TY - JOUR
T1 - Incrementality and Intention-Recognition in Utterance Processing
AU - Gregoromichelaki, Eleni
AU - Kempson, Ruth
AU - Purver, Matthew
AU - Mills, Gregory J.
AU - Cann, Ronnie
AU - Meyer-Viol, Wilfried
AU - Healey, Patrick G. T.
N1 - DOI: 10.5087/dad.2011.109 on article but it doesn't work
PY - 2011/5
Y1 - 2011/5
N2 - Ever since dialogue modelling first developed relative to broadly Gricean assumptions about utter- ance interpretation (Clark, 1996), it has remained an open question whether the full complexity of higher-order intention computation is made use of in everyday conversation. In this paper we exam- ine the phenomenon of split utterances, from the perspective of Dynamic Syntax, to further probe the necessity of full intention recognition/formation in communication: we do so by exploring the extent to which the interactive coordination of dialogue exchange can be seen as emergent from low-level mechanisms of language processing, without needing representation by interlocutors of each others mental states, or fully developed intentions as regards messages to be conveyed. We thus illustrate how many dialogue phenomena can be seen as direct consequences of the grammar architecture, as long as this is presented within an incremental, goal-directed/predictive model.
AB - Ever since dialogue modelling first developed relative to broadly Gricean assumptions about utter- ance interpretation (Clark, 1996), it has remained an open question whether the full complexity of higher-order intention computation is made use of in everyday conversation. In this paper we exam- ine the phenomenon of split utterances, from the perspective of Dynamic Syntax, to further probe the necessity of full intention recognition/formation in communication: we do so by exploring the extent to which the interactive coordination of dialogue exchange can be seen as emergent from low-level mechanisms of language processing, without needing representation by interlocutors of each others mental states, or fully developed intentions as regards messages to be conveyed. We thus illustrate how many dialogue phenomena can be seen as direct consequences of the grammar architecture, as long as this is presented within an incremental, goal-directed/predictive model.
U2 - 10.5087/dad.2011.109
DO - 10.5087/dad.2011.109
M3 - Article
SN - 2152-9620
VL - 2
SP - 199
EP - 233
JO - Dialogue and Discourse
JF - Dialogue and Discourse
IS - 1
ER -