So far, I think the following features from Levinsohn's data should probably be added to our Lowfat treebank in some way:
- P1 / P2 membership for words and word groups, including types like "topic", "situation", etc.
- Split focus / split constituents
I should mention that the hierarchy in Levinsohn's discourse feature data, depending on points of departure, is sometimes a different hierarchy than a purely sentence-based hierarchy. A discourse analysis hierarchy would be yet another hierarchy. So I suspect there will never be just one useful hierarchy for analyzing a set of sentences ...
Is this more or less correct?