Cover not available

Article published In: Interaction Studies
Vol. 17:1 (2016) ► pp.48–76

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Construals of meaning

The role of attention in robotic language production

 | Univ Lyon, Université Lyon 1, Inserm, Stem Cell and Brain Research Institute U1208, Bron, France
 | Univ Lyon, Université Lyon 1, Inserm, Stem Cell and Brain Research Institute U1208, Bron, France
 | LUX, Lund University
 | Univ Lyon, Université Lyon 1, Inserm, Stem Cell and Brain Research Institute U1208, Bron, France
Published online: 7 October 2016
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/is.17.1.03mea
Abstract
In robotics research with language-based interaction, simplifications are made, such that a given event can be described in a unique manner, where there is a direct mapping between event representations and sentences that can describe these events. However, common experience tells us that the same physical event can be described in multiple ways, depending on the perspective of the speaker. The current research develops methods for representing events from multiple perspectives, and for choosing the perspective that will be used for generating a linguistic construal, based on attentional processes in the system. The multiple perspectives are based on the principle that events can be considered in terms of the force driving the event, and the result obtained from the event, based on the theory of Gärdenfors. In addition, within these perspectives a further refinement can be made with respect to the agent, object, and recipient perspectives. We develop a system for generating appropriate construals of meaning, and demonstrate how this can be used in a realistic dialogic interaction between a behaving robot and a human interlocutor.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
    • 1.1The problem of focus in sentence production
    • 1.2Different construals of event meanings
  • 2.Coding of meaning
    • 2.1A model of events
    • 2.2From construals to sentences
    • 2.3Determining the focus of the speaker
  • 3.Central components of the computational system
    • 3.1Sentence comprehension model
    • 3.2Sentence production model
    • 3.3PAOR representation of meaning
    • 3.4Force-result event construal
    • 3.5Ontic processes in mental model formation
  • 4.Method of implementation
    • 4.1Spoken language platform
    • 4.2Construal development
    • 4.3Functional requirements
  • 5.Demonstrations of construal and sentence generation
    • 5.1Conceptualization and construal of spatial configurations
    • 5.2Generating construals from actions
  • 6.Discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (53)
References
AbdulSabur N, Xu Y, Liu S, Chow H, Baxter M, et al. 2014. Neural correlates and network connectivity underlying narrative production and comprehension: A combined fMRI and PET study. Cortex 571: 107–27 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bates E, MacWhinney B. 1987. Competition, variation, and language learning In Mechanisms of language acquisition, ed. B MacWhinney, E Bates, pp. 157–93. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Becker RB, Ferretti TR, Madden-Lombardi CJ. 2013. Grammatical aspect, lexical aspect, and event duration constrain the availability of events in narratives. Cognition 1291: 212–20 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruner J. 1991. The narrative construction of reality. Critical inquiry: 1–21 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft W. 2012. Verbs: Aspect and causal structure. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Croft W, Wood EJ. 2000. Construal operations in linguistics and artificial intelligence Meaning and Cognition: A multidisciplinary approach ed. by Liliana Albertazzi: 51–78 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dominey P, Boucher J. 2005a. Developmental stages of perception and language acquisition in a perceptually grounded robot. Cognitive Systems Research 61: 243–59 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dominey PF. 2001. A model of learning syntactic comprehension for natural and artificial grammars In Basic mechanisms of language and language disorders., ed. E Witruk, AD Friederici, T Lachmann, pp. 61–77. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic PublishersGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 25th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Boston, 2003.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Recurrent temporal networks and language acquisition-from corticostriatal neurophysiology to reservoir computing. Frontiers in psychology 41: 1–14 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dominey PF, Boucher JD. 2005b. Learning to talk about events from narrated video in a construction grammar framework. Artificial Intelligence 1671: 31–61 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dominey PF, Hoen M Blanc JM, Lelekov-Boissard T. 2003. Neurological basis of language and sequential cognition: evidence from simulation, aphasia, and ERP studies. Brain Lang 861: 207–25 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dominey PF, Hoen M, Inui T. 2006. A neurolinguistic model of grammatical construction processing. J Cogn Neurosci 181: 2088–107 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dominey PF, Inui T. 2009. Cortico-striatal function in sentence comprehension: insights from neurophysiology and modeling. Cortex 451: 1012–8 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dominey PF, Inui T, Hoen M. 2009. Neural network processing of natural language: II. Towards a unified model of corticostriatal function in learning sentence comprehension and non-linguistic sequencing. Brain & Language 1091: 80–92 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dominey PF, Ramus F. 2000. Neural network processing of natural language: I. Sensitivity to serial, temporal and abstract structure of language in the infant. Language and Cognitive Processes 151: 40 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Doshi F, Roy N. 2008. Spoken language interaction with model uncertainty: an adaptive human–robot interaction system. Connection Science 201: 299–318 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dowty D. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. language: 547–619 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feldman CF. 1987. Thought from language: the linguistic constructino of cognitive representations In Making sense: the child's construction of the world, ed. J Bruner, pp. 131–46. London: Methuen & Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gärdenfors P. 2014. The geometry of meaning: Semantics based on conceptual spaces. MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gärdenfors P, Warglien M. 2012. Using conceptual spaces to model actions and events. Journal of Semantics: ffs007 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón T. 2001. Syntax: an introduction. John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gorniak P, Roy D. 2004. Grounded semantic composition for visual scenes. J. Artificial Intelligence Res. 211: 429–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hassin RR, Aarts H, Ferguson MJ. 2005. Automatic goal inferences. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 411: 129–40 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinaut X, Dominey PF. 2013. Real-time parallel processing of grammatical structure in the fronto-striatal system: a recurrent network simulation study using reservoir computing. PLoS One 81: 1–18 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hinaut X, Petit M, Pointeau G, Dominey PF. 2014. Exploring the acquisition and production of grammatical constructions through human-robot interaction with echo state networks. Front Neurorobot 81 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jackendoff R. 2002. Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kollar T, Tellex S, Roy D, Roy N. 2010. Proceeding of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-robot Interaction - HRI ’10. Osaka, Japan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff G, Narayanan S. 2010. AAAI Fall Symposium: Computational Models of Narrative.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lallée S, Hamann K, Steinwender J, Warneken F, Martienz U, et al.. 2013. Cooperative Human Robot Interaction Systems: IV. Communication of Shared Plans with Naïve Humans using Gaze and Speech. Presented at IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, TokyoGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lallée S, Madden C, Hoen M, Dominey P. 2010. Linking language with embodied teleological representations of action for humanoid cognition. Frontiers in Neurobotics Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Langacker RW. 1987. Foundations of cognitive grammar: Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford university press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lauria S, Bugmann G, Kyriacou T, Klein E. 2002. Mobile robot programming using natural language. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 381: 171–81 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levin B, Hovav MR. 2005. Argument realization. Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Li P, Macwhinney B. 2013. Competition Model. The Encyclopedia of Applied LinguisticsGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maguire MJ, Hirsh-Pasek K, Golinkoff RM, Imai M, Haryu E, et al.. 2010. A developmental shift from similar to language-specific strategies in verb acquisition: a comparison of English, Spanish, and Japanese. Cognition 1141: 299–319 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Metta G, Fitzpatrick P, Natale L. 2006. YARP: yet another robot platform. International Journal on Advanced Robotics Systems 31: 43–48Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palomares NA. 2008. Toward a Theory of Goal Detection in Social Interaction Effects of Contextual Ambiguity and Tactical Functionality on Goal Inferences and Inference Certainty. Communication Research 351: 109–48 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peelen MV, Romagno D, Caramazza A. 2012. Independent representations of verbs and actions in left lateral temporal cortex. Journal of cognitive neuroscience 241: 2096–107 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pointeau G, Petit M, Dominey PF. 2014. Successive Developmental Levels of Autobiographical Memory for Learning Through Social Interaction. Autonomous Mental Development, IEEE Transactions on Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Regier T, Zheng M. 2007. Attention to Endpoints: A Cross‐Linguistic Constraint on Spatial Meaning. Cognitive Science 311: 705–19 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosen ST. 1999. The syntactic representation of linguistic events. Glot International 41: 3–11Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Roy D. 2002. Learning visually grounded words and syntax for a scene description task. Computer Speech and Language 161: 353–85 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Semin GR, Fiedler K. 1988. The cognitive functions of linguistic categories in describing persons: Social cognition and language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 541: 558 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Talmy L. 1988. Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science 121: 49–100 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello M, Carpenter M, Call J, Behne T, Moll H. 2005. Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 281: 675–91 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Warglien M, Gärdenfors P, Westera M. 2012. Event structure, conceptual spaces and the semantics of verbs. Theoretical Linguistics 381: 159–93 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yu C, Smith LB. 2012. Embodied attention and word learning by toddlers. Cognition 1251: 244–62 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zacks JM, Tversky B. 2001. Event structure in perception and conception. Psychological bulletin 1271: 3 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwaan RA, Madden CJ, Whitten SN. 2000. The presence of an event in the narrated situation affects its availability to the comprehender. Mem Cognit 281: 1022–8 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwarts J. 2008. Aspects of a typology of direction. Theoretical and crosslinguistic approaches to the semantics of aspects: 79–106 Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (11)

Cited by 11 other publications

Pointeau, Gregoire, Solène Mirliaz, Anne-Laure Mealier & Peter Ford Dominey
2021. Learning to Use Narrative Function Words for the Organization and Communication of Experience. Frontiers in Psychology 12 DOI logo
Gardenfors, Peter
2020. An Epigenetic Approach to Semantic Categories. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems 12:2 ► pp. 139 ff. DOI logo
Gärdenfors, Peter
2019. Using Event Representations to Generate Robot Semantics. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction 8:4 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Gärdenfors, Peter
2020. Primary Cognitive Categories Are Determined by Their Invariances. Frontiers in Psychology 11 DOI logo
Gärdenfors, Peter
2025. Conceptual Engineering for Engineers (and for Philosophers): Conceptual Spaces as a Tool. In New Perspectives on Conceptual Engineering - Volume 1 [Synthese Library, 513], ► pp. 159 ff. DOI logo
Moulin-Frier, Clement, Tobias Fischer, Maxime Petit, Gregoire Pointeau, Jordi-Ysard Puigbo, Ugo Pattacini, Sock Ching Low, Daniel Camilleri, Phuong Nguyen, Matej Hoffmann, Hyung Jin Chang, Martina Zambelli, Anne-Laure Mealier, Andreas Damianou, Giorgio Metta, Tony J. Prescott, Yiannis Demiris, Peter Ford Dominey & Paul F. M. J. Verschure
2018. DAC-h3: A Proactive Robot Cognitive Architecture to Acquire and Express Knowledge About the World and the Self. IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems 10:4 ► pp. 1005 ff. DOI logo
Dominey, Peter Ford, Victor Paleologue, Amit Kumar Pandey & Jocelyne Ventre-Dominey
2017. 2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), ► pp. 127 ff. DOI logo
Gharaee, Zahra, Peter Gärdenfors & Magnus Johnsson
2017. Online recognition of actions involving objects. Biologically Inspired Cognitive Architectures 22 ► pp. 10 ff. DOI logo
Gharaee, Zahra, Peter Gärdenfors & Magnus Johnsson
2017. First and second order dynamics in a hierarchical SOM system for action recognition. Applied Soft Computing 59 ► pp. 574 ff. DOI logo
Mealier, Anne-Laure, Gregoire Pointeau, Solène Mirliaz, Kenji Ogawa, Mark Finlayson & Peter F. Dominey
2017. Narrative Constructions for the Organization of Self Experience: Proof of Concept via Embodied Robotics. Frontiers in Psychology 8 DOI logo
Pointeau, Gregoire & Peter Ford Dominey
2017. The Role of Autobiographical Memory in the Development of a Robot Self. Frontiers in Neurorobotics 11 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 16 march 2026. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue