Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Meaning and Dialogue Coherence: A Proof-theoretic Investigation

  • Published:
Journal of Logic, Language and Information Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 31 May 2008

Abstract

This paper presents a novel proof-theoretic account of dialogue coherence. It focuses on an abstract class of cooperative information-oriented dialogues and describes how their structure can be accounted for in terms of a multi-agent hybrid inference system that combines natural deduction with information transfer and observation. We show how certain dialogue structures arise out of the interplay between the inferential roles of logical connectives (i.e., sentence semantics), a rule for transferring information between agents, and a rule for information flow between agents and their environment. The order of explanation is opposite in direction to that adopted in game-theoretic semantics, where sentence semantics (or a notion of valid inference) is derived from winning dialogue strategies. That approach and the current one may, however, be reconcilable, since we focus on cooperative dialogue, whereas the game-theoretic tradition concentrates on adversarial dialogue.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Barth E., Krabbe E. (1982) From axiom to dialogue: A philosophical study of logics and argumentation. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Barwise J., Etchemendy J. (1994) Hyperproof, CSLI lecture notes. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Beun, R. (2001). On the generation of coherent dialogue: A computational approach. Pragmatics & Cognition, 9(1).

  • Boltzmann L. (1905) Über die Methoden der theoretischen Physik. Barth, Leipzig

    Google Scholar 

  • Borghuis, T., & Nederpelt, R. (2000). Belief revision with explicit justifications: An exploration in type theory. CS-Report 00-17, Eindhoven University of Technology.

  • Brandom R. (1994) Making it explicit: Reasoning, representing, and discursive commitment. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunt, H., & Girard, Y. (2005). Designing an open, multidimensional dialogue taxonomy. In C. Gardent, & B. Gaiffe (Eds.), Proceedings of the ninth workshop on the semantics and pragmatics of dialogue (DIALOR’05). Nancy, France.

  • Cohen P., Morgan J., Pollack M. (1990) Intentions in communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Cox, P., & Pietrzykowski, T. (1986). Causes for events: Their computation and applications. In Proc. 8th international conference on automated deduction (CADE’86) (pp. 608–621). Oxford.

  • Craig R., Tracy K. eds. (1983) Conversational coherence: Form, structure and strategy. Sage Publications, Beverly Hills

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, C., & Kakas, A. (1992). Hypothetico-deductive reasoning. In Proc. international conference on fifth generation computer systems (pp. 546–554). Tokyo.

  • Gentzen, G. (1934). Untersuchungen über das logische Schliessen. Mathematische Zeitschrift 39, 176–210, 405–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ginzburg, J. (1996). Dynamics and the semantics of dialogue. In: Language, logic and computation (vol. 1). Stanford: CSLI.

  • Grice H. (1975) Logic and conversation. In: Cole P., Morgan J. (eds). Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts. Academic Press, New York, pp. 64–75

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamblin, C. (1970). Fallacies. Methuen & Co Ltd. [Quote from reprint by Vale Press, Newport New, Virginia, 1993].

  • Hamblin C. (1971) Mathematical models of dialogue. Theoria 37, 130–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kakas, A., Kowalski, R., & Toni, F. (1998). The role of abduction. In D. Gabbay, C. Hogger, & J. Robinson (Eds.), Logic programming, Vol. 5 of handbook of logic in artificial intelligence and logic programming (pp. 235–324). Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  • Levinson S. (1983) Pragmatics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzen P., Lorenz K. (1978) Dialogische logik. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, B. (2002). What is dialogue coherence?. Memo available at http://www-rcf.usc.edu/billmann/WMlinguistic/dcoherence.htm.

  • Merritt M. (1976) On questions following questions (in service encounters). Language in Society 5(3): 315–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petukhova, V., & Bunt, H. (2007). A multidimensional approach to multimodal dialogue act annotation. In J. Geertzen, E. Thijsse, H. Bunt, & Schiffrin, A. (Eds.), Proceedings of the seventh international workshop on computational semantics IWCS-7 (pp. 142–153). Tilburg.

  • Piwek, P. (2006). The Alligator theorem prover for dependent type systems: description and proof sample. In Proceedings of the inference in computational semantics workshop (ICoS-5). Buxton, UK.

  • Piwek, P., & Krahmer, E. (2000). Presuppositions in context: Constructing bridges. In P. Bonzon, M. Cavalcanti, & R. Nossum (Eds.), Formal aspects of context, Vol. 20 of applied logic series (pp. 85–106). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • Piwek, P., & van Deemter, K. (2002). Towards automated generation of scripted dialogue: Some time-honoured strategies. In EDILOG 2002: Proceedings of the sixth workshop on the semantics and pragmatics of dialogue (pp. 141–148).

  • Power R. (1979) The organisation of purposeful dialogues. Linguistics 17, 107–152

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulman, S. (1999). Relating dialogue games to information states. In Proceedings of the European speech communication association workshop on dialogue and prosody (pp. 17–24). The Netherlands: De Koningshof.

  • Saarinen E., eds. (1979) Game-theoretical semantics. D. Reidel, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Schegloff, E. (1972). Sequencing in conversational openings. In Directions in sociolinguistics (pp. 346–380). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

  • Schegloff E., Sacks H. (1973) Opening up closings. Semiotica 7(4): 289–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder-Heister P. (2006) Validity concepts in proof-theoretics semantics. Synthese 148, 525–571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stenius E. (1967). Mood and language-game. Synthese 17: 254–274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stenström A.-B. (1994) An introduction to spoken interaction. Longman, London and New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sudnow D., eds. (1972) Studies in social interaction. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundholm, G. (1986). Proof theory and meaning. In Handbook of philosophical logic (Vol. III, pp. 471–506). D. Reidel.

  • Taylor J.A., Carletta J., Mellish C. (1996) Requirements for belief models in cooperative dialogue. User modeling and user-adapted interaction 6(1): 23–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Traum, D., & Larsson, S. (2003). The information state approach to dialogue management. In Current and new directions in discourse and dialogue (pp. 325–353). Kluwer Academic Publishers.

  • Waismann, F. (1965). The principles of linguistic philosophy. Macmillan.

  • Walton D., Krabbe E. (1995) Commitment in dialogue: Basic concepts of interpersonal reasoning. SUNY Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein L. (1984) Philosophische grammatik. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a.M.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Research in Computing, The Open University, Walton Hall, Milton Keynes, UK

    Paul Piwek

Authors
  1. Paul Piwek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Piwek.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10849-008-9069-2

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Piwek, P. Meaning and Dialogue Coherence: A Proof-theoretic Investigation. J of Log Lang and Inf 16, 403–421 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-007-9046-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10849-007-9046-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation