Agreement and Disputes in Dialogue
نویسندگان
چکیده
In this paper we define agreement in terms of shared public commitments, and implicit agreement is conditioned on the semantics of the relational speech acts (e.g., Narration, Explanation) that each agent performs. We provide a consistent interpretation of disputes, and updating a logical form with the current utterance always involves extending it and not revising it, even if the current utterance denies earlier content.
منابع مشابه
Agreement, Disputes and Commitments in Dialogue
This paper provides a logically precise analysis of agreement and disputes in dialogue. The semantics distinguishes among the public commitments of each dialogue agent, including commitments to relational speech acts or rhetorical relations (e.g., Narration, Explanation, Correction). Agreement is defined to be the shared entailments of the agents’ public commitments. We show that this makes pre...
متن کاملFrom Dialogue Acts to Dialogue Act Offers: Building Discourse Structure as an Argumentative Process
Based on the Theory of Communicative Action developed by Jürgen Habermas we propose to analyse the actions of participants in a dialogue in terms of dialogue act offers that raise validity claims to be evaluated by the addressee of a move. We argue that this approach allows us to model disputes and misunderstandings in conversations in a way that minimises revisions of discourse structure and r...
متن کاملAgreeing on plans through iterated disputes
Autonomous agents transcend their individual capabilities by cooperating towards achieving shared goals. The different viewpoints agents have on the environment cause disagreements about the anticipated effects of plans. Reaching agreement requires the resolution of such inconsistencies and the alignment of the agents’ viewpoints. We present a dialogue protocol that enables agents to discuss ca...
متن کاملGrounding and Correcting Commitments in Dialogue
This paper provides a logically precise analysis of grounding and disputes in dialogue. The semantics distinguishes among the public commitments of each dialogue participant, including commitments to relational speech acts or rhetorical relations (e.g., Narration, Explanation, Acknowledgement). Thus commitments to the illocutionary contribution of an utterance as well as to its compositional se...
متن کاملBurden of Proof
This paper presents an analysis of the concept of burden of proof in argument. Relationship of burden of proof to three traditional informal fallacies is considered: (i) argumentum ad hominem (ii) petitio principii and (iii) argumentum ad ignorantiam. Other topics discussed include persuasive dialogue, pragmatic reasoning, legal burden of proof, plausible reasoning in regulated disputes, rules ...
متن کامل