Creating an argumentation corpus: do theories apply to real arguments?: a case study on the legal argumentation of the ECHR

ABSTRACT

Argumentation annotation is a crucial step in applying machine learning techniques to the argumentation field. However, there exist few argumentation corpora and their development has not been studied in depth. In this paper we present a study conducted during the creation of a legal argumentation corpus. It shows how well-known argumentation theories are used as the background framework of the annotation process and which difficulties are found when applying those theories to real argumentation. The aim of the paper is to highlight different critical points humans encounter when applying theory to real argumentation, allowing better and faster approaches in future annotation processes. Furthermore, we also highlight fundamental problems of the chosen argumentation theories and thereby offer ideas for future research on argumentation theory.

REFERENCES

• 1: Philippe Besnard , Anthony Hunter, Elements of Argumentation, The MIT Press, 2008
• 2: J. A. Blair. A time for argument theory integration. In Critical Problems in Argumentation: Selected Papers from the 13th Biennial Conference on Argumentation, Washington, DC: National Communication Association, 2005.
• 3: A. Hastings. A Reformulation of the Modes of Reasoning in Argumentation, Evanston, Illinois. PhD thesis, 1963.
• 4: M. La Torre. Theories of Legal Argumentation and Concepts of Law. An Approximation. Ratio Juris, 15(4): 377--402, December 2002.
• 5: L. Thorne McCarty, Some arguments about legal arguments, Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Artificial intelligence and law, p.215-224, June 30-July 03, 1997, Melbourne, Australia [doi>10.1145/261618.261656]
• 6: C. Perelman and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca. The New Rhetoric. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 1969.
• 7: F. H. Van Eemeren and Grootendorst. A Systematic Theory of Argumentation. The pragma-dialectic approach. Cambridge University Press, 2004.
• 8: G. R. J. S. van Eemeren, F. H. and S. Jacobs. Reconstructing argumentative discourse. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa, 1993.
• 9: D. N. Walton. Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associate, Mahwah NJ, USA, 1996.
• 10: D. N. Walton. The new dialectic, Conversational contexts of argument. University of Toronto Press, 1998.
• 11: D. N. Walton. Legal Argumentation and Evidence. University Park (PA), University of Pennsylvania Press, 2002.
• 12: D. N. Walton, C. Reed, and F. Macagno. Argumentation Schemes. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2008.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.1 Applications and Expert Systems
          Subjects: Law

Additional Classification:
  I. Computing Methodologies
  I.2 ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
      I.2.6 Learning

  K. Computing Milieux
  K.5 LEGAL ASPECTS OF COMPUTING
      K.5.0 General

General Terms:
Legal Aspects