI ASSESSING POETRY MARKUP WITH NUSCHOLAR by MEGHA JYOTI Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Computer Science at Dalhousie University Halifax, Nova Scotia December 2013 © Copyright by Megha Jyoti, 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... viii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... ix ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................... xi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... xii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1 1.1 Benefits of Digital Scansion Tool ............................................................................... 3 1.2 Motivation ................................................................................................................. 5 1.3 Thesis Contribution ................................................................................................... 6 1.4 Solution Overview ..................................................................................................... 6 1.4.1 Requirement Gathering ................................................................................. 6 1.4.2 Design and Implementation .......................................................................... 7 1.4.3 In situ Evaluation ............................................................................................ 8 1.5 Thesis Roadmap ........................................................................................................ 9 CHAPTER 2 BACKGROUND AND RELATED WORK ........................................................ 11 2.1 E-Learning ............................................................................................................... 11 2.1.2 Guidelines Considered for NUScholar ......................................................... 13 2.2 Annotation .............................................................................................................. 14 2.3 Scansion .................................................................................................................. 17 2.4 “For Better for Verse” ............................................................................................. 23 2.4.1 Scansion Task ............................................................................................... 23 2.4.2 Poems To Scan ............................................................................................. 23 2.4.3 Meter Identification ..................................................................................... 23 2.4.4 Additional Features ...................................................................................... 24 2.4.5 Glossary and Instructions ............................................................................. 24 2.4.6 Limitations of “For Better For Verse” .......................................................... 25 2.4.7 How “For Better for Verse” could be better integrated into the practice of teaching with computers? .................................................................. 26 2.5 Summary ................................................................................................................. 27 ii CHAPTER 3 REQUIREMENT GATHERING ..................................................................... 29 3.1 Research Objectives ................................................................................................ 30 3.2 Study Design ............................................................................................................ 30 3.3 Results ..................................................................................................................... 32 3.3.1 Type of Application ...................................................................................... 32 3.3.2 Scansion Marks Required and their Availability .......................................... 32 3.3.3 Appearance of the Poem ............................................................................. 33 3.3.4 Requirements for Saving the Poem ............................................................. 34 3.3.5 Checking the Accuracy of Marked Poem ..................................................... 35 3.3.6 Choosing a Poem to Scan ............................................................................. 35 3.3.7 Dictionary ..................................................................................................... 36 3.3.8 Other Features Required ............................................................................. 37 3.3.8.1 Ability to Correct Mistakes ................................................................... 37 3.3.8.2 Audio Version of Poems ........................................................................ 37 3.3.8.3 Color Blocking the Stanzas .................................................................... 37 3.3.8.4 Adding Notes and Comments ............................................................... 38 3.3.8.5 Highlight ................................................................................................ 38 3.3.8.6 Print ....................................................................................................... 38 3.3.8.7 System Asking Poem-Specific Questions .............................................. 39 3.3.8.8 Chat/ Discussion .................................................................................... 39 3.3.8.9 Concordance ......................................................................................... 39 3.3.8.10 Caesura ............................................................................................... 39 3.3.8.11 Enjambment ........................................................................................ 40 3.3.8.12 Automatic Meter and Feet Substitution Identification ...................... 40 3.3.8.13 Grading and Marking for Teachers ..................................................... 40 3.3.8.14 Line Numbers for Poem Lines ............................................................. 40 3.3.8.15 Audio for Different Accentual Syllabic Values .................................... 40 3.3.8.16 Glossary ............................................................................................... 40 3.4 Limitations of the Study .......................................................................................... 42 iii 3.5 What Could Have Been Done Differently? ............................................................. 43 CHAPTER 4 DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION .............................................................. 44 4.1 Design ...................................................................................................................... 44 4.1.1 Scanning ....................................................................................................... 44 4.1.2 Undo ............................................................................................................. 50 4.1.3 Finding the meter ........................................................................................ 52 4.1.4 Getting Reviews on Scansion ....................................................................... 54 4.1.5 Flexibility to Choose Poem ........................................................................... 56 4.1.6 Save and Print .............................................................................................. 58 4.1.7 AutoSave ...................................................................................................... 61 4.1.8 Dictionary ..................................................................................................... 61 4.1.9 Glossary ........................................................................................................ 63 4.2 Implementation ...................................................................................................... 63 4.2.1 Syllable Representation, Selection and Marking ......................................... 64 4.2.2 Finding the Meter in the Line ...................................................................... 66 4.2.3 Undo ............................................................................................................. 69 CHAPTER 5 FIELD EVALUATION OF NUSCHOLAR SCANSION TOOL .............................. 72 5.1 Research Objectives ................................................................................................ 72 5.2 Study Design ............................................................................................................ 73 5.2.1 Study Population and Recruitment Procedures .......................................... 73 5.2.2 Participants .................................................................................................. 73 5.2.3 Study Protocol .............................................................................................. 74 5.2.4 Data Collection ............................................................................................. 75 5.3 Results ..................................................................................................................... 75 5.3.1 Background Questions ................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Editor's Introduction
    Editor’s Introduction: Scansion DAVID NOWELL SMITH _______________________ I would like to start from an intuition.1 This might seem an abuse of editorial privilege, and indeed might strike one as more generally tendentious: is an issue on ‘scansion’ the place for discussing one’s intuitions at all? For a start, it contravenes quite brazenly the strict separation between description and performance, lain down most powerfully by John Hollander well over half a century ago. For Hollander, a ‘descriptive’ system of scansion would aim at presenting schematically the whole ‘musical’ structure of a poem, whether this consists, in any particular case, of the prosodic features of the language in which it is written, the arrangement of elements completely foreign to that language (syllable counting in English verse for example), or even the arrangement of type on a page. A performative system of scansion, on the other hand, would present a series of rules governing a locutionary reading of a particular poem, before a real or implied audience. It would end up by describing not the poem itself, but the unstated canons of taste behind the rules. Performative systems of scansion, disguised as descriptive ones, have composed all but a few of the metrical studies of the past. Their subjectivity is far more treacherous than even that of reading poems into oscilloscopes and claiming that the image produced describes, or even is, the true poem.2 1 My great thanks to Ewan Jones on his comments on an earlier draft of this introduction. 2 John Hollander, ‘The Music of Poetry’, The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism vol.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Meter
    Introduction to Meter A stress or accent is the greater amount of force given to one syllable than another. English is a language in which all syllables are stressed or unstressed, and traditional poetry in English has used stress patterns as a fundamental structuring device. Meter is simply the rhythmic pattern of stresses in verse. To scan a poem means to read it for meter, an operation whose noun form is scansion. This can be tricky, for although we register and reproduce stresses in our everyday language, we are usually not aware of what we’re going. Learning to scan means making a more or less unconscious operation conscious. There are four types of meter in English: iambic, trochaic, anapestic, and dactylic. Each is named for a basic foot (usually two or three syllables with one strong stress). Iambs are feet with an unstressed syllable, followed by a stressed syllable. Only in nursery rhymes to do we tend to find totally regular meter, which has a singsong effect, Chidiock Tichborne’s poem being a notable exception. Here is a single line from Emily Dickinson that is totally regular iambic: _ / │ _ / │ _ / │ _ / My life had stood – a loaded Gun – This line serves to notify readers that the basic form of the poem will be iambic tetrameter, or four feet of iambs. The lines that follow are not so regular. Trochees are feet with a stressed syllable, followed by an unstressed syllable. Trochaic meter is associated with chants and magic spells in English: / _ │ / _ │ / _ │ / _ Double, double, toil and trouble, / _ │ / _ │ / _ │ / _ Fire burn and cauldron bubble.
    [Show full text]
  • Audible Punctuation Performative Pause In
    PDF hosted at the Radboud Repository of the Radboud University Nijmegen The following full text is a publisher's version. For additional information about this publication click this link. http://hdl.handle.net/2066/140838 Please be advised that this information was generated on 2021-09-25 and may be subject to change. AUDIBLE PUNCTUATION Performative Pause in Homeric Prosody Audible Punctuation: Performative Pause in Homeric Prosody Proefschrift ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen op gezag van de rector magnificus prof. dr. Th.L.M. Engelen, volgens besluit van het college van decanen in het openbaar te verdedigen op donderdag 21 mei 2015 om 14.30 uur precies door Ronald Blankenborg geboren op 23 maart 1971 te Eibergen Promotoren: Prof. dr. A.P.M.H. Lardinois Prof. dr. J.B. Lidov (City University New York, Verenigde Staten) Manuscriptcommissie: Prof. dr. M.G.M. van der Poel Prof. dr. E.J. Bakker (Yale University, Verenigde Staten) Prof. dr. M. Janse (Universiteit Gent, België) Copyright©Ronald Blankenborg 2015 ISBN 978-90-823119-1-4 [email protected] [email protected] All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the author. Printed by Maarse Printing Cover by Gijs de Reus Audible Punctuation: Performative Pause in Homeric Prosody Doctoral Thesis to obtain the degree of doctor from Radboud University Nijmegen on the authority of the Rector Magnificus prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Dactylic Hexameter Is Properly Scanned When Divided Into Six Feet, with Each Foot Labelled a Dactyl Or a Spondee
    Latin Meter: an introduction Dactyllic Hexameter English Poetry: Poe’s “The Raven”—Trochaic Octameter / x / x / x / x / x / x / x / x Once up- on a mid- night drear- y, while I pon- dered weak and wear- y / x / x x / x / x x / x / x / x / O- ver man- y a quaint and cur- i- ous vol- ume of for- got- ten lore, / x / x / x / x / x / x / x / x While I nod- ded, near- ly nap- ping, sud- den- ly there came a tap- ping, / x / x / x / x / x / x / x / As of some- one gent- ly rap- ping, rap- ping at my cham- ber door. / x / x / x / x / x / x / x / “’Tis some vis- i- tor,” I mut- tered, “tap- ping at my cham- ber door; / x / x / x / On- ly this, and noth- ing more.” Scansion n Scansion: from the Latin scandere, “to move upward by steps.” Scansion is the science of scanning, of dividing a line of poetry into its constituent parts. n To scan a line of poetry is to follow the rules of scansion by dividing the line into the appropriate number of feet, and indicating the quantity of the syllables within each foot. n A line of dactylic hexameter is properly scanned when divided into six feet, with each foot labelled a dactyl or a spondee. Metrical Symbols: long: – short: u syllaba anceps: u (may be long or short) Basic Feet: dactyl: – u u spondee: – – Dactylic Hexameter: Each line has six feet, of which the first five may be either dactyls or spondees, though the fifth is nearly always a dactyl (– u u), and the sixth must be either a spondee (– –) or a trochee (– u), but we will treat it as a spondee.
    [Show full text]
  • Basic Guide to Latin Meter and Scansion
    APPENDIX B Basic Guide to Latin Meter and Scansion Latin poetry follows a strict rhythm based on the quantity of the vowel in each syllable. Each line of poetry divides into a number of feet (analogous to the measures in music). The syllables in each foot scan as “long” or “short” according to the parameters of the meter that the poet employs. A vowel scans as “long” if (1) it is long by nature (e.g., the ablative singular ending in the first declen- sion: puellā); (2) it is a diphthong: ae (saepe), au (laudat), ei (deinde), eu (neuter), oe (poena), ui (cui); (3) it is long by position—these vowels are followed by double consonants (cantātae) or a consonantal i (Trōia), x (flexibus), or z. All other vowels scan as “short.” A few other matters often confuse beginners: (1) qu and gu count as single consonants (sīc aquilam; linguā); (2) h does NOT affect the quantity of a vowel Bellus( homō: Martial 1.9.1, the -us in bellus scans as short); (3) if a mute consonant (b, c, d, g, k, q, p, t) is followed by l or r, the preced- ing vowel scans according to the demands of the meter, either long (omnium patrōnus: Catullus 49.7, the -a in patrōnus scans as long to accommodate the hendecasyllabic meter) OR short (prō patriā: Horace, Carmina 3.2.13, the first -a in patriā scans as short to accommodate the Alcaic strophe). 583 40-Irby-Appendix B.indd 583 02/07/15 12:32 AM DESIGN SERVICES OF # 157612 Cust: OUP Au: Irby Pg.
    [Show full text]
  • Generalized Anacrusis in the Meter of Beowulf*
    Generalized Anacrusis in the Meter of Beowulf* Chang Yong Sohn This paper proposes a modified version of anacrusis which applies to a verse- initial element in order to make the verse more manageable by a finite set of verse types. The type- dependent application of the restricted anacrusis originally proposed by Sievers (1885) and adherently employed by Bliss (1958), Cable (1974), Russom (1987) and Hutcheson (1995) not only is unwarranted but also yields a statistical anomaly in some identifiable pairs of verse types. It is demonstrated that there is no obvious reason for such limitation on its application and that the correlation between relative complexity and actual frequency of lift- initial verse types exhibits a pattern incompatible with that of dip- initial verse types. To account for such problems. it is argued that the application of anacrusis be extended to all verse types in such a way that both lift- initial and dip-initial verse types are legitimate candidates for its application. Such extension is further justified by the frequency pattern in light verses. 1. I ntroducti on Anacrusis or auttakt refers to the addition of one or two extra syllables at the beginning of a line. The syllables are "extrametrical" in that they do not count as legible elements for scansion. In other words, they are invisible as far as scansion or metrical analysis is concerned. The primary motivation for positing the initial extrametrical element is that without it aberrant and isolated metrical patterns can be dispensed with. Consider the following verse in Beavulp,2 • This material is based on work supported by Seoul National University under Grant No.
    [Show full text]
  • Zeuscansion: a Tool for Scansion of English Poetry
    ZeuScansion: A tool for scansion of English poetry Manex Agirrezabal1, Aitzol Astigarraga1, Bertol Arrieta1, and Mans Hulden2 1 University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Department of Computer Science, 20018 Donostia, Spain 2 University of Colorado Boulder, Department of Linguistics, Boulder, Colorado (USA) abstract We present a finite-state technology (FST) based system capable of Keywords: performing metrical scansion of verse written in English. Scansion scansion, English, is the traditional task of analyzing the lines of a poem, marking the poetry, out-of-vocabulary stressed and non-stressed elements and dividing the line into metrical words feet. The system’s workflow is composed of several subtasks designed around finite-state machines that analyze verse by performing tok- enization, part-of-speech tagging, stress placement, and stress-pattern prediction for unknown words. The scanner also classifies poems ac- cording to the predominant type of metrical foot found. We present a brief evaluation of the system using a gold standard corpus of human- scanned verse, on which a per-syllable accuracy of 86.78% is achieved. The program uses open-source components and is released under the GNU GPL license.1 1 introduction Scansion is a well-established form of poetry analysis which involves marking the prosodic meter of lines of verse and possibly also dividing the lines into feet. The specific technique and scansion notation may 1 ZeuScansion code: https://github.com/manexagirrezabal/zeuscansion Stress guesser code: https://github.com/manexagirrezabal/athenarhythm Journal of Language Modelling Vol 4, No 1 (2016), pp. 3–28 M. Agirrezabal et al. differ from language to language because of phonological and prosodic differences, and also because of different traditions regarding meter and form.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of Scansion in William Wordsworth's
    AN ANALYSIS OF SCANSION IN WILLIAM WORDSWORTH’S POEMS SKRIPSI Submitted Partial Fulfillment of the Requiretments For the Degree of Sarjana Pendidikan (S.Pd) English Education Program BY : HARIANI 1502050280 FACULTY OF TEACHER TRAINING AND EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF MUHAMMADIYAH SUMATERA UTARA MEDAN 2019 i i ii i ABSTRACT Hariani. 1502050280. An Analysis of Scansion in William Wordsworth’s Poems. Thesis : English Education Program of Teachers’ Training and Education. University of Muhammadiyah Sumatera Utara. Medan. 2019. This study deals with the use of scansion in the William Wordsworth‟s poems. There were two main objectives in this study. The first was to find out the metrical foot and line in William Wordsworth‟s poems. The second was to find out the kind of metrical feet dominantly appeared in William Wordsworth‟s poems. Documentation method was used in collecting the data. This study used descriptive qualitative method for analyzed the data and to describe the findngs. There were 10 poems in this research as the source of data, Surprised by Joy, To a Butterfly, With Ships The Sea Was Sprinkled, Glad Sight Whenever New With Old, It Is a Beauteous Evening, Calm, and Free, The Daffodils, I Travelled Among Unknown Men, Great Men Have Been Among Us, At Furness Abbey, The World Is Too Much With Us. The findings showed there were five kinds of metrical feet found in William Wordsworth‟s poems, Monosyllabic (Masculine or Feminine Ending), Iambic, Trochaic, Dsctylic, and Anapestic.The total number of Monosyllabic (Masculine Ending) was (3), (Feminine Ending) was (12), Iambic was (609), Trochaic was (44), Dactylic was (11), and Anapestic was (8).
    [Show full text]
  • Dactylic Hexameter Verse
    Dactylic Hexameter Verse Ancient verse was composed in lines of long or short syllables in different combinations. Dactylic hexameter consists of lines made from six (hexa) feet, each foot containing either a long syllable followed by two short syllables (a dactyl: – ˇ ˇ) or two long syllables (a spondee: – –). The first four feet may either be dactyls or spondees. The fifth foot is normally (but not always) a dactyl. The sixth foot is an anceps, i.e., either a long-long (– –) or long-short (– ˇ). A line of dactylic hexameter will follow this pattern: I. Quantity Determined by Nature. Each foot of poetry thus consists of long and/or short syllables. If the syllable contains a short vowel or a long vowel, its quantity is said to be determined by its “nature” — it is short or long simply because it contains a short or long syllable. Thus: 1. A short syllable contains a short quantity vowel. 2. A long syllable contains a long quantity vowel 3. A long syllable may also contain a diphthong. Here are some general rules to assist in determining the nature of syllables: • A final -o, -i, or -u is usually long by nature. But: the final -i in tibi and mihi may be either short or long as the meter requires. (The first -i- in both words is always short.) • A final -as, -es, or -os is usually long by nature. • A final -a or -is is often short by nature. But: -a in the first declension ablative singular is always long, as is -is in the first and second declensions ablative / dative plural.
    [Show full text]
  • To Old English Metre (Version 1.5, September 26Th 2016)
    1 A beginner’s guide (hopefully) to Old English metre (version 1.5, September 26th 2016) Alaric Hall and Sheryl McDonald1 1. Introduction When referring to poetic metre, we are referring to the structure of a poem’s rhythm. Metre has to do with things like the different degrees of emphasis (or stress) placed on the different words in a line of poetry, as well as the number of syllables that make up each poetic line. When we analyse the rhythm of poems in relation to their metre, we scan them: an analysis of poetic metre can also be referred to as scansion. You may already be familiar with the idea that much of Shakespeare’s poetry is in a type of metre called iambic pentameter; Old English poetry is just in a different type of metre with different rules, all of which will be explained in more detail in the sections that follow. Old English poetic metre is very different from most recent European traditions, and the details of how it works are still debated. The seminal research on Old English metre was undertaken by Eduard Sievers in the nineteenth century. Sievers made some great leaps and his ideas are still often repeated, but unfortunately they do not really explain how Old English poetry works. The present account is based on Thomas Cable, The English Alliterative Tradition (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1991). More recently, Thomas A. Bredehoft, Early English Metre (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005) has argued for a different way of viewing things which does not contradict Cable’s system given here, but, he argues, does identify more fundamental rules for Old English metre.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Dactylic Hexameter Updated Version: This Page Is an Archive
    Introduction to Dactylic Hexameter Updated version: http://www.skidmore.edu/academics/classics/courses/metrica/ This page is an archive. Introduction to the Dactylic Hexameter Preface. What follows is not a complete discussion of hexameter verse, but a utilitarian guide to the first principles of recitation. As such, some liberties have been taken for the sake of clarity; but with these principles in mind, students should be able to approach with some confidence the daunting prospect of reading Latin epic aloud. The Tradition of the Dactylic Hexameter. Before plunging into the technical details, a few introductory words are in order. Greek and Latin poems follow certain rhythmic schemes, or meters, which are sometimes highly defined and very strict, sometimes less so. Epic poetry from Homer on was recited in a particular meter called the dactylic hexameter. It is fair to say that the dactylic hexameter defines epic. That is, it is impossible to conceive of an epic poem not composed in hexameters; and the hexameter rhythms, when heard, signal that the poem being recited is an epic of some sort. (It is true that in Homer's era, epics were more sung than recited, to the accompaniment of a lyre. This was not the practice in Vergil's day, when the spoken word was preferred.) Fingers. The word dactylos is Greek for "finger" (and for "toe" as well, which picks up on the notion of feet, below). The dactyl is therefore a snippet of rhythm that resembles, at least aurally, a finger. It has a rhythmic shape consisting of one long syllable (noted as ), which represents the long bone, or phalanx, of the finger, plus two short syllables ( ), which represent the two short phalanges.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Scansion with Syntax: an Investigation Into the Effectiveness of a Syntactic Analysis of Poetry by Computer Using Phonological Scansion Theory
    ISSN 1744-1986 Technical Report N O 2007/ 26 Improving Scansion with Syntax: an Investigation into the Effectiveness of a Syntactic Analysis of Poetry by Computer using Phonological Scansion Theory G McAleese 29 September, 2007 Department of Computing Faculty of Mathematics, Computing and Technology The Open University Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, MK7 6AA United Kingdom http://computing.open.ac.uk Improving Scansion with Syntax: an Investigation into the Effectiveness of a Syntactic Analysis of Poetry by Computer using Phonological Scansion Theory A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the Open University‘s Master of Science Degree in Computing for Commerce and Industry by William Gareth Moore McAleese (gm3739) 4 March 2008 Word Count: 14,965 (excluding appendices) Preface I am very grateful to colleagues at work who allowed themselves to be tested (John Andrews, Chris Boomer, Richard Chilvers, Paul Craig, Stephen Cunningham, Keith Dawson, Mark Duggan, Gareth Ferguson, Brendan Gogarty, Wayne Goucher, Martin Kealey , Adam King, John McAree, Jennifer McMaster, Robert Speers and Matthew Williamson). Thanks also go to my supervisor, Trevor Forsythe, who guided me through the project, to my brother Jonathan McAleese who gave me advice, and my parents who supported me. Table of Contents Preface ........................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]