Rejection by Implicature
نویسنده
چکیده
On one view of dialogue, the conversational record is part of the COMMON GROUND of the conversants. As conversants make assertions, the content of these assertions are added to the common ground, with the effect of limiting the context set (Stalnaker, 1978; Gazdar, 1979). According to Stalnaker, an assertion is assumed to be ACCEPTED, with a concomitant limitation of shared context, unless it is REJECTED by another conversant, and if an assertion is REJECTED the context remains as it was. Although Stalnaker says nothing about how acceptance and rejection are indicated and recognized in dialogue, other work has shown that the inference of acceptance can be licensed in the absence of rejection (Whittaker and Stenton, 1988; Walker and Whittaker, 1990), but that conversants often explicitly indicate acceptance, as B does in 1:
منابع مشابه
Inferring Rejection by Default Rules of Inference
This paper discusses the processes by which conversants in a dialogue can infer whether their assertions and proposals have been rejected by their conversational partners. It expands on previous work by showing that logical consistency is a necessary indicator of acceptance, but that it is not sufficient, and that logical inconsistency is sufficient as an indicator of rejection, but it is not n...
متن کاملInferring Acceptance and Rejection in Dialogueby Default Rules of
This paper discusses the processes by which conversants in a dialogue can infer whether their assertions and proposals have been accepted or rejected by their conversational partners. It expands on previous work by showing that logical consistency is a necessary indicator of acceptance, but that it is not suucient, and that logical inconsistency is suucient as an indicator of rejection, but it ...
متن کاملInferring Acceptance and Rejection in Dialogue by Default Rules of Inference
This paper discusses the processes by which conversants in a dialogue can infer whether their assertions and proposals have been accepted or rejected by their conversational partners. It expands on previous work by showing that logical consistency is a necessary indicator of acceptance, but that it is not sufficient, and that logical inconsistency is sufficient as an indicator of rejection, but...
متن کاملPragmatic Rejection
Computationally detecting the accepting/rejecting force of an utterance in dialogue is often a complex process. In this paper we focus on a class of utterances we call pragmatic rejections, whose rejection force arises only by pragmatic means. We define the class of pragmatic rejections, present a novel corpus of such utterances, and introduce a formal model to compute what we call rejectionsby...
متن کاملReflections on Jennifer Saul's View of Successful Communication and Conversational Implicature
Saul (2002) criticizes a view on the relationship between speaker meaning and conversational implicatures according to which speaker meaning is exhaustively comprised of what is said and what is implicated. In the course of making her points, she develops a couple of new notions which she calls “utterer-implicature” and “audience-implicature”. She then makes certain claims about the relationshi...
متن کامل