Article published 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

| University of Pécs, Hungary
| University of Pécs, Hungary
| University of Pécs, Hungary
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.
Published online: 26 November 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/ds.25.03alb
References

References

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.Google Scholar
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Alberti, Gábor, and Judit Kleiber
2012 “Where are Possible Worlds? (Arguments for ReALIS).” Acta Linguistica Hungarica 59 (1–2): 3–26. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Asher, Nicholas, and Alex Lascarides
2003 Logics of Conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bussmann, Hadumod
1996 Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Falkenberg, Gabriel
1982 Lügen. Grundzüge einer Theorie sprachlicher Täuschung. Tübingen: Niemeyer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hans-Martin, Gärtner, and Beáta Gyuris
2012 “Pragmatic markers in Hungarian: Some introductory remarks.” Acta Linguistica Hungarica 59: 387–426. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W., and Herbert L. Colston
2007 Irony in Language and Thought. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
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.Google Scholar
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 Crossref
Meibauer, Jörg
2005 “Lying and Falsely Implicating.” Journal of Pragmatics 37: 1373–1399. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Posner, Roland
1980 “Semantics and Pragmatics of Sentence Connectives in Natural Language.” In Speech Act Theory and Pragmatics, ed. by John R. Searle, Ferenc Kiefer, and Manfred Bierwisch, 168–203. Reidel: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Ruzsa, Imre
2001 Bevezetés a modern logikába [Introduction to modern logic]. Budapest: Osiris.Google Scholar