Constraints in Discourse 172nd Edition Anton Benz (Ed.)
- 1. Visit https://ebookultra.com to download the full version and explore more ebooks or textbooks Constraints in Discourse 172nd Edition Anton Benz (Ed.) _____ Click the link below to download _____ https://ebookultra.com/download/constraints-in- discourse-172nd-edition-anton-benz-ed/ Explore and download more ebooks or textbooks at ebookultra.com
- 2. Here are some recommended products that we believe you will be interested in. You can click the link to download. Wilhelm Reich in Hell Robert Anton Wilson https://ebookultra.com/download/wilhelm-reich-in-hell-robert-anton- wilson/ Conversion to Islam in the Balkans Anton Minkov https://ebookultra.com/download/conversion-to-islam-in-the-balkans- anton-minkov/ Uncle Vanya Anton Chekhov https://ebookultra.com/download/uncle-vanya-anton-chekhov/ Advances in Insect Physiology Vol 29 1st Edition Peter Evans https://ebookultra.com/download/advances-in-insect-physiology- vol-29-1st-edition-peter-evans/
- 3. Calculus 10th Edition Howard Anton https://ebookultra.com/download/calculus-10th-edition-howard-anton/ Lenin as Philosopher Anton Pannekoek https://ebookultra.com/download/lenin-as-philosopher-anton-pannekoek/ Immunogenetics 1st Edition Anton W. Langerak https://ebookultra.com/download/immunogenetics-1st-edition-anton-w- langerak/ Anton Chekhov 1st Edition Rose Whyman https://ebookultra.com/download/anton-chekhov-1st-edition-rose-whyman/ Adobe InDesign Classroom in a Book 2022 release 1st Edition Kelly Anton https://ebookultra.com/download/adobe-indesign-classroom-in-a- book-2022-release-1st-edition-kelly-anton/
- 5. Constraints in Discourse 172nd Edition Anton Benz (Ed.) Digital Instant Download Author(s): Anton Benz (ed.), Peter Kühnlein (ed.) ISBN(s): 9789027291431, 9027291438 Edition: 172 File Details: PDF, 4.06 MB Year: 2008 Language: english
- 8. Volume 172 Constraints in Discourse Edited by Anton Benz and Peter Kühnlein Editor Andreas H. Jucker University of Zurich, English Department Plattenstrasse 47, CH-8032 Zurich, Switzerland e-mail: ahjucker@es.uzh.ch Editorial Board Shoshana Blum-Kulka Hebrew University of Jerusalem Jean Caron Université de Poitiers Robyn Carston University College London Bruce Fraser Boston University Thorstein Fretheim University of Trondheim John C. Heritage University of California at Los Angeles Susan C. Herring Indiana University Masako K. Hiraga St.Paul’s (Rikkyo) University David Holdcroft University of Leeds Sachiko Ide Japan Women’s University Catherine Kerbrat- Orecchioni University of Lyon 2 Claudia de Lemos University of Campinas, Brazil Marina Sbisà University of Trieste Associate Editors Jacob L. Mey University of Southern Denmark Herman Parret Belgian National Science Foundation, Universities of Louvain and Antwerp Jef Verschueren Belgian National Science Foundation, University of Antwerp Emanuel A. Schegloff University of California at Los Angeles Deborah Schiffrin Georgetown University Paul Osamu Takahara Kobe City University of Foreign Studies Sandra A. Thompson University of California at Santa Barbara Teun A. van Dijk Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona Richard J.Watts University of Berne Pragmatics & Beyond New Series is a continuation of Pragmatics & Beyond and its Companion Series. The New Series offers a selection of high quality work covering the full richness of Pragmatics as an interdisciplinary field, within language sciences. Pragmatics & Beyond New Series (P&BNS)
- 9. Constraints in Discourse Edited by Anton Benz Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaften Peter Kühnlein Rijksuniversiteit Groningen John Benjamins Publishing Company Amsterdam/Philadelphia
- 10. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Constraints in discourse / edited by Anton Benz, Peter Kuhnlein. p. cm. (Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, issn 0922-842X ; v. 172) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Discourse analysis. 2. Constraints (Linguistics) I. Benz, Anton, 1965- II. Kühnlein, Peter. P302.28.C66 2008 401'.41--dc22 2007048314 isbn 978 90 272 5416 0 (Hb; alk. paper) © 2008 – John Benjamins B.V. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any other means, without written permission from the publisher. John Benjamins Publishing Co. · P.O. Box 36224 · 1020 me Amsterdam · The Netherlands John Benjamins North America · P.O. Box 27519 · Philadelphia pa 19118-0519 · usa The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences – Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ansi z39.48-1984. 8 TM
- 11. Table of contents Acknowledgements vii 1. Constraints in discourse: An Introduction 1 part i The Right Frontier 27 2. Troubles on the right frontier 29 Nicholas Asher 3. The moving right frontier 53 Laurent Prévot and Laure Vieu part ii Comparing Frameworks 67 4. Strong generative capacity of rst, sdrt and discourse dependency dags 69 Laurence Danlos 5. Rhetorical distance revisited: A parameterized approach 97 Christian Chiarcos and Olga Krasavina 6. Underspecified discourse representation 117 Markus Egg and Gisela Redeker part iii The Cognitive Perspective 139 7. Dependency precedes independence: Online evidence from discourse processing 141 Petra Burkhardt 8. Accessing discourse referents introduced in negated phrases: Evidence for accommodation? 159 Barbara Kaup and Jana Lüdtke
- 12. Table of contents part iv Language Specific Phenomena 179 9. Complex anaphors in discourse 181 Manfred Consten and Mareile Knees 10. The discourse functions of the present perfect 201 Atsuko Nishiyama and Jean-Pierre Koenig 11. German right dislocation and afterthought in discourse 225 Maria Averintseva-Klisch 12. A discourse-relational approach to continuation 249 Anke Holler 13. German Vorfeld-filling as constraint interaction 267 Augustin Speyer Index 291
- 13. Acknowledgements The contributions collected in this volume are based on the proceedings of the first conference on Constraints in Discourse held at the University of Dortmund. All con- tributions have been reviewed again and thoroughly revised before publication. The conference was organised by the two editors Anton Benz and Peter Kühnlein together with Claudia Sassen. Both editors regret that Claudia Sassen, who did a great job at organising the conference, had to leave the editorial board. We thank Angelika Storrer from the Institute for German Language at the Univer- sity of Dortmund as well as the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft for their financial support. Furthermore, we have to thank our employers, the IFKI at the University of Southern Denmark, the University of Bielefeld, the ZAS in Berlin and the University of Groningen for their help and encouragement. John Tammena has helped reduce the unreadability of our introductory chapter. We want to thank him as well as Paul David Doherty who helped setting up the index. Our special thanks, however, go to Andreas Jucker, the series editor of PBns, and of course to Isja Conen from John Benjamins’ publishing company, for their untiring help and patience.
- 15. Constraints in discourse An introduction 1. General remarks For a long time the development of precise frameworks of discourse interpretation has been hampered by the lack of a deeper understanding of the dependencies between different discourse units. The last 20 years have seen a considerable advance in this field. A number of strong constraints have been proposed that restrict the sequencing and attaching of segments at various descriptive levels, as well as the interpretation of their interrelations. An early and very influential work on the sequencing and acces- sibility of expressions across sentence boundaries was concerned with the rfc (Right Frontier Constraint), often associated with a paper by Polanyi (1988). The rfc formu- lates a restriction on the possible discourse positions of pronominal expressions. Another much discussed constraint governing pronominal reference is the centering principle formulated by Grosz and Sidner (1986). In addition to the proposal of new discourse constraints, recent years saw the development of competing formal frameworks for discourse generation and interpretation, most importantly, Rhetorical Structure Theo- ry (rst, Mann and Thompson 1987) and Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (sdrt). Especially the recent publication of Asher and Lascarides (2003), which sum- marises more than ten years of joint research in sdrt, gave a strong impulse to the field of discourse semantics and led to the publication of an increasing number of papers. Constraints play a role not only in diverse fields of linguistics, but in a wide variety of fields of research in general, such as computer science, especially artificial intelli- gence (cf., e.g., (Blache 2000)). What the use of constraints has in common in all these fields is that they describe properties of objects in order to specify whether certain objects are well-formed from the point of view of the background theory. As soon as an object carries the property or properties specified by all of the constraints defined by the theory, it counts as well-formed and is accepted as (part of) a model of the theory. The object is then said to satisfy the constraints set by the theory. Inthepresentcollection,anumberofauthorscontributedtodefineconstraintsthus understood to specify properties that are relevant in the context of research on dis- course. The multiplicity of identified constraints mirrors the multiple facets of this re- search area itself. To give a rough understanding of major issues in discourse research, we will lay out three paradigms in this introduction and relate them to each other and to the texts in this volume. The three paradigms we selected share a focus on rhetorical relations: a discourse is conceived as such only if every part of it is connected to the rest via certain relations
- 16. Constraints in discourse — an introduction that specify its role. This property of discourse is classically related to coherence and cohesion and can be used as a constraint to distinguish well-formed discourses from arbitrary sets of objects. The paradigms were developed during the last 20 years and within their frame- works, a number of such constraints have been proposed for the description and explanation of the multiplicity of dependencies between units of discourse. Segmented Discourse Representation Theory (sdrt), for example, posits a selection principle over interpretations of discourse: among possible interpretations of a discourse the one is selected that renders the discourse as coherent as possible. This is operationalised via the number of rhethorical relations that connect parts of the discourse and an order- ing over preferences for those relations: the more the better, given their type for some discourse. This principle is called Maximise Discourse Coherence (mdc) and of course is a constraint over the selection of interpretations as well as discourses: of those interpretations that can be generated for a given discourse only those are acceptable that have the highest possible degree of coherence. And among objects generally only those count as discourse for which some interpretation establishes coherence. Con- sider what would happen if (1b) and (1c) were exchanged in example (1), taken from (Asher and Lascarides 2003); the resulting discourse would clearly be less acceptable, and one might well argue that this would be due to the loss of coherence. (1) a. One plaintiff was passed over for promotion three times. b. Another didn’t get a raise for five years. c. A third plaintiff was given a lower wage compared to males who were doing the same work. d. But the jury didn’t believe this. One prominent constraint that is recognised by almost all theories of discourse is the so-called Right Frontier Constraint (rfc), see especially the chapters in Part I of this book. This constraint amounts to a restriction over attachment points in a discourse. (We will give a short characterization here and discuss the rfc a little more extensively in Section 3.) Consider Example (1) again. Under any reasonable interpretation, (1d) can only be related to either the immediately preceding utterance (1c) or to the totality of the preceding utterances (1a–1c). In the first case, what the jury didn’t believe was just the fact that one plaintiff was given a lower wage compared to males who were doing the same work. In the second case, the jury wouldn’t believe any of the reported facts. What should not be possible—and that is the claim connected with the rfc—is an attachment of (1d) to (1a) or (1b) alone. These two utterances should be blocked as attachment points. The name Right Frontier Constraint derives from an assumption over representa- tions stating that more recent utterances, or, more general, constituents in a discourse are graphically represented to the right of less recent ones. Discussion of formal repre- sentations of discourse structure and measures of anaphoric distances can be found in the chapters of Part II of this book. The most recent constituents in discourse (1) prior
- 17. Constraints in discourse — an introduction to the utterance of (1d) are either (1c) or the compound constituent (1a–1c), which makes these two being situated on the right hand side of the representation given this assumption. As accordingly all and only those constituents that are accessible for pronominal anaphoric attachment are on the right hand side of the representation, this constraint is called rfc. As a reaction to the variety of constraints, there will be discussions on a broad spectrum of restrictions on well-formedness, be these universal, language indepen- dent restrictions, like the two mentioned seem to be, or language specific constraints. It is one interesting property of constraints that they can be more or less specific, and their effects can add to each other. Thus, one can end up with a very strong filter over admissible structures by combining constraints that pertain to different properties of objects. Exemplarily, there are discussions on language-specific constraints that don’t seem to be readily transferable to other languages from, e.g., German. For more on language specific constraints, see the chapters in Part IV of this book. Other chapters, Part III, deal with psycholinguistic or neurolinguistic reflexes of constraints and their empirical testing. During the processing of discourses by human participants, the linguistic constraints can be expected to produce effects and generate preferences for strategies or solutions. These predictions of course should be empiri- cally testable. 2. The cognitive status of rhetorical relations The theory of rhetorical relations is a cornerstone of discourse analysis. In general, it is undisputed that the meaning of text is more than the conjunction of the meanings of its sentences, but there are different opinions about the cognitive status of rhetori- cal relations. One position assumes that rhetorical relations are part of the linguistic inventory of language users and therefore of their linguistic competence. When faced with a sequence of two text segments, the hearer or reader searches a closed list of Figure 1. A graphical representation of what it means for a node to be on the right frontier: node α represents the last utterance in a discourse. α and every node dominating α (like β) is thus on the right frontier and available for attachment for a subsequent utterance γ. α β γ
- 18. Constraints in discourse — an introduction rhetorical relations and chooses that relation which fits best, where the criterion for fitting best varies from theory to theory. From this we may distinguish positions that assume that the extra information that the reader infers from the concatenation of two text segments is derived e.g., from assumptions about the speaker’s intentions, com- monsense world knowledge, and conversational maxims alone. Rhetorical relations are then not part of our basic linguistic inventory. We may call the first position a non–reductionist position and the second position a reductionist position. Within re- ductionist positions we may roughly distinguish between approaches that take their starting point in plan-based reasoning, and approaches that take their starting point in Gricean pragmatics. The most important frameworks of discourse analysis discussed in this volume are non–reductionist in character, e.g., the Linguistic Discourse Model (Polanyi 1986), Rhetorical Structure Theory (Mann and Thompson 1987), and Seg- mented Discourse Representation Theory (Asher and Lascarides 2003). As an illustra- tion, we discuss the following example: (2) Ann calls a taxi service. Ann: (1) I need a taxi now. (2) Pick me up at the Dortmund railway station and (3) drop me at Haus Bommerholz. The first sentence is a directive speech act asking the taxi service to supply a transpor- tation to Ann. Propositions (2) and (3) provide more information about the lift. They elaborate the content of the first sentence. A non–reductionist would assume that there exists a rhetorical relation Elaboration that is inferred by the addressee. The inference of text coherence begins with an interpretation of the sentences (1), (2) and (3). The addressee then searches a mental library of rhetorical relations. We may assume that it contains the entries Elaboration, Explanation, and Result. Each rhetorical relation defines constraints that must be fulfilled by text segments which are connected by the relation. For example, a text segment β can only elaborate a text segment α if β denotes a sub-eventuality of α, whereas Explanation and Result assume that the eventualities are non-overlapping and that one is the result of the other. Hence, the addressee can infer Elaboration, and therefore text coherence, from the fact that the propositions in (2) and (3) refer to sub-eventualities of the event mentioned in (1). (For more on this cf. Section 6.) A reductionist tries to show discourse coherence without reference to a predefined set of rhetorical relations. Instead, the explanation may for example rest on assumptions about the speaker’s domain plans. Taking a lift with a taxi is an activity which can be bro- ken down into being picked up by the taxi at a certain place, the taxi ride, and being dropped at the destination. Schematically, we can describe this decomposition as follows: → 1 (S ) TakingTaxi(P) PickUp(P, Time1, Place1), TaxiRide, Drop(P, Time2, Place2) An analysis of Example (2) may proceed as follows: Sentence (1) states the speak- er’s domain intention. This activates schema (S1), which is shared knowledge in the
- 19. Constraints in discourse — an introduction relevant language community. In order to make the directive in (1) felicitous, some of the parameters in (S1) have to be specified. This is done in sentences (2) and (3); they state the place of departure Place1 and the destination Place2. Coherence is achieved by direct reference to a schema like (S1). Discourse becomes incoherent if the hearer cannot find a domain schema which connects the text segments, as seen in the follow- ing example: (3) Ann calls a taxi service. Ann: (1) I need a taxi now. (2) I grew up in Bielefeld, Ostwestfahlen–Lippe. A reductionist position which is based on plan recognition is widespread among approaches in artificial intelligence, e.g., (Grosz and Sidner 1986; Litman and Allen 1990). The assumption that rhetorical relations are part of our linguistic inventory has consequences for our understanding of both pragmatics and, especially, conversation- al implicatures (Grice, 1975). For an example we look at:1 (4) Ann: Smith doesn’t seem to have a girl friend. Bob: He’s been paying lots of visits to New York lately. Implicature: Smith possibly has a girl friend in New York (p). In order to understand Bob’s utterance as a contribution to the ongoing conversation, Ann has to find a rhetorical relation that connects his utterance to her contribution. We may assume that there exists a rhetorical relation of Counterevidence. The infer- ence of Counterevidence can proceed from the semantic content of the utterances and their prosodic and other linguistic properties. It is not necessary that the inference takes into account the interlocutors’ intentions. If Counterevidence holds between Ann’s and Bob’s utterances, then Bob’s utterance must provide evidence for the negation of Ann’s claim, i.e., it must provide evidence for the claim that Smith has a girl friend. This is the case if one assumes that Smith possibly has a girl friend in New York. Hence, the construction of a rhetorical relation between the two utterances leads to an accommodation of the implicature (p). We may contrast this reasoning with the standard theory of conversational impli- catures (Grice 1975), (Levinson 1983, Ch. 3), which assumes that the implicatures are derived by reasoning about each other’s intentions. According to Grice, interlocutors adhere to a number of conversational principles which spell out how discourse par- ticipants should behave in order to make their language use rational and efficient. In particular, Grice assumes that each contribution to the ongoing conversation serves a joint goal of speaker and hearer. A possible derivation of the implicature may proceed 1. For a more thorough discussion of this example and the relation between Grice’ theory of conversational implicatures and the assumption of rhetorical relations see (Asher and Lascarides 2003, Sec. 2.6).
- 20. Constraints in discourse — an introduction as follows: (1) Ann’s utterance raises the question whether Smith has a girl friend; (2) Bob’s contribution must be relevant to this question; (3) Bob’s contribution can only be relevant if Smith possibly has a girl friend in New York; (4) as Bob has done nothing in order to stop Ann from inferring that (p), it follows that she safely can infer that (p). In contrast to the first explanation, this explanation infers implicatures directly from joint intentions and a general principle of relevance.2 3. Topics in the analysis of discourse constraints In the previous section, we were introduced to different positions concerning the status of rhetorical relations. Rhetorical relations provide the backbone of some of the most important formal frameworks in discourse analysis. In this section, we want to address some topics in discourse analysis which are related to the investigation of discourse constraints. We start with constraints related to rhetorical relations and the discourse structures constructed by them. In this context, we introduce, for example, the Right Frontier Constraint as first codified by Livia Polanyi (1986) in her ldm (for more detail see Section 4). Text coherence is the result of interconnectedness of text segments. The analysis using rhetorical relations naturally leads to a representation as a graph. The terminal nodes of the graph can be identified with elementary illocutionary acts. The graph in Figure 2 shows an analysis of the following example, in which Ann tells how she came to Haus Bommerholz: (5) Ann: (1) I arrived at 10 am. (2) I took a taxi then. (3) It picked me up at the Dortmund railway station and (4) dropped me at Haus Bommerholz. (5) I thought it might be quite complicated to get to this place but (6) it wasn’t. A natural question that arises concerns the general structure of these graphs. First we may ask, what kind of branches are associated with the different rhetorical rela- tions. Are they always of the same kind or can we distinguish between different types of relations? Closely related to this question is that for the types of graphs that can be generated. For example, the graph in Figure 2 has a tree like structure and only binary branches. A third question concerns the comparability of different representations. The tree in Figure 2 is an rst graph (Mann and Thompson 1987). These trees are dif- ferent from trees which we usually find in syntax. In syntactic trees, the relations that connect two constituents are normally attached to the branching nodes. In rst graphs 2. Asher and Lascarides (2003) point out that any existing theory of conversational implica- tures in the tradition of Grice, has to assume that interlocutors carry out costly computations about each other’s intentions. Hence, a theory of conversational implicatures which is based on the theory of rhetorical relations is attractive from a cognitive point of view as it makes weaker assumptions about the inference capabilities of the interlocutors.
- 21. Constraints in discourse — an introduction they are labels to the edges connecting the nodes. We will see syntax like graphs in the section about the Linguistic Discourse Model. The answers to the above questions im- pose more or less strict constraints on discourse. These topics are especially discussed in the contributions by Danlos (Chapter 4) and Egg Redeker (Chapter 6). In Figure 2, we can find two types of relations: relations like Elaboration which are attached to an arch and relations like Narration which are attached to branches starting from a shared node. Text segments connected by Narration are intuitively on the same level, whereas a text segment that is attached to another text segment by Elaboration or Evidence is subordinated to this segment. The distinction between coordinating and subordinating discourse relations became very influential with (Grosz and Sidner 1986).3 One way of conceptualising the distinction between subordinating and coordinating rhetorical relations is based on the discourse intentions of the speaker. In Example (2), the sentences ‘Pick me up at Dortmund railway station’ and ‘Drop me at Haus Bommerholz’ provide information without which the addressee cannot successfully perform what was asked from him in the first sentence ‘I need a taxi now’. In a coordinated sequence like ‘(1) I arrived at 10 pm. (2) I took a taxi then.’ neither (1) is uttered in order to sup- port (2), nor is (2) uttered in order to support (1). Each sentence can stand alone, and none needs the other in order to justify its occurrence. In contrast, the utterance of (2) CONTRAST (5) EVIDENCE NARRATION (1) ELABORATION (2) NARRATION (3) (4) (6) Figure 2. An analysis of Example (5). The graph shows the rhetorical relations that hold between text segments. 3. rst distinguishes between multi-nuclear and nucleus-satellite relations. This distinctions is closely related to Grosz and Sidner’s (1986) distinction between coordinating and subordinating relations.
- 22. Constraints in discourse — an introduction ‘Pick me up at Dortmund railway station’ in Example (2) cannot be justified without the information that Ann needs a taxi. The distinction between coordinating and subordinating discourse relations is in- corporated in most formal frameworks and in all frameworks which we will present in the next sections. There are differences how subordination and coordination are defined. In particular, there are different ways of thinking about the nature of these relations. For example, they may be defined in terms of discourse plans and intentions, or in a purely syntactic way. Subordination and coordination are the properties of rhetorical relations that de- fine the right frontier. Roughly, the right frontier denotes the zone in a graph where new text segments can attach. It is on the right side of the discourse graph if we assume that the graph is a tree and that the order from left to right corresponds to the natural order of discourse segments in text or dialogue. We consider the following example, where Ann tells another story: (6) Ann: (1) I took a taxi to Haus Bommerholz. (2) It picked me up at the railway station. (3) The ride took more than half an hour. (4) The taxi driver didn’t know his way. (5) This was very annoying. To which proposition does (5) refer? Sentences (2) and (3) are coordinated to each other and subordinated to (1). Sentence (4) is subordinated to (3). The right frontier consists of the segments (1), (3), (4), and (2+3). It is defined as follows: the top node of a tree is always on the right frontier; if a sequence of coordinated nodes is subordi- nated to a node on the right frontier, then the sequence itself and its rightmost coordi- nated node are also on the right frontier.4 The right frontier constraint states that new discourse segments can only attach to segments that are positioned on the right frontier. This means that in our example (5) can only attach to (1), (3), (4), or the compound (2+3). This does not follow from expectations about annoying things: (7) Ann: (1) I took a taxi to Haus Bommerholz. (2) I had to wait very long for it. (3) Then, the ride took more than half an hour. (4) The driver didn’t know his way. (5) This was very annoying. Again, (5) can only attach to the segments on the right frontier, i.e., to (1), (3), (4), and the compound (2+3) but not to (2). The claim that new discourse segments can only attach to the right frontier needs some qualification. What can attach are anaphoric expressions, i.e., discourse elements which need a previous discourse element in order to receive a truth value. Examples of anaphoric expressions are pronouns like ‘he,’ ‘she,’ or ‘it’, but also abstract object 4. The precise definition of the right frontier and its associated constraint is, of course, frame- work dependent; see especially sections 4 and 6.
- 23. Constraints in discourse — an introduction anaphora (Asher 1993) like ‘this’ in sentence (5) which refers to an preceding event. Furthermore, we can think of a complete sentence like (5) as an anaphoric expres- sion that needs a previous discourse segment to which it can be linked by a rhetorical relation. Not all anaphoric expressions are bound by the right frontier constraints. For ex- ample definite descriptions can pick up objects which were introduced in segments left to the right frontier. Here is a slight variation of an example from (Asher and Lascarides 2003): (8) (1) One plaintiff was passed over for promotion three times. (2) Another didn’t get a raise for five years. (3) A third plaintiff was given a lower wage compared to males who were doing the same work. (4) But the jury didn’t believe this. (4ʹ) But the jury didn’t believe the first case. ‘This’ in sentence (4) can only refer to either the compound of (1), (2), (3) or (3) alone. In contrast, ‘the first case’ in (4ʹ) refers to (1), which is not on the right frontier. An obvious problem for the right frontier constraint are cataphors, i.e., pronouns that refer to objects that are introduced later in discourse. The graph in Figure 2 shows another potential problem: The last coordinated sentences (5) and (6) are superordinated to the previous discourse (1)–(4) in such a way that (1)–(4) are at- tached to the last sentence (6). This is not possible if we assume that sentences (5) and (6) are attached sequentially to the previous graph for (1)–(4). It is possible to analyse the discourse in Example (5) in other ways which avoid this problem. The right frontier constraint is discussed especially in the papers by Asher (Chapter 2) and Prévot Vieu (Chapter 3). Consten Knees (Chapter 9) discuss abstract object anaphora. Chiarcos Krasavina (Chapter 5) discuss different methods to measure the distance between anaphors and their antecedents in discourse graphs. Another important constraint connected to rhetorical relations and the structures defined by them is the Maximize Discourse Coherence (mdc) constraint introduced by (Asher and Lascarides, 2003). rst graphs, for example, connect discourse segments Figure 3. An analysis of Example (6). ELABORATION (1) NARRATION EXPLANATION (2) (3) (4)
- 24. Constraints in discourse — an introduction by a single rhetorical relation. The mdc constraint represents the contrary position. It states that as many rhetorical relations as possible are realised between discourse segments. This can be understood best from the interpretation perspective. The addressee tries to connect the different segments by as many discourse relations as possible. Coherence is defined by connectedness through rhetorical relations. Maxi- mising the number of relations that hold between segments is then the same as max- imising discourse coherence. An intuitive example is the following one taken from (Asher and Lascarides 2003, p. 18): (9) (1) John moved from Brixton to St. John’s Wood. (2) The rent was less expensive. There are two possibilities to resolve the bridging anaphora in (2). ‘The rent’ can relate to the rent in Brixton or St. John’s Wood. In both cases, (2) provides background infor- mation, hence (2) can attach to (1) by a relation named Background. But if we assume that ‘the rent’ refers to St. John’s Wood, then we get in addition also an explanation for whyJohnmoved.ThisisthepreferredreadingofExample(9).Wegetthisinterpretation if we maximise the number of discourse relations as the preferred reading allows to connect (2) with Background and Explanation to (1), whereas the dispreferred reading allows a connection only with Background. So far, we presented phenomena and constraints directly related to the discourse structure defined by rhetorical relations. But not all discourse constraints are con- nected to these relations. We here mention two important principles: centering (Grosz et al., 1995) and DRT subordination (Kamp and Reyle 1993). Grosz and Sidner (1986) distinguished between three components of discourse structure: the linguistic structure, the intentional structure, and the attentional state. The linguistic structure is defined by discourse segments and the relations holding between them. The intentional structure is defined by the speaker’s intentions that underlie the discourse segments and the relation between these intentions. The atten- tional state is defined by the immediate focus of attention at each point of the discourse. Grosz and Sidner distinguish between local and global discourse coherence. Global discourse coherence roughly corresponds to the coherence defined by the discourse relations holding between discourse segments, i.e., it is associated with the linguistic structure. Local coherence refers to coherence among the utterances of one discourse segment.5 Centering Theory (CT) explains, for example, why the discourse in Example (10a) is more coherent than the discourse in (10b) (Grosz et al., 1995, p. 206). (10) a. (1) John went to his favourite music store to buy a piano. (2) He had frequented the store for many years. (3) He was excited that he could finally buy a piano. (4) He arrived just as the store was closing for the day. 5. Here, discourse segment has to be understood roughly as meaning a sequence of coordinated utterances.
- 25. Constraints in discourse — an introduction b. (1ʹ) John went to his favourite music store to buy a piano. (2ʹ) It was a store John had frequented for many years. (3ʹ) He was excited that he could finally buy a piano. (4ʹ) It was closing just as John arrived. CT assigns to each utterance a set of forward looking centres and a unique backward looking centre. Forward and backward looking centres are semantic domain entities like persons, things, and events. The backward looking centre is the immediate focus of attention. The forward and backward looking centres of two consecutive utterances are related to each other as follows: The backward looking centre of the second ut- terance must be an entity from the forward looking centre of the first utterance. The elements of the forward looking centre are ranked according to salience. The subject is most likely to be ranked highest. CT formulates several discourse constraints that are derived from forward and backward looking centres. One rule states that the back- ward looking centre of a sentence must be realised as a pronoun if any element of the forward looking centre of the previous utterance is also realised by a pronoun. This predicts that (11a) is better than (11b): (11) a. John met Mary. He loves her. b. John met Mary. John loves her. Another rule states, for example, that a continuation of backward looking centres is preferred over a change. This explains the observation in Example (10) and explains why the use of the pronoun ‘he’ in sentence (5) of Example (12) is misleading (Grosz et al., 1995, p. 207). (12) (1) Terry really goofs sometimes. (2) Yesterday was a beautiful day and he was excited about trying out his new sailboat. (3) He wanted Tony to join him on a sailing expedition. (4) He called him at 6 AM. (5) He was sick and furious at being woken up so early. DRT subordination likewise imposes restrictions on anaphoric accessibility of discourse objects. In contrast to the constraints presented so far, DRT subordination is derived from the logical form of utterances. It explains why, for example, the following uses of pronouns are infelicitous: (13) a. In the cage there was no lion. *It was snoring and sleeping. b. If a farmer owns a donkey, he beats it. ?He is my neighbour. Discourse is interpreted incrementally by constructing Discourse Representation Structures (drss). Several construction algorithms have been proposed. One sugges- tion is to construct a unique drs for each new sentence and merge it with a drs rep- resenting discourse old information. A drs consists of a pair 〈U,Con〉 of a discourse universe U and discourse constraints Con. The universe U contains discourse referents, which correspond to the familiar variables in first-order logic. U represents the set of entities introduced by the discourse. The discourse constraints in Con are, in the most
- 26. Other documents randomly have different content
- 27. Plainsman and the Lady. 1946. Plunderers. 1948. Port of Forty Thieves. 1944. Post Office Investigator. 1949. Powder River Rustlers. 1949. Prairie Pioneers. 1941. Pretender. 1947. Pride of the Plains. 1943. Prince of the Plains. 1949. Public Enemies. 1941. Puddin' Head. 1941. Purple Monster Strikes. (Serial) Purple V. 1943. Rags to Riches. 1941. Raiders of Sunset Pass. 1943. Raiders of the Range. 1942. Rainbow over Texas. 1946. Rancho Grande. 1940. Ranger and the Lady. 1940. Ranger of Cherokee Strip. 1949. Red Menace. 1949. Red River Renegades. 1946. Remember Pearl Harbor! 1942. Rendezvous with Annie. 1946. Renegades of Sonora. 1948. Ride, Tenderfoot, Ride. 1940. Riders of the Rio Grande. 1943. Ridin' Down the Canyon. 1942. Ridin' on a Rainbow. 1941. Rio Grande Raiders. 1946. Road to Alcatraz. 1945. Robin Hood of Texas. 1947. Robin Hood of the Pecos. 1941. Rocky Mountain Rangers. 1940. Roll on Texas Moon. 1946. Romance on the Range. 1942. Rookies on Parade. 1941. Rose of the Yukon. 1949. Rosie, the Riveter. 1944.
- 28. Rough Riders of Cheyenne. 1945. Rustlers of Devil's Canyon. 1947. Saddle Pals. 1947. Saddlemates. 1941. Sailors on Leave. 1941. San Antone Ambush. 1949. San Fernando Valley. 1944. Santa Fe Saddlemates. 1945. Santa Fe Scouts. 1943. Santa Fe Uprising. 1946. Scatterbrain. 1940. Scotland Yard Investigator. 1945. Scream in the Dark. 1943. Secret Service in Darkest Africa. (Serial) Secret Service Investigator. 1948. Secrets of Scotland Yard. 1944. Secrets of the Underground. 1942. Shadows on the Sage. 1942. Shantytown. 1943. Shepherd of the Ozarks. 1942. Sheriff of Cimarron. 1945. Sheriff of Las Vegas. 1944. Sheriff of Redwood Valley. 1946. Sheriff of Sundown. 1944. Sheriff of Tombstone. 1941. Sheriff of Wichita. 1949. Sierra Sue. 1941. Silent Partner. 1944. Silver City Kid. 1944. Silver Spurs. 1943. Sing, Dance, Plenty Hot. 1940. Sing Neighbor Sing. 1944. Singing Hill. 1941. Sioux City Sue. 1946. Sis Hopkins. 1941. Sleepy Lagoon. 1943. Sleepytime Gal. 1942. Slippy McGee. 1948. Someone To Remember. 1943.
- 29. Son of God's Country. 1948. Son of Zorro. (Serial) Song of Mexico. 1945. Song of Nevada. 1944. Song of Texas. 1943. Sons of Adventure. 1948. Sons of the Pioneers. 1942. S O S Coast Guard. 1942. South of Rio. 1949. South of Santa Fe. 1942. South of the Border. 1939. Specter of the Rose. 1946. Spoilers of the North. 1947. Sporting Chance. 1945. Springtime in the Sierras. 1947. Spy Smasher. (Serial) Stagecoach Express. 1942. Stagecoach to Denver. 1946. Stagecoach to Monterey. 1944. Stardust on the Sage. 1942. Storm over Lisbon. 1944. Strange Impersonation. 1946. Strangers in the Night. 1944. Streets of San Francisco. 1949. Sun Valley Cyclone. 1946. Sundown in Santa Fe. 1948. Sundown Kid. 1942. Sunset in El Dorado. 1945. Sunset in Wyoming. 1941. Sunset on the Desert. 1942. Sunset Serenade. 1942. Susanna Pass. 1949. Swing Your Partner. 1943. Swingin' on a Rainbow. 1945. Tahiti Honey. 1943. Tell It to a Star. 1945. Texas Terrors. 1940. That Brennan Girl. 1946. That's My Baby. 1944.
- 30. That's My Gal. 1947. That's My Man. 1947. Thoroughbreds. 1944. Thou Shalt Not Kill. 1939. Three Faces West. 1940. Three Little Sisters. 1944. Three's a Crowd. 1945. Thumbs up. 1943. Thundering Trails. 1943. Tiger Woman. (Serial) Tiger Woman. 1945. Timber Trail. 1948. Topeka Terror. 1945. Traffic in Crime. 1946. Tragedy at Midnight. 1942. Trail Blazers. 1940. Trail of Kit Carson. 1945. Trail to San Antone. 1947. Train to Alcatraz. 1948. Traitor Within. 1942. Trespasser. 1947. Tucson Raiders. 1944. Tulsa Kid. 1940. Tuxedo Junction. 1941. Twilight on the Rio Grande. 1947. Two Gun Sheriff. 1941. Under California Stars. 1948. Under Colorado Skies. 1947. Under Fiesta Stars. 1941. Under Nevada Skies. 1946. Under Texas Skies. 1940. Undercover Woman. 1946. Utah. 1945. Valley of Hunted Men. 1942. Valley of the Zombies. 1946. Vampire's Ghost. 1945. Vigilantes of Boomtown. 1947. Vigilantes of Dodge City. 1944. Village Barn Dance. 1940.
- 31. Wagon Tracks West. 1943. Wagon Wheels Westward. 1945. Wagons Westward. 1940. Wake of the Red Witch. 1949. Web of Danger. 1947. West Side Kid. 1943. Westward Ho. 1942. Whispering Footsteps. 1943. Who Killed Aunt Maggie? 1940. Wild Frontier. 1947. Winter Wonderland. 1947. Wolf of New York. 1940. Woman Who Came Back. 1945. Women in War. 1940. Wyoming. 1947. Wyoming Bandit. 1949. Wyoming Wildcat. 1941. X Marks the Spot. 1942. Yankee Fakir. 1947. Yellow Rose of Texas. 1944. Yokel Boy. 1942. Young Bill Hickok. 1940. Young Buffalo Bill. 1940. Youth on Parade. 1942. Yukon Patrol. 1942. Zorro's Black Whip. (Serial) Zorro's Fighting Legion. (Serial) RESCE, WALTER, d.b.a. RAINBOW PICTURES. SEE Rainbow Pictures. RESEARCH ANIMATION FILMS. *Gametogenesis. 1942. *Human Tooth Development. 1942. RESEARCH DEPT. OF THE HOUSEHOLD FINANCE CORPORATION. SEE Household Finance Corporation. Research Dept. RESEARCH LABORATORIES OF PARKE, DAVIS AND COMPANY. SEE Parke, Davis and Company. Research Laboratories. È
- 32. REVILLON FRÈRES. *Nanook of the North. 1922. REYNOLDS, E. A. Modern Quality Control. 1947. REYNOLDS, RICHARD F. Television Televised. 1948. RHODES, EUGENE MANLOVE. Four Faces West. 1948. RHYTHM SHORTS, INC. *Don't Be a Joe. 1947. RICE, ALBERT. Gay Blades. 1946. RICE, ALICE HEGAN. Mrs. Wiggs of the Cabbage Patch. 1942. RICE, CRAIG. Home Sweet Homicide. 1946. Lucky Stiff. 1949. Tenth Avenue Angel. 1947. RICE, ELMER. Dream Girl. 1948. RICE, RALPH W. Athletic Injuries. 1941. Osteopathic Mechanics. 1941. Osteopathic Research, the Second Lumbar Lesion. 1940. Osteopathic Therapeutics, Anterior Poliomyelitis. 1940. RICHARDS, I. A. Basic English. 1945. RICHARDSON, ANNA S. Father Is a Prince. 1940. RICHARDSON, JOHN CLARENCE. *Share the Care. 1941. RICHFIELD OIL CORPORATION. Along the Golden Trail. 1940.
- 33. Flashes to Dealers. 1946. Where the Eagle Flies. 1947. RICHTER, CONRAD. Sea of Grass. 1946. RIDDICK, HILDA GOBLE. *Little Girl Who Did Not Believe in Santa Claus. 1949. RIDDICK (STANLEY) STUDIO. *Pla-Lady. 1949. RIDDICK, WILLIAM MARION. *Little Girl Who Did Not Believe in Santa Claus. 1949. Pla-Lady. 1949. RIDLEY, ARNOLD. Easy Money. 1948. RIMSKII-KORSAKOV, NIKOLAI ANDREEVICH. Song of Scheherazade. 1947. RINALDO, FRED. No Time for Love. 1943. RINEHART, MARY ROBERTS. Dog in the Orchard. 1941. Nurse's Secret. 1941. Tish. 1942. RINGSIDE PICTURES CORPORATION. *World's Middleweight Championship: Tony Zale vs. Marcel Cerdan. 1948. RIOS, S. PONDAL. Romance on the High Seas. 1948. RIPLEY, ARTHUR. Prisoner of Japan. 1942. Voice in the Wind. 1943. RIPLEY (ARTHUR) RUDOLPH MONTER PRODUCTIONS. *Voice in the Wind. 1943. RISKIN, ROBERT. Magic Town. 1947.
- 34. Meet John Doe. 1941. Thin Man Goes Home. 1944. RISKIN (ROBERT) PRODUCTIONS, INC. *Magic Town. 1947. RITTER, M. C. Prosperity 2–Girl Shirt Finishing Unit. 1947. RITTER, W. T. Breaking the Bottleneck. 1945. RIVERSIDE PICTURES. *Broken Strings. 1948. ROACH, HAL. About Face. 1942. All-American Co-Ed. 1941. Broadway Limited. 1941. Brooklyn Orchid. 1942. Calaboose. 1942. Captain Caution. 1940. Chump at Oxford. 1940. Dudes Are Pretty People. 1942. Fall In. 1942. Fiesta. 1941. Flying with Music. 1942. Hay Foot. 1941. McGuerins from Brooklyn. 1942. Miss Polly. 1941. Nazty Nuisance. 1942. Niagara Falls. 1941. Of Mice and Men. 1940. One Million B. C. 1940. Prairie Chickens. 1942. Road Show. 1941. Saps at Sea. 1940. Tanks a Million. 1941. Turnabout. 1940. Taxi, Mister. 1942. Topper Returns. 1941. Yanks Ahoy. 1942.
- 35. ROACH, HAL, Jr. All-American Co-Ed. 1941. ROACH (HAL) STUDIOS, INC. *About Face. 1942. *All-American Co-Ed. 1941. *Broadway Limited. 1941. Brooklyn Orchid. 1942. *Calaboose. 1942. Captain Caution. 1940. Chump at Oxford. 1940. *Curley. 1947. *Devil with Hitler. 1942. *Dudes Are Pretty People. 1942. *Fabulous Joe. 1947. *Fall In. 1942. *Fiesta. 1941. *Flying with Music. 1942. *Hay Foot. 1941. *Here Comes Trouble. 1948. *McGuerins from Brooklyn. 1942. *Miss Polly. 1941. *Nazty Nuisance. 1942. *Niagara Falls. 1941. *Of Mice and Men. 1940. *One Million B. C. 1940. *Prairie Chickens. 1942. *Road Show. 1941. *Saps at Sea. 1940. *Tanks a Million. 1941. *Taxi, Mister. 1942. *Topper Returns. 1941. *Turnabout. 1940. *Who Killed Doc Robbin. 1948. *Yanks Ahoy. 1942. ROADSHOW ATTRACTIONS. Night at the Follies. 1947. ROARK, GARLAND.
- 36. Wake of the Red Witch. 1949. ROBB, PEGGY. Our Lady and the Tumbler. 1948. ROBERTS, BEN. Borrowed Hero. 1942. Fly-by-Night. 1942. ROBERTS, EDITH KNEIPPLE. That Hagen Girl. 1947. ROBERTS, EDWARD. Sikorsky Helicopter. 1944. ROBERTS, KENNETH. Captain Caution. 1940. Northwest Passage. 1940. ROBERTS, WILLIAM CARMEL. *War Surgery—up Front. 1948. ROBERTS PRODUCTIONS, INC. *Body and Soul. 1947. *Force of Evil. 1949. ROBERTSON, LAWSON. Carreras, Saltos y Relevos. 1947. Dashes, Hurdles, and Relays. 1946. Distance Races. 1946. Jumps and Pole Vault. 1946. Pesas: Tiro, Disco, Jabalina, Martillo. 1947. Saltos con Garrocha. 1947. Weight Events. 1946. ROBERTSON, WILLARD. Moontide. 1942. ROBIN, NATHAN, W. MERLE CONNELL, d.b.a. QUALITY PICTURES COMPANY. SEE Quality Pictures Company. ROBINSON, BERTRAND. Ladies' Day. 1943. Too Busy to Work. 1939.
- 37. ROBINSON, CASEY. Days of Glory. 1944. Racket Man. 1944. ROBINSON, CHARLES. Fleet's In. 1942. ROBINSON, PERCY. Wanted for Murder. 1946. ROBINSON, SEYMOUR B. Stormy Weather. 1943. ROBINSON, THEODORE CECIL. One Nation—Indivisible. 1946. ROCHARD, HENRI. I Was a Male War Bride. 1949. ROCHE, KATHLEEN. *Influence of Geography and History on the Port of New York. 1949. ROCHESTER, N. Y. TRINITY METHODIST CHURCH. YOUTH FELLOWSHIP. *Scenes from the Life of Peter. 1948. ROCKNE, BONNIE (SKILES) Knute Rockne—All American. 1940. ROCKNE, KNUTE KENNETH. Knute Rockne—All American. 1940. ROCKWOOD, ROY, pseud. Bomba, the Jungle Boy. 1949. RODGERS, RICHARD. I Married an Angel. 1942. Too Many Girls. 1940. ROGERS, BOGART. Man from Down Under. 1943. ROGERS, CHARLES BUDDY. High Fury. 1948.
- 38. ROGERS, CHARLES R. Angel on My Shoulder. 1946. Delightfully Dangerous. 1945. Powers Girl. 1943. Song of the Open Road. 1944. ROGERS (CHARLES R.) ENTERPRISES. *Delightfully Dangerous. 1945. ROGERS (CHARLES R.) TALKING PICTURE CORPORATION. *Song of the Open Road. 1944. ROGERS, HOWARD EMMETT. Easy To Wed. 1946. Gambler's Choice. 1944. ROGERS, LOUIS. Water As Nature Meant It To Be. 1947. ROGERS, WILLIAM. Water As Nature Meant It To Be. 1947. ROGERS PRODUCTIONS, INC. *Powers Girl. 1943. ROHM AND HAAS COMPANY. Looking Ahead Through Rohm and Haas Plexiglas. 1947. ROHMER, SAX. Drums of Fu Manchu. (Serial) Drums of Fu Manchu. 1943. ROHRBACH, GLENN. Tractor Fuels and Tractors. 1941. ROLEY, RICHARD. Living Lithography. 1941. ROLFE, CHARLES E. Connecticut Answers! 1941. ROMA FILM COMPANY. *Life of the Blessed Mother Cabrini. 1946. *Polska nie Zgineła. 1940. ROMAINE FILM CORPORATION.
- 39. *To Be or Not To Be. 1942. ROMAY PICTURES, INC. *Return of Rin Tin Tin. 1947. ROMBERG, SIGMUND. Desert Song. 1943. New Moon. 1940. Up in Central Park. 1948. RONALD, JAMES. Suspect. 1945. RONELL, ANN. Hard-Boiled Canary. 1941. RONNE, FINN. *Antarctica. 1943, 1948. ROONEY, PHILIP. Captain Boycott. 1947. ROOSEVELT, JAMES. Pastor Hall. 1940. *Pot o' Gold. 1941. ROOT, GEORGE, Jr. Gang's All Here. 1943. ROOT, LYNN. Cabin in the Sky. 1943. Golden Fleecing. 1940. Kid from Brooklyn. 1946. ROPES, BRADFORD. Buck Privates Come Home. 1947. Hullabaloo. 1940. Ship Ahoy. 1942. RORICK, ISABEL SCOTT. Are Husbands Necessary? 1942. ROSBOROUGH, J. F. Truck Farmer. 1939. ROSE, BERNARD.
- 40. *Story of Mr. Jiggs. 1949. ROSE, BILLY. Champagne for Two. 1947. ROSE, DAVID E. French Without Tears. 1940. ROSE, HARRY M. Immunization. 1947. ROSE, LOUIS ARTHUR. Lambeth Walk. 1939. ROSE, NORMAN. Your Last Act. 1941. ROSE, RICHARD. *Story of Mr. Jiggs. 1949. ROSENBLOOM, SLAPSIE MAXIE. Maybe Darwin Was Right. 1942. ROSENCRANS, LEO S. Human Mileage. 1949. Sugar Plum Tree. 1948. ROSENTHAL, LAWRENCE M. Machine Shop Work; Fundamentals of Blueprint Reading. (Serial) Machine Shop Work; Operations on the Centerless Grinding Machine. (Serial) Machine Shop Work; Operations on the Vertical Milling Machine. (Serial) ROSENWALD, FRANZ. Double Rhythm. 1946. ROSS, FRANK. House I Live In. 1945. Lady Takes a Chance. 1943. ROSS (FRANK) INC. *Lady Takes a Chance. 1943. ROSS (FRANK)-NORMAN KRASNA, INC. *Devil and Miss Jones. 1941.
- 41. ROSS (FRANK) PRODUCTIONS, LTD. *House I Live In. 1945. ROSS, GEORGE. Big Fix. 1947. ROSS, LEONARD Q. All Through the Night. 1942. ROSTEN, LEO. Dark Corner. 1946. Sleep, My Love. 1948. ROTH-GREEN-ROUSE. Town Went Wild. 1944. ROTHMAN, JOSEPH. Damage Control. (Serial) Milling Machine. 1941. Operations on the Milling Machine. (Serial) Shipbuilding Skills: 1, 2, 4, 5, 10. (Serial) ROTTER, FRITZ. Out of the Night. 1945. Something in the Wind. 1947. ROUDABUSH, BYRON. Invitation to the Nation. 1946. ROUSE, RUSSELL. Yokel Boy. 1942. ROUVEROL, AURANIA. Andy Hardy Meets Debutante. 1940. Andy Hardy's Blonde Trouble. 1944. Andy Hardy's Double Life. 1942. Andy Hardy's Private Secretary. 1941. Courtship of Andy Hardy. 1942. Judge Hardy and Son. 1939. Life Begins for Andy Hardy. 1941. Love Laughs at Andy Hardy. 1946. ROWE, L. S. America Central. 1947.
- 42. Antillas. 1947. Centro América. 1947. Colombia e Venezuela. 1947. Colombia y Venezuela. 1946. ROWLAND (RICHARD A.) PRODUCTIONS, INC. *Cheers for Miss Bishop. 1941. ROWLAND, WILLIAM. International Forum. (Serial) ROWLES, BURTON, Jr. Make Way for Youth. 1947. Partnership of Faith. 1949. Wheel Sense. 1949. ROYAL AIR FORCE. SEE Gt. Brit. Royal Air Force. ROYAL CANADIAN MOUNTED POLICE. SEE Canada. Royal Canadian Mounted Police. ROYAL NETHERLAND GOVERNMENT. SEE Netherlands (Kingdom, 1815– ) RUBEL, JAMES L. Medico of Painted Springs. 1941. Prairie Stranger. 1941. Thunder over the Prairie. 1941. RUBEN, ALEX. Time Out for Rhythm. 1941. RUBEN, J. WALTER. Fleet's In. 1942. RUBEROID COMPANY. *Sidelights on Siding. 1941. RUBIEN, A. J. G. I. Honeymoon. 1945. RUDERMAN, MIKHAIL. Pobyeda. 1945. RUFFIN, JOHN NATHANIEL. *Governor William Bradford. 1938.
- 43. RUNYON, DAMON. At the Stroke of Twelve. 1941. Big Street. 1942. It Ain't Hay. 1943. Just a Cute Kid. 1940. Sorrowful Jones. 1949. Tight Shoes. 1941. RURIC, PETER. Alias a Gentleman. 1948. RUSSELL (F. C.) COMPANY. One Step Ahead. 1949. RUSSELL, GENE. Musical Varieties. 1946. RUSSELL, ROBERT. It Looks like Rain. 1945. Well Groomed Bride. 1946. RUSSIA (1923– U. S. S. R.) MOSCOW KINO STUDIO. Smart as a Fox. 1946. RUST, PAUL D., Jr. *F. D. R. Was My Skipper. 1949. RUTH (ROY DEL) PRODUCTIONS. SEE Del Ruth (Roy) Productions. RYAN, DON. Death Valley Outlaws. 1941. Old Hickory. 1940. RYAN, GENEVIEVE. Sitting Right. 1946. RYERSON, FLORENCE. Smooth as Silk. 1946. RYSER, OTTO. Advanced Tumbling. 1945. Beginning Tumbling. 1946. Simple Stunts. 1946.
- 44. RYSKIND, MORRIE. Louisiana Purchase. 1941. Where Do We Go from Here. 1945. S SABATES, S. A. *El Ferrocarril. 1948. *Juanito y Su Perro. 1948. *Los Tres Fantasmas. 1948. SABATINI, RAFAEL. Black Swan. 1942. SAFETY EDUCATION DEPT., AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY. SEE Aetna Casualty and Surety Company Safety Education Dept. SAFETY EDUCATION DEPT. OF THE AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY. SEE Aetna Life Insurance Company, Hartford, Conn. Safety Education Dept. SAGE WESTERN PICTURES. *Untamed Breed. 1948. ST. CLAIR, LEONARD. Inner Circle. 1946. ST. CLAIRE, ARTHUR. Gunman's Code. 1946. Stagecoach Buckaroo. 1941. ST. JOHN, ADELA ROGERS. Government Girl. 1943. I Want a Divorce. 1940. That Brennan Girl. 1946. ST. LOUIS. SERRA CLUB. SEE Serra Club of St. Louis. ST. LOUIS ZOOLOGICAL GARDEN. Jungle Land. 1943. Monkey Doodle Dandies. 1942. SALE, RICHARD.
- 45. Rendezvous with Annie. 1946. Strange Cargo. 1940. SALKOW, KAE. Danger Street. 1947. SALSGIVER, PAUL L. Sharing Economic Risks. 1947. What Is Business? 1948. What Is Money? 1947. Your Thrift Habits. 1948. SALTEN, FELIX. Bambi. 1942. Florian. 1940. SAMSEL, LEON GEORGE. *Strips and Curves. 1947. SANBORN, COLIN CAMPBELL. Mammals of the Rocky Mountains. 1947. Mammals of the Western Plains. 1947. SANCHEZ, ARTHUR. *Spell of the Fandango. 1941. SAND, GEORGE, pseud. of Mme. DUDEVANT. Marquise. 1949. SANDER, F. V. Studies in Human Fertility. 1940. SANG, PAUL S. Coiffure Designing by Visual Education. 1947. SANTA, GEORGE F. Autobiography of a Tract. 1942. Choosing Rather. 1943. City Streets. 1942. Dear Diary. 1943. Fishers of Men. 1942. Found Wanting. 1942. SANTANA PICTURES, INC. *Knock on Any Door. 1949.
- 46. *Tokyo Joe. 1949. SAPPER, pseud. SEE McNeile, Herman Cyril. SARDOU, VICTORIEN. That Uncertain Feeling. 1941. SARGENT, TONY. Devil on Wheels. 1947. SAROYAN, WILLIAM. Good Job. 1942. Human Comedy. 1943. Time of Your Life. 1948. SASSANO, ANTHONY A. Prairie Chickens. 1949. Prairie Wings. 1948. SAUBER, HARRY. Here Comes Happiness. 1941. Love and Learn. 1947. Gonorrhea. 1943. SAVINGS BANK ASSOCIATION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. GROUP V. *In Security, There Is Strength. 1941. SAVINGS BANKS ASSOCIATION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK. *A for Achievement. 1949. SAYERS, DOROTHY L. Haunted Honeymoon. 1940. SCANNELL, FRANCIS P. This Is Nylon. 1949. SCENOGRAPH FILM COMPANY, INC. *We Make Butter. 1949. SCHADEL, LEES MALCOLM, Jr. *Pudendal Block with Demerol and Intracaine. 1949. SCHADL, JOSEPH. National Socialist Activities, U. S. A., 1937–1939. 1947.
- 47. SCHAEFER, HENRY A. *Bees and Honey. 1949. SCHARY, DORE. Adventure in Baltimore. 1949. Boy with Green Hair. 1948. Crossfire. 1947. Every Girl Should Be Married. 1948. I Remember Mama. 1948. Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House. 1948. Race Street. 1948. Rachel and the Stranger. 1948. Till the End of Time. 1946. Woman's Secret. 1949. SCHARY, JEB. Live Wires. 1946. SCHEIDING, ARNO HERMAN. Sextant. (Serial) SCHERING CORPORATION. *Physiology of Normal Menstruation. 1948. SCHIER, MAYER B. A. *Study in Auditology. 1940. SCHILLER, FRED. Boston Blackie's Rendezvous. 1945. Something To Shout About. 1943. Winter Wonderland. 1947. SCHINDEL, MORTON. *Adventuring Pups. 1948. SCHISGALL, OSCAR. Man I Married. 1940. SCHLESINGER, HERMANN I. Energy and Its Transformations. 1946. SCHLESINGER, LEON. *Deep Diving. (Serial) SCHLESINGER (LEON) PRODUCTIONS.
- 48. All This and Rabbit Stew. 1941. Aviation Vacation. 1941. Bird Came C. O. D. 1942. Brave Little Bat. 1941. Bug Parade. 1941. Bugs Bunny Gets the Boid. 1942. Cagey Canary. 1941. Cat's Tale. 1941. Conrad the Sailor. 1942. Coy Decoy. 1941. Crackpot Quail. 1941. Deep Diving. (Serial) Double Chaser. 1942. Draft Horse. 1942. Early Worm Gets the Bird. 1939. Gander at Mother Goose. 1940. Hardship of Miles Standish. 1940. Haunted Mouse. 1941. Heckling Hare. 1941. Hiawatha's Rabbit Hunt. 1941. Hobby Horse-Laffs. 1942. Hop, Skip, and a Chump. 1942. Impatient Patient. 1942. Inki and the Lion. 1941. Lights Fantastic. 1942. Meet John Doughboy. 1941. Notes to You. 1941. Nutty News. 1942. Porky's Ant. 1941. Porky's Cafe. 1942. Porky's Hired Hand. 1940. Porky's Midnight Matinee. 1941. Porky's Pastry Pirates. 1942. Porky's Pooch. 1941. Porky's Poor Fish. 1940. Porky's Preview. 1941. Porky's Prize Pony. 1941. Rhapsody in Rivets. 1941. Robinson Crusoe, Jr. 1941.
- 49. Rookie Revue. 1941. Saddle Silly. 1941. *Shallow Water Diving. 1944. Sniffles Bells the Cat. 1940. Snow Time for Comedy. 1941. *Specific Gravity of Healthy Men. 1944. Trial of Mr. Wolf. 1941. Wabbit Twouble. 1941. Wacky Blackout. 1942. Wacky Worm. 1941. SCHNEIDER, JOHN, III. *Weather at a Glance. 1949. SCHNEIDER, ROBERT E. Cleaning of Walls. 1946. SCHOOLMAN, RALPH. Invasion. 1941. SCHORLING, RALEIGH. Broader Concept of Method. Part 1. Developing Pupil Interest. 1947. Broader Concept of Method. Part 2. Teacher and Pupils Planning and Working Together. 1947. Learning To Understand Children. Part 1. A Diagnostic Approach. 1947. Learning To Understand Children. Part 2. A Remedial Program. 1947. Maintaining Classroom Discipline. 1947. SCHUBERT, BERNARD. Song of Love. 1947. SCHULTZ, WILLIAM J. Federal Taxation. 1948. SCHUYLER, J. B. *Eye Pay—You Take It. 1942. SCHWAB, LAWRENCE. Desert Song. 1943. Good News. 1947.
- 50. New Moon. 1940. SCHWARTZ, ARTHUR. Dancing in the Dark. 1949. Thank Your Lucky Stars. 1943. SCHWARTZ, H. W. Breaking the Bottleneck. 1945. SCHWARTZ, SID. Man Made Monster. 1941. SCHWARZ (JACK) PRODUCTIONS. *Buffalo Bill Rides Again. 1946. *Hollywood Barn Dance. 1947. SCIENCE ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE. What I Want Next. 1949. SCOGGINS, C. E. Tycoon. 1947. SCOOP PRODUCTIONS. *One Inch from Victory; Hitler's Russian Surprise. 1944. SCOTT, ALAN. Honeymoon for Three. 1941. SCOTT, DE VALLON. She Went to the Races. 1945. SCOTT, EWING. Arctic Manhunt. 1949. Harpoon. 1948. Untamed Fury. 1947. SCOTT, ROBERT LEE, Jr. God Is My Co-Pilot. 1945. SCREEN ART PICTURES CORPORATION. *Case of the Baby Sitter. 1947. *Hat-Box Mystery. 1947. *Queen of the Amazons. 1946. SCREEN GEMS, INC. *A Hunting We Won't Go. 1943.
- 51. *Amoozin' but Confoozin. 1944. *As the Fly Flies. 1944. *Barnyard Babies. 1940. *Battle for a Bottle. 1942. *Be Patient, Patient. 1944. *Big House Blues. 1947. *Blackboard Revue. 1940. *Booby Socks. 1945. *Boston Beanie. 1947. *Boy, a Gun and Birds. 1939. *Bulldog and the Baby. 1942. *Cagey Bird. 1946. *Carnival Courage. 1945. *Catnipped. 1946. *Cat-Tastrophy. 1949. *Cholly Polly. 1942. *Cinderella Goes to a Party. 1942. *Cockatoos for Two. 1947. *Cocky Bantam. 1943. *Concerto in B Flat Minor. 1942. *Coo-Coo Bird Dog. 1949. *Crystal Gazer. 1941. *Cuckoo I. Q. 1941. *Cute Recruit. 1941. *Disillusioned Blue Bird. 1944. *Dizzy Newsreel. 1943. *Dog, Cat and Canary. 1945. *Dog Meets Dog. 1942. *Dream Kids. 1944. *Dumb like a Fox. 1941. *Dumbconscious Mind. 1942. *Duty and the Beast. 1943. *Egg Hunt. 1940. Egg-Yegg. 1945. *Farmer Tom Thumb. 1940. *Fiesta Time. 1945. *Fish Follies. 1940. *Flora. 1948. *Fly in the Ointment. 1943.
- 52. *Fowl Brawl. 1947. *Fox and the Grapes. 1941. *Foxey Flatfoots. 1946. *Giddy-Yapping. 1944. *Goofy News Views. 1945. *Grape Nutty. 1949. *Great Cheese Mystery. 1941. *Greyhound and the Rabbit. 1940. *Gullible Canary. 1942. *Happy Holidays. 1940. *Happytots' Expedition. 1940. *He Can't Make It Stick. 1943. *Helping Paw. 1941. *Herring Murder Mystery. 1944. *Hollywood Detour. 1942. *Hot Foot Lights. 1945. *Imagination. 1943. *It Happened to Crusoe. 1941. *Kickapoo Juice. 1945. *Kindly Scram. 1943. *King Midas Junior. 1942. *Kitty Caddy. 1947. *Kitty Gets the Bird. 1941. *Kongo-Roo. 1946. *Ku-Ku-Nuts. 1945. *Land of Fun. 1941. *Leave Us Chase It. 1947. *Lionel Lion. 1944. *Little Theatre. 1941. *Lo, the Poor Buffalo. 1948. *Loco Lobo. 1947. *Mad Hatter. 1940. *Magic Strength. 1944. *Malice in Slumberland. 1942. *Man of Tin. 1940. *Mass Mouse Meeting. 1943. *Merry Mouse Cafe. 1941. *Mr. Elephant Goes to Town. 1940. *Mr. Fore by Fore. 1944.
- 53. *Mr. Moocher. 1944. *Mother Hubba-Hubba Hubbard. 1947. *Mouse Meets Lion. 1940. Mutt 'n Bones. 1944. *Mysto Fox. 1946. *News Oddities. 1940. *Nursery Crimes. 1943. *Old Blackout Joe. 1942. *Olde Swap Shoppe. 1940. *Paunch 'n Judy. 1940. *Pee-kool-yar-sit-chee-ay-shun. 1944. *Peep in the Deep. 1940. *Phoney Baloney. 1945. *Pickled Puss. 1948. *Picnic Panic. 1946. *Playful Pest. 1943. *Playing the Pied Piper. 1941. *Plenty Below Zero. 1943. *Polar Playmates. 1946. *Polly Wants a Doctor. 1943. *Pooch Parade. 1940. *Porkyliar Piggy. 1944. *Practice Makes Perfect. 1940. *Prof. Small and Mr. Tall. 1943. *Red Riding Hood Rides Again. 1942. *Rippling Romance. 1945. *River Ribber. 1946. *Rocky Road to Ruin. 1943. *Room and Bored. 1943. *Sadie Hawkins Day. 1944. *Schoolboy Dreams. 1940. *Schooner the Better. 1946. *Short Snorts on Sports. 1948. *Silent Tweetment. 1946. *Simple Siren. 1945. *Slay It with Flowers. 1943. *Snap Happy Traps. 1946. *Song of Victory. 1942. *Streamlined Donkey. 1941.
- 54. *Swiss Tease. 1947. *Tangled Angler. 1942. *Tangled Television. 1940. *Tangled Travels. 1944. *There's Music in Your Hair. 1941. *There's Something About a Soldier. 1943. *Timid Pup. 1940. *Tito's Guitar. 1942. *Toll Bridge Troubles. 1942. *Tom Thumb's Brother. 1941. *Tooth or Consequence. 1947. *Topsy Turkey. 1948. *Treasure Jest. 1945. *Tree for Two. 1943. *Uncultured Vulture. 1947. *Unsure-Runts. 1946. *Up 'n' Atom. 1947. *Vitamin-G-Man. 1943. *Wacky Quacky. 1947. *Wacky Wigwams. 1942. *Wallflower. 1941. *Way Down Yonder in the Corn. 1943. *Way of All Pests. 1941. *Who's Zoo in Hollywood. 1941. *Wild and Woozy West. 1942. *Willoughby's Magic Hat. 1943. *Wise Owl. 1940. *Wolf Chases Pigs. 1942. *Woodman Spare That Tree. 1942. SCREEN GUILD PRODUCTIONS, INC. Arson, Inc. 1949. Bells of San Fernando. 1947. Dalton Gang. 1949. Dead Man's Gold. 1948. Death Valley. 1946. Deputy Marshal. 1949. *Flight to Nowhere. 1946. Frontier Revenge. 1948.
- 55. God's Country. 1946. Grand Canyon. 1949. Highway 13. 1949. I Shot Jesse James. 1949. Jungle Goddess. 1948. Last of the Wild Horses. 1948. Mark of the Lash. 1948. Mozart Story. 1948. *My Dog Shep. 1946. 'Neath Canadian Skies. 1946. North of the Border. 1946. Northwest Trail. 1945. Omoo-Omoo, the Shark God. 1949. Outlaw Country. 1948. *Renegade Girl. 1946. Return of Wildfire. 1948. Rimfire. 1949. Ringside. 1949. *Rolling Home. 1946. Shep Comes Home. 1948. *Shoot To Kill. 1947. Sky Liner. 1949. Son of a Bad Man. 1949. Son of Billy the Kid. 1949. Square Dance Jubilee. 1949. Thunder in the Pines. 1948. Treasure of Monte Cristo. 1949. SCREEN PLAYS CORPORATION. Champion. 1949. SCREEN PLAYS, INC. *So This Is New York. 1948. SCREEN PLAYS II CORPORATION. *Champion. 1949. *Home of the Brave. 1949. SCREEN SONG. Readin', Ritin', and Rhythmetic. 1948. SCREENCRAFT PICTURES, INC.
- 56. *Great Betrayal. 1947. Riders of the Pony Express. 1949. SCRIPTURE FILMS. *Frontier Parson Reads the Bible. 1947. SCRIPTURES VISUALIZED INSTITUTE. *Autobiography of a Tract. 1942. *Backyard Explorations. 1942. *Choosing Rather. 1943. *City Streets. 1942. *Dear Diary. 1943. *Dying Thief. 1947. *Fishers of Men. 1942. *Go Ye. 1943. *Happy Time for Boys and Girls. 1943, 1944. *Life That Satisfies. 1946. *Little Toy Soldier. 1945. *Man Who Forgot God. 1943. *Musical Moments with the Ramseyers. 1943. *Note of Praise. 1945. *Old Rugged Cross. 1946. *Power of the Blood. 1946. *Prodigal Son. 1944. *Thankful Dandelion. 1947. *This Amazing Universe. 1942. *Tree of God's Planting. 1944. *Way to Heaven. 1946. SEATON, GEORGE. Cockeyed Miracle. 1946. SECURITY PICTURES, INC. *Anna Lucasta. 1949. SEEGER, HAL. Don't Be a Joe. 1947. *Hands Tell the Story. 1948. SEFF, MANNY. Hitchhike to Happiness. 1945. SEGALL, HARRY.
- 57. Bride Wore Boots. 1946. Down to Earth. 1947. Here Comes Mr. Jordan. 1941. SEGHERS, ANNA. Seventh Cross. 1944. SEIBERLING RUBBER COMPANY. Miracle on Mulberry Street. 1949. SEIDE, JULIAN ROBERT. *Bosco, Delinquent Pup. 1948. *Heaven Sent. 1948. *Winner Take Bosco. 1948. SEIDEL, ELMER FRANK. Cooper-Bessemer Diesel Engine Maintenance. 1943. SEILER, HEINRICH. Hidden Menace. 1938. SEITZINGER, P. H. Construction of a Light Airplane. 1943. SELECT ATTRACTIONS, INC. *City of Missing Girls. 1941. SELECT PRODUCTIONS, INC. *Long Night. 1947. SELECTED FILMS, INC. *Plot To Kill Roosevelt. 1948. SELTZER (FRANK) PRODUCTIONS, INC. Let's Live Again. 1948. SELWYN, EDGAR. Pierre of the Plains. 1942. SELZNICK. Portrait of Jennie. 1949. SELZNICK, DAVID O. Fallen Idol. 1949. Since You Went Away. 1944. Spellbound. 1945.
- 58. Third Man. 1949. SELZNICK INTERNATIONAL. I'll Be Seeing You. 1944, 1945. Since You Went Away. 1944. Spellbound. 1945. SELZNICK INTERNATIONAL PICTURES, INC. *Gone with the Wind. 1939. *Rebecca. 1940. SELZNICK RELEASING ORGANIZATION. Fallen Idol. 1949. Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House. 1948. SENNETT, MACK. Good Old Corn. 1945. Happy Faces. 1941. Happy Times and Jolly Moments. 1943. Love's Intrigue. 1940. Once Over Lightly. 1944. Wedding Yells. 1942. SEPIA PRODUCTIONS, INC. *Mr. Adam's Bomb. 1949. SERRA CLUB OF ST. LOUIS. *Captains in His Army. 1948. SERVICE, ROBERT W. Shooting of Dan McGoo. 1945. SERVITE FATHERS. Eternal Gift. 1941. SETON, ANYA. Dragonwyck. 1946. SEUSS, Dr. And To Think That I Saw It on Mulberry Street. 1944. 500 Hats of Bartholomew Cubbins. 1943. SEWALL, ANNA. Black Beauty. 1946.
- 59. SHADWICK, GEORGE W., Jr. Mary Bennett Takes a Trip. 1941. SHAFF, MONTY. Man-Eater of Kumaon. 1948. SHAFF (MONTY) PRODUCTIONS, INC. *Man Eater of Kumaon. 1948. SHANE, MAXWELL. Eyes of the Underworld. 1942. Golden Gloves. 1940. Man Who Dared. 1946. Seven Were Saved. 1947. SHANNON, ROBERT T. Barnyard Follies. 1940. Flame. 1947. Sleepytime Gal. 1942. Sons of the Pioneers. 1942. X Marks the Spot. 1942. SHAPERO, DONALD M. Film Memos; What About the Postwar Car? 1945. SHAPIRO, LIONEL. Sealed Verdict. 1948. SHARIN, EUGEN. Egmont. 1948. Emperor Waltz. 1948. Kleine Nachtmusik. 1948. Merry Christmas. 1948. Orpheus in Hades. 1948. Tales from the Vienna Woods. 1948. SHARP, MARGERY. Cluny Brown. 1946. Forbidden Street. 1949. Julia Misbehaves. 1948. SHATTUCK (FRANK G.) COMPANY. *Schrafft's. 1944.
- 60. SHATTUCK, RICHARD. Ghost That Walks Alone. 1944. SHAVELSON, MELVILLE. Where There's Life. 1947. SHAW, DAVID. Take One False Step. 1949. SHAW, GEORGE BERNARD. Caesar and Cleopatra. 1946. Major Barbara. 1941. SHAW, IRWIN. Easy Living. 1949. Out of the Fog. 1941. Take One False Step. 1949. SHAW, KERRY. Men in Her Diary. 1945. SHEAFFER (W. A.) PEN COMPANY. Right to the Point. 1945. 26 Old Characters. 1947. SHEARING, JOSEPH, pseud. Blanche Fury. 1947. SHEARING, JOSEPH, pseud. SEE Campbell, Gabrielle Margaret Vere. Long, Gabrielle Margaret Vere Campbell. SHELDON, E. LLOYD. Beyond the Blue Horizon. 1942. SHELDON, EDWARD BREWSTER. Dishonored Lady. 1947. Lulu Belle. 1948. SHELDON, H. HORTON. Distributing Heat Energy. 1946. Fuels and Heat. 1946. Máquinas Simples. 1947. SHELDON, SIDNEY. Borrowed Hero. 1942.
- 61. Fly-by-Night. 1942. SHELL OIL COMPANY, INC. *Birth of an Oil Field. 1949. *Prospecting for Petroleum. 1948. *Start. 1949. Tomorrow's Highroad. 1945. SHELLABARGER, SAMUEL. Captain from Castile. 1947. SHEPPARD, DAVID P. That Babies May Live. 1949. SHEPRO, MERRILL JAMES. Bilateral Cleft-Lip Reconstruction—Schultz Method. 1943. Technic of Amalgam Restorations. 1944. SHEPRO SCIENTIFIC FILM COMPANY. *Bilateral Cleft-Lip Reconstruction—Schultz Method. 1943. *Technic of Amalgam Restorations. 1944. SHERMAN, EDWARD. Wave, a Wac and a Marine. 1944. SHERMAN, HAROLD M. Adventures of Mark Twain. 1944. SHERMAN, HARRY. American Empire. 1942. Buckskin Frontier. 1943. Knights of the Range. 1940. Santa Fe Marshal. 1940. Silver Queen. 1942. Texas Masquerade. 1943. Woman of the Town. 1943. SHERMAN (HARRY) PICTURES, INC. *Four Faces West. 1948. *Ramrod. 1947. SHERMAN (HARRY A.) PRODUCTIONS. Bar 20. 1943. Border Patrol. 1942.
- 62. Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to specialized publications, self-development books, and children's literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system, we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and personal growth! ebookultra.com