In:Communicating Certainty and Uncertainty in Medical, Supportive and Scientific Contexts
Edited by Andrzej Zuczkowski, Ramona Bongelli, Ilaria Riccioni and Carla Canestrari
[Dialogue Studies 25] 2014
► pp. 59–78
Ideal and deviant interlocutors in a formal interpretation system
Published online: 26 November 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.25.03alb
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.25.03alb
Conversational partners’ “ideal” information states – their knowledge (about the world and each other), their beliefs (with different degrees of certainty), their desires and intentions (of different degrees of intensity) – can be specified at any point in the conversation. The various elements making up an information state are sometimes standard-like, but often they serve as basis for various possible deviations from the standard. Some verbs which express particular deviations are discussed, including the extreme case of lying while saying the truth. Our analyses are presented in a formal interpretation system, which allows us to demonstrate how different meanings emerge while only changing polarity parameters from case to case. We thus intend to build a bridge between pragmatics and hardcore formal semantics.
References (17)
Alberti, Gábor. 2005. “Accessible Referents in “Opaque” Belief Contexts.” In Proc’s of 9th ESSLLI Belief Revision and Dynamic Logic Workshop, ed. by Hans van Ditmarsch, and Andreas Herzig, 1–7. Edinburgh: Heriot-Watt University.
Alberti, Gábor, and Márton Károly. 2012. “Multiple Level of Referents in Information State.” In Computational Linguistics and Intelligent Text Processing, CICLing2012, LNCS7181, ed. by Alexander Gelbukh, 349–362. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer Verlag.
Alberti, Gábor, Márton Károly, and Judit Kleiber. 2010. “The ReALIS Model of Human Interpreters and Its Application in Computational Linguistics.” Proc. of ICSOFT 2010, 5th International Conference on Software and Data Technologies, Athens, Greece, Vol. 2, 468–474. Portugal: SciTePress.
Alberti, Gábor, and Judit Kleiber. 2012. “Where are Possible Worlds? (Arguments for ReALIS).” Acta Linguistica Hungarica 59 (1–2): 3–26.
Asher, Nicholas, and Alex Lascarides. 2003. Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bussmann, Hadumod. 1996. Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. London and New York: Routledge.
Clark, Herbert H., and Richard J. Gerrig. 2007. “On the Pretence Theory of Irony.” In Irony in Language and Thought, ed. by Raymond W. Gibbs, and Herbert L. Colston, 25–33. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Falkenberg, Gabriel. 1982. Lügen. Grundzüge einer Theorie sprachlicher Täuschung. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Hans-Martin, Gärtner, and Beáta Gyuris. 2012. “Pragmatic markers in Hungarian: Some introductory remarks.” Acta Linguistica Hungarica 59: 387–426.
Gibbs, Raymond W., and Herbert L. Colston. 2007. Irony in Language and Thought. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Grice, Paul. 1975. “Logic and Conversation”. In Syntax and Semantics 3, ed. by Peter Cole, and Jerry L. Morgan, 41–58. New York: Academic Press.
Kamp, Hans, Josef van Genabith, and Uwe Reyle. 2011. “Discourse Representation Theory.” In Handbook of Philosophical Logic 15, ed. by Dov Gabbay, and Franz Guenthner, 125–394. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Károly, Márton, and Gábor Alberti. 2013. “The Implementation of a ReALIS-based Method of Static Intensional Interpretation.” In Proceedings of KEOD 2013, 5th International Conference on Knowledge Engineering and Ontology Development (Vilamoura, Portugal, 19–22 September 2013), ed. by Joaquim Filipe, and Jan Dietz, 393–398.
Kleiber, Judit, and Gábor Alberti. In press. “Uncertainty in Polar Questions and Certainty in Answers?” In Certainty–Uncertainty – and the Attitudinal Space in Between, ed. by Sibilla Cantarini, Werner Abraham, and Elisabeth Leiss. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.