Discourse structure, topicality and questioning
Open accessAbstract
In this paper we present an alternative approach to discourse structure according to which topicality is the general organizing principle in discourse. This approach accounts for the fact that the segmentation structure of discourse is in correspondence with the hierarchy of topics defined for the discourse units. Fundamental to the proposed analysis is the relation it assumes between the notion of topic and that of explicit and implicit questioning in discourse. This relation implies that (1) the topic associated with a discourse unit is provided by the explicit or implicit question it answers and (2) the relation between discourse units is determined by the relation between these topic-providing questions.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
QUD theory provides a model of discourse that views the progression of a narrative as answers to a series of implicit questions.
“Questions Under Discussion (QUD) (Roberts 1996; 2012; Ginzburg et al. 1996; Van Kuppevelt 1995; 1996, i.a. ) provides a model of discourse that views the progression of a narrative as answers to a series of implicit questions (or QUDs).”
From QUDsim: Quantifying Discourse Similarities in LLM-Generated Text (2025) · cites this paper as Van Kuppevelt 1995
Cited by
Sorted by citations
QUDsim: Quantifying Discourse Similarities in LLM-Generated Text
Namuduri, R., Wu, Y., Zheng, A. A., Wadhwa, M., Durrett, G., & Li, J. J. (2025) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2504.09373
“Theoretical Foundation Questions Under Discussion (QUDs) (Roberts 1996; 2012; Ginzburg et al. 1996; Van Kuppevelt 1995; 1996 i.a. ) is a linguistic framework originally developed to explain discourse progression through a process of posing and resolving questions (Hamblin 1957; 1970; Stalnaker 1978).”
Influential
- Authors
- Kuppevelt, J. V.
- Affiliations
- Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
- Corresponding author
- Kuppevelt, Jan Van
- Venue
- Journal of Linguistics
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 1995-03
- Volume
- 31
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 109-147
- ISSN
- 0022-2267 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7742
- OpenAlex
- W2132623301
- Cited by
- 437
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 44 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 30 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 7
- FWCI
- 10.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- hdl.handle.net
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Linguistics (publishedVersion)
- Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Linguistics and Discourse Analysis
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Literature and Literary Theory › Discourse Analysis in Language Studies
- Keywords
- discourse structure, topicality, topic, discourse segmentation, discourse units, topic hierarchy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
