Next: The speech act
Up: Indirect Speech Acts and
Previous: Introduction
The knowledge about speech acts and the way they relate to each other is stored
in the speech acts library, represented in an action hierarchy based on a
formalism similar to that by Kautz (1990). In particular, we set
apart the decomposition hierarchy (boxed arcs in the figures) and the
generalization-specialization hierarchy (thick arrows).
When the decomposition includes a single step, the relation between the two
actions is a generation relation (Pollack, 1990).
The leaves of the hierarchy, surf-imperative, surf-yn-question,
surf-wh-question, surf-assertion correspond to the different syntactic types
of sentence, namely imperatives, declaratives and interrogatives (two small
portions of the library are reported in Figure 1 and
2. There, the surface types are circled by thick ovals).
The actions of the hierarchy are characterized by the following features:
: Representation of the ask-if speech-act
-
parameters:
the parameters of an action include the speaker, the hearer
and a reference to the speech act. The third parameter has different meanings
in the various actions of the speech act library: since the interpretation of
surface speech acts starts with the analysis of the linguistic aspects in the
input utterances (e.g. the detection of politeness features), the actions
related to that phase refer to the semantic representation of the input
sentences (e.g. consider ask-if, ..., indirect-req in
Figure 1). On the other
hand, after considering the linguistic aspects, the analysis goes
on taking into account the knowledge about domain actions (in order to relate
the speaker's utterance to domain goals). So, the third parameter of
actions referring to this phase of the analysis refers to an instance of a
domain action involved by the speaker's utterance.
The domain action is recognized from the semantic representation by a plan
recognition phase ( action identification (Carberry, 1990), shown in the
figures as act-id).
-
preconditions: they represent the presuppositions associated with actions
(see Searle's felicity conditions (Searle, 1969)). For example,
obtain-info (the action of asking information) has the precondition
that the speaker does not know the requested information.
-
restrictions:
they are included in the wh property of actions and, as for parameters,
their meaning varies in the different actions of the speech acts library. In
the actions related to the analysis of the linguistic aspects of utterances,
they concern the linguistic features present in their propositional content.
These features are called by Searle (1969) illocutionary force
indicating devices and allow the hearer to identify the kind of speech act.
They are, for example, the form of the sentence (declarative, interrogative,
imperative), the tense and mood of verbs, the presence of modal verbs
( can, want, ...) and performative verbs ( say, ask,
order, ...), or particles like please, clearly, etc. An example of this
kind of restriction is can2 feature(sem) in ask-if in Figure
1, which restricts the main verb of the sentence to be the
second person of the modal potere (`can').
In some actions referring to the domain actions involved
by the input utterances, the restrictions may link the parameters of the actions
in the speech acts library with the identified domain actions, or with their
parameters. For example, in off-record-req in Figure 1, a
restriction forces the agent of the identified domain action to be the hearer;
this restriction is important in the definition of off-record-req because,
when the restriction is not respected, a different speech-act is being
performed (e.g. if the agent coincides with the speaker, we have an act of
stating her/his plan).
-
communicative effects:
the actions of the library produce two types of effects: the first one consists
in the communicative intentions of the speaker (e.g. when a request is performed
successfully, then the speaker and the hearer share the belief that the speaker
intends the hearer to perform an action and intends her/his intention to be a
mutual knowledge).
The second type of effects is related with the politeness consequences of the
use of direct/indirect expressions in communication: for example, the effect of the indirect request ind-req1 is to
express that the speaker doesn't want to presuppose any hearer's
capability in performing the requested action, so that the negative face of the
speaker is not threatened.
The recursiveness of natural language implies that illocutionary force
indicating devices can be nested inside each other; so, complex utterances
including different speech acts can be built
and interpreted in a compositional way. For example, the sentence:
2)
Vorrei chiederti se puoi dirmi dove si trova la biblioteca.
[I would like to ask you whether you can tell me where is the library.]
is composed of an external surface statement with conditional mood
( vorrei, ``I would like"), an explicit performative ( chiedere,
``to ask") and an indirect request expressed by an inner
yes/no question ( se ..., ``whether ...").
Because of the freedom in the composition of sentences, the speech acts
library contains some cyclic paths (see the ask-if action that, in
figure 2, occurs in its own definition).
Next: The speech act
Up: Indirect Speech Acts and
Previous: Introduction
Guido Boella Dottorando
Thu Oct 31 15:35:12 MET 1996