Language Use in Joint Action: The Means of Referring Expressions

This study examined how human–human collaboration can be achieved through an exchange of verbal information in exchanging information about the referents in a joint action. Knowing other people’s referential intention is fundamental for joint action. Joint action can be achieved verbally by two types of referring expressions, namely, symbolic and deictic referring expressions. Using corpus data, we extracted nouns as typical symbolic references and demonstratives as typical deictic references. We examined whether the word usage of these terms changed when the robot vehicles controlled by the participants repeatedly performed the same collaborative task. We used a novel virtual space for the task because we wanted to control the common ground shared by the participants. The results of the performance indicate that the task completion became more efficient as the participants repeated the task. The referential word use was reduced in both symbolic and deictic references, and this reduction occurred with a grounding process among the collaborators. The study showed that reduction of referential expressions occurs with the grounding process in human–human collaboration and suggests that appropriate collaborative robot systems must deal with the reduction process of referencing in humans.

[1]  Satoshi Suzuki,et al.  Changes of action ontology in conversation among collaborators using virtual space , 2012, 2012 IEEE RO-MAN: The 21st IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[2]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Accelerating Robot Development Through Integral Analysis of Human–Robot Interaction , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[3]  Takayuki Kanda,et al.  Natural deictic communication with humanoid robots , 2007, 2007 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[4]  Fumio Harashima,et al.  Natural Interface Using Pointing Behavior for Human–Robot Gestural Interaction , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics.

[5]  S. Brennan,et al.  Processes of Interactive Spoken Discourse: The Role of the Partner , 2003 .

[6]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Common ground at the understanding of demonstrative reference , 1983 .

[7]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Contributing to Discourse , 1989, Cogn. Sci..

[8]  M. Pickering,et al.  Why is conversation so easy? , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[9]  B. MacWhinney The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk , 1992 .

[10]  K. Coventry,et al.  Language within your reach: Near–far perceptual space and spatial demonstratives , 2008, Cognition.

[11]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Why Nouns Are Learned before Verbs: Linguistic Relativity Versus Natural Partitioning. Technical Report No. 257. , 1982 .

[12]  A. Baddeley Working Memory, Thought, and Action , 2007 .

[13]  Anna K. Kuhlen,et al.  Two Minds, One Dialog , 2010 .

[14]  遠藤 めぐみ 指示詞コ・ソ・アの使い分けにおける操作可能性と聞き手の非人格化の影響 , 1988 .

[15]  Irene Heim,et al.  The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases : a dissertation , 1982 .

[16]  H. Bekkering,et al.  Joint action: bodies and minds moving together , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[17]  H. Grice Logic and conversation , 1975 .

[18]  Holger Diessel,et al.  Demonstratives: Form, function and grammaticalization , 1999 .

[19]  M. Tomasello Why We Cooperate , 2009 .

[20]  K. Coventry,et al.  Spatial demonstratives and perceptual space: Describing and remembering object location , 2014, Cognitive Psychology.

[21]  Rajesh P. N. Rao,et al.  Embodiment is the foundation, not a level , 1996, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[22]  H. Diessel Demonstratives, joint attention, and the emergence of grammar , 2006 .