Agreement, Disputes and Commitments in Dialogue
نویسندگان
چکیده
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 precise predictions about implicit agreement. The theory also provides a consistent interpretation of disputes and models what content is agreed upon when a dispute has taken place.
منابع مشابه
Agreement and Disputes in Dialogue
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 utter...
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 کاملDynamics of Public Commitments in Dialogue
In this paper, we present a dynamic semantics for dialogue in terms of commitments. We use this to provide a model theoretic treatment of ambiguity and its effects on the evolutions of commitments as a dialogue proceeds. Our first semantics ensures common commitments and has a simple logic for which we provide a complete axiomatization. On the other hand, our semantics poses difficulties for th...
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 کاملAddressing NCDs: Protecting Health From Trade and Investment Law; Comment on “Addressing NCDs: Challenges From Industry Market Promotion and Interferences”
Building on Tangcharoensathien and colleagues’ description of four tactics used by the tobacco, alcohol, processed food, and breast milk substitute industries to interfere with the development and implementation of health policies, we present a fifth tactic: trade and investment disputes. We describe recent examples of trade and investment claims filed by the tobacco in...
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:
- J. Semantics
دوره 26 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2009