Intentions and Information in Discourse

This paper is about the flow of inference between communicative intentions, discourse structure and the domain during discourse processing. We augment a theory of discourse interpretation with a theory of distinct mental attitudes and reasoning about them, in order to provide an account of how the attitudes interact with reasoning about discourse structure

A Cognitive Model for Conversation

International audienceThis paper describes a symbolic model of rational action and decision making to support analysing dialogue. The model approximates principles of behaviour from game theory, and its proof theory makes Gricean principles of cooperativity derivable when the agents’ preferences align

A semantics and pragmatics for the pluperfect

We offer a semantics and pragmatics of the pluperfect in narrative discourse. We examine in a formal model of implicature, how the reader's knowledge about the discourse, Gricean-maxims and causation contribute to the meaning of the pluperfect. By placin

Strategic Conversation

International audienceModels of conversation that rely on a strong notion of cooperation don’t apply to strategic conversation — that is, to conversation where the agents’ motives don’t align, such as courtroom cross examination and political debate. We provide a game-theoretic framework that provides an analysis of both cooperative and strategic conversation. Our analysis features a new notion of safety that applies to implicatures: an implicature is safe when it can be reliably treated as a matter of public record. We explore the safety of implicatures within cooperative and non cooperative settings. We then provide a symbolic model enabling us (i) to prove a correspondence result between a characterisation of conversation in terms of an alignment of players’ preferences and one where Gricean principles of cooperative conversation like Sincerity hold, and (ii) to show when an implicature is safe and when it is not

Discourse relations and defeasible knowledge

This paper presents a formal account of the temporal interpretation of text. The distinct nat- ural interpretations of texts with similar syntax are explained in terms of defeasible rules charac- tcrising causal laws and Gricean-style pragmatic maxims. Intuitively compelling patterns of defea. sible entaJlment that are supported by the logic in which the theory is expressed are shown to underly temporal interpretation

Agreement and Disputes in Dialogue

In this paper we define agreement in terms of shared public commitments, and implicit agreement is conditioned on the semantics of the relational speech acts (e.g., Narration, Ex-planation) that each agent performs. We pro-vide a consistent interpretation of disputes, and updating a logical form with the current utterance always involves extending it and not revising it, even if the current utterance denies earlier content.