Eliminating deceptions and mistaken belief to infer conversational implicature
نویسندگان
چکیده
Conversational implicatures are usually described as being licensed by the disobeying or flouting of some principle by the speaker in cooperative dialogue. However, such work has failed to distinguish cases of the speaker flouting such a principle from cases where the speaker is either deceptive or holds a mistaken belief. In this paper, we demonstrate how the three different cases can be distinguished in terms of the beliefs ascribed to the speaker of the utterance. We argue that in the act of distinguishing the speaker's intention and ascribing such beliefs, the intended inference can be made by the hearer. This theory is implemented in ViewGen, a pre-existing belief modelling system used in a medical counselling domain.
منابع مشابه
Reflections 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 کاملComedy, Context and Unsaid Meaning: A Case Study in Conversational Implicature
Pragmatics moves away from the word level and sentence level study of language towards the study of language in real-world context and at discourse level whereby two or more participants take part in conversation. There are moments when the speaker explicitly says something but the listener may have other interpretations and inferences from their statements. The aim of this study was to demonst...
متن کاملRationality, Cooperation and Conversational Implicature
beliefs explaining the role the first set of beliefs play in the speaker's plan. Pollack's idea of ascribing a set of additional beliefs based on the intentions contained in the recognised plan is similar to our idea of ascribing additional conversational goals to explain why a plan is apparently inefficient. However, her motivation is to show how mistaken beliefs in dialogue can be recognised ...
متن کاملNegotiating causal implicatures
In this paper we motivate and describe a dialogue manager which is able to infer and negotiate causal implicatures. A causal implicature is a type of Gricean relation implicature, and the ability to infer them is crucial in situated dialogue. Because situated dialogue interleaves conversational acts and physical acts, the dialogue manager needs to have a grasp on causal implicatures in order no...
متن کاملContext and Implicature
This paper introduces Paul Grice’s notion of conversational implicature. The basic ideas — the cooperative principle, the maxims of conversation, and the contrast between implicature and presupposition — make it clear that conversational implicature is a highly contextualized form of language use that has a lot in common with non-linguistic behavior. But what exactly is its role? We invite the ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- CoRR
دوره cmp-lg/9806005 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 1997