Probabilistic pragmatics, or why Bayes’ rule is probably important for pragmatics

Pragmatics is about language use in context. This involves theorizing about speakers’ choices of words and listeners’ ways of interpreting. More often than not, this also involves a certain amount of noise and uncertainty: speakers and listeners may not know exactly what the relevant contextual parameters are, they may make mistakes, believe that their interlocutor is uncertain and possibly prone to err, etc. We believe that taking this picture seriously can, despite its apparent messiness, inspire a stringent formal approach to pragmatics that lends itself to precise empirical testing. We call it probabilistic pragmatics here, to emphasize the role that probabilities play in it. But it contains much more. In the following, we try to sketch its main characterizing features in relation to other approaches and give some example applications. We argue that probability models are the natural and most practicable tool for modeling the richness of pragmatic phenomena which are affected by many unknown contextual factors. Sections 2 and 3 characterize probabilistic pragmatics. Section 2 discusses different levels of analysis in pragmatic theory, so as to contrast probabilistic pragmatics with alternative approaches. Section 3 discusses key properties of probabilistic pragmatics. Sections 4, 5 and 6 sketch examples of applications. Section 4 introduces a baseline model for reasoning about referential expressions to demonstrate how the probabilistic modeling, inspired by classical pragmatic theory, can be fit to experimental data. Section 5 exemplifies further ways in which probabilistic pragmatics can shed light on gradient patterns in empirical data. The leading example for illustration is that of scalar implicature. Section 6 argues that considering (multiple levels of) gradient subjective contextual uncertainty, as captured by a probability distribution, is essential to understanding indirect speech acts. This section demonstrates how explicit representations, inspired from game theory, of interlocutors’ preferences and likely dialogue moves help tackle indirectness of speech in non-cooperative contexts.

[1]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Inferring word meanings by assuming that speakers are informative , 2014, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  Kris De Jaegher,et al.  A Game-Theoretic Rationale for Vagueness , 2003 .

[3]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Embedded Implicatures as Pragmatic Inferences under Compositional Lexical Uncertainty , 2015, J. Semant..

[4]  Judith Degen,et al.  Investigating the distribution of some (but not all ) implicatures using corpora and web-based methods , 2015 .

[5]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Context, scale structure, and statistics in the interpretation of positive-form adjectives , 2013 .

[6]  Andrew G. Barto,et al.  Reinforcement learning , 1998 .

[7]  Daniel Rothschild,et al.  GAME THEORY AND SCALAR IMPLICATURES , 2013 .

[8]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Processing Scalar Implicature: A Constraint-Based Approach , 2015, Cogn. Sci..

[9]  Michael Franke,et al.  Pragmatic Back-and-Forth Reasoning , 2014 .

[10]  Gerald Gazdar,et al.  Pragmatics: Implicature, Presupposition, and Logical Form , 1978 .

[11]  Paul Portner,et al.  Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning , 2011 .

[12]  Jörg Meibauer,et al.  Experimental pragmatics : semantics , 2011 .

[13]  G. Mailath,et al.  Repeated Games and Reputations: Long-Run Relationships , 2006 .

[14]  Michael Franke,et al.  Game Theoretic Pragmatics , 2013 .

[15]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Predicting Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Games , 2012, Science.

[17]  Todd Squires,et al.  A discourse analysis of the Japanese particle sa , 1994 .

[18]  Roger Levy,et al.  That's what she (could have) said: How alternative utterances affect language use , 2012, CogSci.

[19]  Michael Franke,et al.  Variations on a Bayesian Theme: Comparing Bayesian Models of Referential Reasoning , 2015 .

[20]  Peter Stone,et al.  Reinforcement learning , 2019, Scholarpedia.

[21]  S. Levinson Presumptive Meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature , 2001 .

[22]  D. Sperber,et al.  Relevance: Communication and cognition, 2nd ed. , 1995 .

[23]  Floris Roelofsen,et al.  Inquisitive Semantics: A New Notion of Meaning , 2013, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[24]  H. Barlow Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information: David Marr. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1982. pp. xvi + 397 , 1983 .

[25]  Joseph Y. Halpern Reasoning about uncertainty , 2003 .

[26]  R. Luce,et al.  Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis. , 1960 .

[27]  A. Rubinstein Economics and Language , 1999 .

[28]  Charles Kemp,et al.  How to Grow a Mind: Statistics, Structure, and Abstraction , 2011, Science.

[29]  M. Oaksford,et al.  The rationality of informal argumentation: a Bayesian approach to reasoning fallacies. , 2007, Psychological review.

[30]  Nick Chater,et al.  A rational analysis of the selection task as optimal data selection. , 1994 .

[31]  Kees van Deemter,et al.  Are we Bayesian referring expression generators , 2013 .

[32]  Michael Franke,et al.  Pragmatic Reasoning About Unawareness , 2013, Erkenntnis.

[33]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Formalizing the Pragmatics of Metaphor Understanding , 2014, CogSci.

[34]  Bob van Tiel,et al.  Quantity matters: implicatures, typicality, and truth , 2009 .

[35]  Christopher Kennedy,et al.  Scale Structure, Degree Modification, and the Semantics of Gradable Predicates , 2005 .

[36]  Robert Stalnaker Saying and Meaning, Cheap Talk and Credibility , 2006 .

[37]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Lost your marbles? The puzzle of dependent measures in experimental pragmatics , 2014, CogSci.

[38]  Noam Chomsky Language and Other Cognitive Systems. What Is Special About Language? , 2011 .

[39]  Michael Franke,et al.  Signal to act : game theory in pragmatics , 2009 .

[40]  Brady Clark,et al.  Overspecification and the Cost of Pragmatic Reasoning about Referring Expressions , 2014, CogSci.

[41]  Deirdre Wilson,et al.  Relevance theory: A tutorial , 2002 .

[42]  A. Stechow COMPARING SEMANTIC THEORIES OF COMPARISON , 1984 .

[43]  Michael Franke,et al.  UC Merced Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society , 2013 .

[44]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Theory-based Bayesian models of inductive learning and reasoning , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[45]  M. Dalrymple,et al.  Reciprocal Expressions and the Concept of Reciprocity , 1998 .

[46]  I. J. Myung,et al.  Tutorial on maximum likelihood estimation , 2003 .

[47]  Arnim von Stechow,et al.  Term answers and contextual change , 1984 .

[48]  Andreas Blume,et al.  Intentional Vagueness , 2014 .

[49]  Ashwini Deo The semantic and pragmatic underpinnings of grammaticalization paths: The progressive to imperfective shift , 2015 .

[50]  Reinhard Blutner,et al.  Lexical Pragmatics , 1998, J. Semant..

[51]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Knowledge and implicature: Modeling language understanding as social cognition , 2012, CogSci.

[52]  Arthur Merin,et al.  Information, relevance, and social decisionmaking: some principles and results of decision-theoretic semantics , 1999 .

[53]  David Ripley,et al.  Tolerant, Classical, Strict , 2010, Journal of Philosophical Logic.

[54]  Bart Geurts,et al.  Scalar Diversity , 2016, J. Semant..

[55]  Jennifer Culbertson,et al.  Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society , 2013 .

[56]  Prashant Parikh The use of language , 2001 .

[57]  Sven Lauer Mandatory implicatures in Gricean pragmatics , 2014 .

[58]  Stephanie Solt,et al.  Notes on the Comparison Class , 2009, ViC.

[59]  Michael Franke,et al.  Reasoning in Reference Games: Individual- vs. Population-Level Probabilistic Modeling , 2016, PloS one.

[60]  Terry Regier,et al.  Testing a rational account of pragmatic reasoning: The case of spatial language , 2014, CogSci.

[61]  Benjamin Russell,et al.  Probabilistic reasoning and the computation of scalar implicatures , 2012 .

[62]  J. Atlas,et al.  It-clefts, informativeness and logical form: Radical pragmatics (revised standard version) , 1981 .

[63]  R. Duncan Luce,et al.  Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis , 1979 .

[64]  Johan Kwisthout,et al.  Rational analysis, intractability, and the prospects of ‘as if’-explanations , 2014, Synthese.

[65]  Michael K. Tanenhaus,et al.  Making Inferences: The Case of Scalar Implicature Processing , 2011, CogSci.

[66]  Yoad Winter,et al.  Plural Predication and the Strongest Meaning Hypothesis , 2001, J. Semant..

[67]  Henk Zeevat,et al.  Optimality-theoretic pragmatics , 2009 .

[68]  Siobhan Chapman Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[69]  Emmanuel Chemla,et al.  Remarks on the Experimental Turn in the Study of Scalar Implicature, Part I , 2014, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[70]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Wonky worlds: Listeners revise world knowledge when utterances are odd , 2015, CogSci.

[71]  D. Fox Free Choice and the Theory of Scalar Implicatures , 2007 .

[72]  Gerhard Jäger,et al.  Game theory in semantics and pragmatics , 2012 .

[73]  Katrin Schulz,et al.  Exhaustive Interpretation of Complex Sentences , 2004, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[74]  S. Pinker,et al.  Rationales for indirect speech: the theory of the strategic speaker. , 2010, Psychological review.

[75]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Ad-hoc scalar implicature in adults and children , 2011, CogSci.

[76]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Modeling the effects of memory on human online sentence processing with particle filters , 2008, NIPS.

[77]  Michael Franke,et al.  Quantity implicatures, exhaustive interpretation, and rational conversation , 2011 .

[78]  J. Anscombre,et al.  L'argumentation dans la langue , 1976 .

[79]  Benjamin Spector,et al.  Global positive polarity items and obligatory exhaustivity , 2014 .

[80]  John R. Anderson The Adaptive Character of Thought , 1990 .

[81]  Reinhard Blutner,et al.  Some Aspects of Optimality in Natural Language Interpretation , 2000, J. Semant..

[82]  Anton Benz,et al.  Errors in Pragmatics , 2012, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[83]  S. Hannabuss The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature , 2008 .

[84]  Penelope Brown,et al.  Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage , 1989 .

[85]  Uli Sauerland,et al.  The Computation of Scalar Implicatures: Pragmatic, Lexical or Grammatical? , 2012, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[86]  Emmanuel Chemla,et al.  Remarks on the Experimental Turn in the Study of Scalar Implicature, Part II , 2014, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[87]  Robert van Rooij,et al.  Pragmatic Meaning and Non-monotonic Reasoning: The Case of Exhaustive Interpretation , 2006 .

[88]  Steven Pinker,et al.  The logic of indirect speech , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[89]  D. McFadden Quantal Choice Analysis: A Survey , 1976 .

[90]  Bob van Tiel,et al.  Truth and typicality in the interpretation of quantifiers , 2014 .

[91]  Kris De Jaegher,et al.  Game-Theoretic Pragmatics Under Conflicting and Common Interests , 2013 .

[92]  S. Pinker The Stuff of Thought: Language as a Window into Human Nature , 2007 .

[93]  Ariel Cohen,et al.  Probability in Semantics , 2009, Lang. Linguistics Compass.

[94]  李 廷玟 Language, cognition, and mind , 2016 .

[95]  Henk Zeevat Language Production and Interpretation: Linguistics Meets Cognition , 2014 .

[97]  Irene Heim,et al.  The Semantics of Degree , 2002 .

[98]  G. Ward,et al.  On the Non-Unified Nature of Scalar Implicature: An Empirical Investigation , 2009 .

[99]  Catherine Kerbrat-Orecchioni,et al.  A Multilevel Approach in the Study of Talk-In-Interaction , 1997 .

[100]  Yoad Winter,et al.  Total Adjectives vs. Partial Adjectives: Scale Structure and Higher-Order Modifiers , 2004 .

[101]  M. Franke,et al.  Gradable adjectives, vagueness, and optimal language use: A speaker-oriented model , 2014 .

[102]  Florian Heiss,et al.  Discrete Choice Methods with Simulation , 2016 .

[103]  David Beaver,et al.  Vagueness Is Rational under Uncertainty , 2009, Amsterdam Colloquium on Logic, Language and Meaning.

[104]  Noah D. Goodman,et al.  Nonliteral understanding of number words , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[105]  S. Pinker The evolutionary social psychology of off-record indirect speech acts , 2007 .

[106]  Michael Franke,et al.  Optimal Reasoning About Referential Expressions , 2012 .

[107]  Matthew W. Crocker,et al.  Rational models of comprehension : Addressing the performance paradox , 2004 .

[108]  Jacob K. Goeree,et al.  Quantal Response Equilibrium , 2018 .

[109]  G. Chierchia,et al.  Scalar implicature as a grammatical phenomenon , 2012 .

[110]  Roland Mühlenbernd Signals and the structure of societies , 2013 .

[111]  Michael Franke,et al.  of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society Title Typical use of quantifiers : A probabilistic speaker model Permalink , 2014 .