Robert van Rooij's papers
- Explaining quantity implicatures . (with Tikitu de Jager, Journal of Logic, Language, and Information 2012) pdf file
We give derivations of two formal models
of Gricean Quantity implicature and strong
exhaustivity in bidirectional
optimality theory and in a signalling games
framework. We show that, under a unifying
model based on signalling games, these interpretative strategies are game-theoretic equilibria when the speaker is known to be respectively minimally and maximally expert in the
matter at hand. That is, in this framework
the optimal strategy for communication depends on the degree of knowledge the speaker
is known to have concerning the question she
is answering.
In addition, and most importantly, we give a
game-theoretic characterisation of the interpretation rule \Grice{} (formalising Quantity
implicature), showing that under natural
conditions this interpretation rule occurs in
the unique equilibrium play of the signalling
game.
- The propositional and relatioinal syllogistic . (Logique et Analyse 2012) pdf file
In this paper it is shown how syllogistic reasoning can be extended to account for propositional logic and relations.
- Tolerant, classical, strict . (with Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egre and Dave Ripley, Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2012) pdf file
In this paper we investigate a semantics for first-order logic originally proposed by R.\ van Rooij to account for the idea that vague predicates are tolerant, that is, for the principle that if $x$ is $P$, then $y$ should be $P$ whenever $y$ is similar enough to $x$. The semantics, which makes use of indifference relations to model similarity, rests on the interaction of three notions of truth: the {\em classical} notion, and two dual notions simultaneously defined in terms of it, which we call {\em tolerant} truth and {\em strict} truth. We characterize the space of consequence relations definable in terms of those and discuss the kind of solution this gives to the sorites paradox. We discuss some applications of the framework to the pragmatics and psycholinguistics of vague predicates, in particular regarding judgments about borderline cases.
- Tolerance and mixed consequence in a super/sub-valuationist setting . (with Pablo Cobreros, Paul Egre and Dave Ripley, to appear in Studia Logica) pdf file
In a previous paper we investigated a semantic framework to deal with the idea that vague predicates are tolerant, namely that small changes do not affect the applicability of a vague predicate even if large changes do. Our approach there rests on two main ideas. First, given a classical extension of a predicate, we might define a strict and a tolerant extension depending on an indifference relation associated to that predicate. Second, we can use these notions of satisfaction to lead to mixed consequence relations that capture non-transitive tolerant reasoning. The present paper intends to explore the possibility of defining mixed notions of consequence in a super/sub-valuationist setting and see to what extent any of these notions captures non-transitive tolerant reasoning.
- Vagueness, Signaling and Bounded Rationality . (with Michael Franke and Gerhard Jaeger, in proceedings of LENLS2010) pdf file
Vagueness is a pervasive feature of natural language, but indeed one
that is troubling for leading theories in semantics and language
evolution. We focus here on the latter, addressing the challenge of
how to account for the emergence of vague meanings in signaling game
models of language evolution.
- Conjunctive interpretation of disjunction . (in Semantics and Pragmatics, 2010, here is an old version) pdf file
In this extended commentary I discuss the problem of how to account for `conjunctive' readings of some sentences with embedded disjunctions for globalist analyses of conversational implicatures. Following (Franke 2009), I propose that earlier proposals failed, because they did not take into account the interactive reasoning of what else the {\it speaker} could have said, and how else the {\it hearer} could have interpreted the (alternative) sentence(s). I show how Franke's idea relates to more traditional pragmatic interpretation strategies.
- Measurement, and interadjective comparisons . (in Journal of Semantics, 2010) pdf file
This paper shows the relevance of measurement theory for the linguistic analysis of comparative statements. In particular, the paper focusses on interadjective comparatives like `$x$ is $P$-er than $y$ is $Q$' and comparatives involving multidimensional adjectives. It is argued that Bale's (2008) recent proposal to account for such comparatives is rather limited, and just one way to account for interadjective comparison. In fact, it is shown that we can make use of recently developed measurement-theoretic techniques in political economy to handle intersubjective comparisons of utility to account for interadjective comparatives as well. This paper also discusses how to {\it construct} the desired scales, if one starts with a delineation approach of comparatives.
- Implicit versus explicit compartives . (in Egre & Klinedins (eds.): Vagueness and Language, 2011) pdf file
It is natural to assume that the explicit comparative -- John is taller than Mary -- can be true in cases the implicit comparative -- John is tall compared to Mary -- is not. This is sometimes seen as a threat to comparison-class based analyses of the comparative. In this paper it is claimed that the distinction between explicit and implicit comparatives corresponds to the difference between (strict) weak orders and semi-orders, and that both can be characterized naturally in terms of constraints on the behavior of predicates among different comparison classes.
- Strategic Vagueness, and appropriate contexts . with Kris de Jaegher (in `Meaning and Game Theory', edited by A. Benz, C. Ebert, G. Jaeger, and R. van Rooij, 2011) pdf file
This paper brings together several approaches to vagueness, and ends by suggesting a new approach. The common thread in these approaches is the crucial role played by context. We argue that the most plausible application to vagueness in natural language of these models is one where the listener only imperfectly observes the context in which the speaker makes her utterances. Yet, it is clear that not all vagueness can be accounted for by conflicts of interest. This is why the rest of the paper looks at the case of common interest. First, vagueness is thus seen as an application of Horn's pragmatic rule that (un)marked states get an (un)marked expression. Then we argue that the Sorities paradox arises from the use of vague predicates in an inappropriate context. Finally, we follow prospect theory and assume that context directly enter agents' utility functions in the form of reference points, with respect to which agents think in gains and losses. The rationale for vagueness here is that vague predicates allow players to express their valuations, without necessarily uttering the context, so that the advantage of vague predicates is that they can be expressed across contexts.
- Promises and Threats with Conditionals and Disjunctions . with Michael Franke (to appear in Ten Years After, volume edited by Grewendorf and E. Zimmermann) pdf file
With a conditional ``If you do ....., I'll do ....'' we can make
promises and threats. But with a disjunction ``You do \dots, or I'll
do \dots'' we can only make threats, no promises. We suggest that
this so because disjunctive promises would be a suboptimal strategic
commitment in a game-like situation where the speaker is trying to
influence the hearer's choice of action.
- Meaning and Use . (in Handbook of Philosophy and Linguistics, by Asher, Fernando, and Kempson, ) pdf file
This paper deals with the meaning of natural language expressions, and how meanings of expressions are used in communication. The two disciplines that talk most about meanings of expressions are linguistics (semantics and pragmatics) and philosophy. This paper is about topics discussed in both disciplines. The first part of the paper is more philosophical in nature and discusses what is meaning in the first place, and how it is related with reference. The second part is concerned with the relation between semantics and pragmatics.
- Non-monotonic reasoning in interpretation . with Katrin Schulz (in Handbook of Logic and Language) pdf file
The original article of Thomason pursues two goals: first to outline the central logical issues of non-monotonic reasoning, and second to indicate possible applications of nonmonotonic reasoning techniques in linguistics. This appendix will follow up on Thomason's second goal and show that linguists have taken up his invitation to use nonmonotonic logic as a formal tool. Particularly in the new and very vivid area of formal pragmatics and at the intersection of semantics and cognitive psychology nonmonotonic logics are playing an important role.
The paper is structured as follows. The purpose of its first part is to present the recent progress made in formal pragmatics by using nonmonotonic logic to describe pragmatic meaning. We will show how minimal models can be used to describe and explain inferences of language use, in particular Gricean conversational implicatures. After this we will discuss how nonmonotonic logic can be used at the semantic-pragmatic interface to account for the {\it preferred interpretation} of a sentence. In the last part of the paper we will discuss the role of nonmonotonic logic for human reasoning in general. Here we will focus in particular on Stenning and van Lambalgen.
- Relevance in Cooperation and Conflict . with Michael Franke and Tikitu de Jager (in Journal of Logic and Computation, 2012) pdf file
If speaker and hearer preferences do not coincide, we can distinguish speaker relevance from hearer relevance. Taking speaker relevance seriously lets us extend the scope of linguistic pragmatics beyond cases of pure cooperation. Making use of game theoretical tool, in this paper we discuss (i) the speaker's motive to communicate in such situations at all, and (ii) what can be inferred from what is said in such situations.
- Vagueness and Linguistics . (new version) (in G. Ronzitti (ed), The Vagueness Handbook, 2011) pdf file
This paper is a long (and biased) overview of vagueness in linguistics. I argue, among others, (i) that semi-orders are crucial for vagueness, (ii) that the Sorites paradox is best solved by putting constraints on the contexts in which vague predicates can be used appropriately, and (iii) discuss the relation between vagueness and matters of grain-size.
- Towards a uniform analysis of any . (Nat. Language Semantics (2008), 297-315) pdf file
In this paper, Universal {\it any} and Negative Polarity Item {\it any} are uniformly analyzed as `counterfactual' donkey sentences (in disguise). Their difference in meaning is reduced here to the distinction between {\it strong} and {\it weak} readings of donkey sentences. It is shown that this explains the {\it universal} and {\it existential} character of Universal- and NPI-{\it any}, respectively, and the positive and negative contexts in which they are licensed. Our uniform analysis extends to the use of {\it any} in command and permission sentences. It predicts that whereas the use of {\it any} in permission sentences is licensed and gives rise to a universal reading, it is not licensed in command sentences.
- Topic, Focus, and Exhaustive Interpretation . (in Chungmin (ed.), Proceedings of CIL 18 workshop) pdf file
In this paper we proposed that a sentence like `John_T ate broccoli_F' should pragmatically be interpreted as follows: (a) Focus should be interpreted exhaustively: John ate only broccoli; (b) Topic must be interpreted exhaustively: Only John ate (only) broccoli; and (c) The speaker takes it to be possible (or even knows, if he is competent) that at least one alternative of the form `x ate y' not entailed by the sentence is true.
- Revealed preference and Satisficing Behavior. (Synthese, 2011) pdf file
A much discussed topic in the theory of choice is how a preference order among options can be derived from the assumption that the notion of `choice' is primitive. Assuming a choice function that selects elements from each finite set of options, Arrow (1959) already showed how we can generate a weak ordering by putting constraints on the behavior of such a function such that it behaves as a utility maximizer. Arrow proposed that rational agents can be modeled by such choice functions. Arrow's standard model of rationality has been criticized in economics and gave rise to approaches of {\it bounded rationality}. Two standard assumptions of rationality will be given up in this paper. First, the idea that agents are utility {\it optimizers} (Simon). Second, the idea that the relation of `indifference' gives rise to an equivalence relation. To account for the latter, Luce (1956) introduced semi-orders. Extending some ideas of Van Benthem (1982), we will show how to derive semi-orders (and so-called interval orders) based on the idea that agents are utility {\it satisficers} rather than utility optimizers.
- Comparatives and Quantifiers. (in Bonani and Hofherr (eds), Empirical Issues in Syntax and Semantics 7) pdf file
A traditional issue in the analysis of comparatives is whether or not degrees are essential. In the first part of this paper I discuss the traditional analyses that account for comparatives with (Seuren, von Stechow) and without (Klein) degrees, and remind the reader that these are very similar to each other. A more recent issue is how to account for quantifiers in the {\it than}-clause. The traditional analyses account well for Negative Polarity Items in comparative clauses, but have problems with conjunctive quantifiers. The strength of the proposals of Larson (1988) and Schwarzchild \& Wilkinson (2002), on the other hand, goes exactly in the opposite direction. I will discuss two types of strategies so as to account for both types of quantifiers: (i) one based on the traditional analysis, but by making use of more coarse-grained models or of intervals, (ii) one where comparatives are taken to be ambiguous between the traditional reading and the Larson-reading, and where the actual reading is selected with the help of the strongest meaning hypothesis.
- Games and Quantity implicatures. (Journal of Economic Methodology, 2008, vol 15, issue 3, 261) pdf file
In this paper we seek to account for scalar implicatures and Horn's division of pragmatic labor in game-theoretical terms by making use mainly of refinements of the standard solution concept of signaling games. Scalar implicatures are accounted for in terms of Farrell's (1993) notion of a `Neologism-Proof' equilibrium together with Grice's maxim of Quality. Horn's division of pragmatic labor is accounted for in terms of Cho \& Kreps' (1987) notion of `equilibrium domination' and their `Intuitive Criterion'.
- Strengthening conditional presuppositions. (Journal of Semantics, 2007, 24: 289-304); pdf file
In this paper it will be shown how conditional presuppositions can be strengthened to unconditional ones if we assume that the antecedent and consequent of a conditional presupposition are {\it independent} of one another. Our notion of independence is very weak, and based on Lewis' (1988) notion of orthogonality of questions. It will be argued that our way to strengthen these presuppositions does not give rise to some wrong predictions Geurts (1996) argued other proposed strengthening accounts do.
- How to donkey FC and NPI any. (in proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 2006) pdf file
Free Choice {\it any} and Negative Polarity Item {\it any} are uniformly analyzed as counterfactual donkey sentences (in disguise). Their difference in meaning will be reduced to the distinction between {\it strong} and {\it weak} readings of donkey sentences. It is shown that this explains the {\it universal} and {\it existential} character of FC- and NPI-{\it any}, respectively, and the positive and negative contexts in which they are licensed.
- Optimal assertions, and what they implicate. (Topoi, 2007, 26: 63-78, with Anton Benz) pdf file
To determine what the speaker in a cooperative dialog meant with his assertion, on top of what he explicitly said, it is crucial that we assume that the assertion he gave was optimal. In determining optimal assertions we assume that dialogues are
embedded in decision problems (van Rooij, 2003) and use backwards
induction for calculating them (Benz, 2006). In this paper we show that in terms of our framework we can account for several types of implicatures in a uniform way, suggesting that there is no need for an independent linguistic theory of generalized implicatures. In the final section we show how we can embed our theory in the framework of signaling games, and how it relates with other game theoretic analyses of implicatures.
- Evolutionary motivations for semantic universals. (in `Variation, Selection, Development -- Probing the evolutionary model of language change, Eckardt, Jaeger and Veenstra, 2008)pdf file
Most work in `evolutionary linguistics' seeks to motivate the emergence of linguistic universals. Although the search for universals never played a major role in semantics, a number of such universals have been proposed concerning connectives, property and preposition denoting expressions, and quantifiers. In this paper we suggest some evolutionary motivations for these proposed universals using game theory.
- Free Choice Counterfactual Donkeys. (Journal of Semantics, 2006, 23: 383-402) pdf file
We propose a straightforward analysis of counterfactual donkey sentences, by combining the Lewis/Stalnaker analysis of counterfactuals with standard dynamic semantics. The main idea is to define a similarity relation between world-assignment pairs such that two such pairs are unconnected if their assignments differ. We show that with the help of this ordering relation we can also account for a number of related problems involving disjunctions and the use of {\it any} in counterfactuals and permission sentences.
- Comparing Questions and Answers: A bit of Logic, a bit of Language, and some bits of Information. (This paper was written in 2000, but is published in `Theories of Information' edited by G. Simuraga, in 2008) pdf
file
- Book: Game Theory and Pragmatics (jointly edited with Anton Benz and Gerhard Jaeger) Rooted in Gricean tradition, this book concentrates on game- and decision-theoretic (GDT) approaches to the foundations of pragmatics. An Introduction to GDT, with an overview of GDT pragmatics research to date and its relation to semantics and to Gricean pragmatics is followed by contributions offering a high-level survey of current GDT pragmatics and the field of its applications, demonstrating that this approach provides a sound basis for synchronic and diachronic explanations of language use.\\
For more information, see http://www.palgrave.com/products/Catalogue.aspx?is=1403945721.
- Language Structure: Psychological and Social Constraints (With Gerhard Jaeger, Synthese, 2007, 159: 99-130), pdf file
In this article we discuss the notion of a linguistic universal, and possible sources of
such invariant properties of natural languages. In the first part, we explore the
conceptual issues that arise. In the second part of the paper, we focus on the explanatory potential of horizontal evolution. We particularly focus on two case studies, concerning Zipf's
Law and universal properties of color terms respectively. We show how computer
simulations can be employed to study the large scale, emergent, consequences of
psycholinguistically and psychologically motivated assumptions about the working of
horizontal language transmission.
- Free Choice Items and Alternatives (With Maria Aloni, in Proceedings of KNAW Academy Colloquium: Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation (2004), pdf file
Extending the proposal made by Schulz (2003), we put forward a pragmatic account of the meaning of existential and universal FC items, where the `ignorance or indifference' inference triggered by the former and the `universal' inference triggered by the latter are treated as implicatures obtained by standard gricean reasoning formalized in terms of the two operations {\it grice} and {\it competence}. On this account, the implicatures of a sentence are generated with respect to a number of relevant alternatives. The difference between existential and universal FCs is due only to the choice of these alternatives.
- Only: Meaning and implicature (With Katrin Schulz, in Paul Dekker et al. Questions and Answers, 199-224, 2007). An very short version of this paper appeared in the proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung, 2004, pdf file
The issue of how to account for the interpretation of `only' has always been exciting and challenging. Over the years many sophisticated proposals have been brought forward, but `only' always managed to strike back by exposing another new and strange property. In this paper we will not focus on new extraordinary data and their treatment. Instead, we will argue that there is a way to approach the meaning of `only' that is faithful to classical insights and observations but still can deal with well-known challenges.
- Different faces of risky speech (With Merlijn Sevenster, in `Pragmatics and Game Theory' edited by Anton Benz, Gerhard Jeager and Robert van Rooij, 2005 pdf file
Sally (2003) has pointed out that in many game theoretical situations the Pareto optimal equilibrium is not the outcome we actually observe in case the preferences of the agents are not fully alinged. In those cases, avoidance of risk plays an important role as well. Following Sally's observations, we discuss the importance of risk for the use of expressions with an intended non-literal interpretation, or with an underspecified meaning.
- Pragmatic Meaning and Non-monotonic Reasoning:
The Case of Exhaustive Interpretation (Linguistics and Philosophy, 2006, 29: 205-250 (With Katrin Schulz), pdf file
(this is the final version)
In this paper an approach to the {\it exhaustive interpretation} of answers is developed. It builds on a proposal brought forward by Groenendijk \& Stokhof (1984). We will use the close connection between their approach and McCarthy's (1980, 1986) {\it predicate circumscription} to describe exhaustive interpretation as an instance of {\it interpretation in minimal models}, well-known from work on counterfactuals (see for instance Lewis (1973)). It is shown that by combining this approach with independent developments in semantics/pragmatics one can overcome certain limitations of Groenenedijk \& Stokhof's (1984) proposal. In the last part of the paper we will provide a Gricean motivation for exhaustive interpretation building on work of van Rooij \& Schulz (2004). (a much earlier version of this paper appeared as `Exhaustification' in the Tilburg workshop on computational semantics, januari, 2003)
- Relevance of complex sentences (Mind and Manner, 2006, pdf file
Carnap (1950) defined a notion of relevance and discussed some of its behavior. Recently, Merin (1997) extended this kind of research to Good's (1950) notion of relevance and argued that this gives rise to appealing results to determine the relevance of complex sentences. This paper extends these investigations by discussing the behavior of some other notions of relevance under complex sentences.
- Exhaustive interpretation of complex sentences (Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 2004, 13: 491-519. with Katrin Schulz) Here is an almost final version: pdf file
In terms of Groenendijk \& Stokhof's (1984) formalization of exhaustive interpretation, many conversational implicatures can be accounted for. In this paper we justify and generalize this approach. Our justification proceeds by relating their account via Halpern \& Moses' (1984) non-monotonic theory of `only knowing' to the Gricean maxims of Quality and the first sub-maxim of Quantity. The approach of Groenendijk \& Stokhof (1984) is generalized such that it can also account for implicatures that are triggered in subclauses not entailed by the whole complex sentence.
- A modal analysis of presupposition and modal subordination (Journal of Semantics, 2005, 281-306. pdf file )
In this paper I give a
modal two-dimensional analysis of presupposition and
modal subordination. I will think of presupposition as a non-veridical propositional attitude. This allows me to evaluate what is presupposed and what is asserted at different dimensions without getting into the binding problem. What is presupposed will be represented by an accessibility relation between possible worlds. The major part of the paper consists of a proposal to account for the
dependence of the interpretation of modal expressions, i.e. modal subordination, in
terms of an accessibility relation as well. Moreover, I
show how such an analysis can be extended from the
propositional to the predicate logical level.
- Cooperative versus argumentative communication (A part of this appeared in Philosophia Scientia, {\bf *} (2), 2004, 195-209) pdf
file
Game theoretical analyses of communication (e.g. Lewis, Crawford \& Sobel) demand cooperation between conversational partners for reliable information exchange to take place. Similarly, in pragmatics, the theory of language use, it is standard to assume that communication is a cooperative affair. Recently, this standard view has come under attack by Durcot and Merin, and it has been proposed that an argumentative view on natural language use is more appropriate. In this paper I discuss to what extent this attack is justified and whether the alternative view can provide a more adequate analysis of `pragmatic meaning', i.e., implicatures. I will investigate the game-theoretical underpinning of the argumentative view, and contrast Merin's analysis of scalar implicatures with one using the principle of exhaustive interpretation.
- A review of Nirit Kadmon's `Formal Pragmatics' (Journal of Pragmatics, 2005, 749-755) pdf
file
- Utility, informativity and protocols; (Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2004, 33, pp. 389-419. An earlier version appeared in the Proceedings of LOFT 2002: Logic and the Foundations of Game and Decision Theory, Bonnano et al. International Center for Economic research, Torino): pdf
file
In this paper I show that maximization of relevance reduces under specific circumstances to maximization of informativity. It is also shown that the logical notion of entailment can be seen as an {\it abstraction} of the comparative relation of utility between two speech acts. The moral of this technical article is important for my more linguistically oriented research: relevance, or utility, is shown to be the basic notion, and notions that are normally used in linguistic semantics and pragmatics, like informativity and entailment, can be seen as special cases.
- Questions and Relevance, (A slightly different version from one that appeared in: Questions and Answers: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives (Proceedings of 2nd CoLogNET-ElsNET Symposium, pp. 96-107
, pdf file
In this paper it is argued that the interpretation of an interrogative sentence is {\it underspecified} by its conventional meaning. A uniform but still {\it substantial} underspecified meaning is given, and it is shown how this underspecification can be resolved by making use of a {\it relevance} relation between propositions. (I am afraid that this paper is not really new material, although the ideas are (hopefully) presented in a somewhat clearer way.)
- Evolution of conventional meaning and conversational principles, In Synthese (Knowledge, Rationality and Action), 2004, 139: 331-366. Here is an almost final version: pdf file
In this paper language use and organisation are analyzed by making use of Lewisean signalling games. Standard game theoretical approaches are contrasted with evolutionary ones to analyze conventional meaning and conversational interpretation strategies. It is argued that analyzing successful communication in terms of standard game theory requires agents to be very rational and fully informed. The main goal of the paper is to show that in terms of evolutionary game theory we can motivate the emergence and self-sustaining force of (i) conventional meaning and (ii) some conversational interpretation strategies in terms of weaker and, perhaps, more plausible assumptions.
- Being polite is a handicap: Towards a game
theoretical analysis of polite linguistic behavior (In proceedings of TARK 9, 2003, edited by M. Tennenholtz, pdf file );
In this paper I argue for a broad game
theoretical perspective on language use. Polite
linguistic behavior, in particular, should be taken as
rational interaction of conversational partners that
each come with their own beliefs and preferences. I
argue that the {\it function} of making a request in a polite way is to turn a situation in which preferences are
not well aligned to one where they are by assuming that to utter polite expressions is {\it costly}. This idea will be formalized by
making use of Lewisean {\it signaling
games} and the biological {\it
handicap principle}.
- Quality and Quantity of Information Exchange (Journal of Logic, Language and Information, 2003, 12: 423-451). Here is an almost final version: pdf file )
The paper deals with credible and relevant information flow in dialogs: How
useful is it for a receiver to get some information, how useful is it for a sender to
give this information, and how much credible information can we expect to flow between
sender and receiver? What is the relation between semantics and pragmatics? These
Gricean questions will be addressed from a decision and game-theoretical point of view.
- On Polar Questions (With Marie Safarova, In R. Young and Y. Zhou (eds.), Salt 13: Semantics and Linguistic Theory, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University). Here is an almost final version: pdf
file
We first show on a number of examples that positive polar questions, negative polar questions and alternative questions (containing a proposition and its negation) are not interchangeable in context. We will account for the
differences pragmatically, using decision theory. We offer a
simple classification of three types of use, which covers a number
of phenomena hitherto not systematically dealt with. Finally, we
do away with Ladd's typology of negative polar questions and give
a more systematic interpretation of the data.
An earlier version of this paper appeared as `No's no Good Alternative (With Marie Nilsenova, Stuttgart workshop on Info-structure, 2002); pdf
file
- Questioning to Resolve Decision Problems (Linguistics and Philosophy, 2003, pp. 727-763, an early version of it appeared already in the Proceedings of the 1999 Amsterdam colloquium as an extended abstract). Here is an almost final version: pdf
file
Why do we ask questions? Because we want to
have some information. But why this particular kind of
information? Because only information of this particular
kind is helpful to resolve the {\it decision problem}
that the agent faces. In this paper I argue that
questions are asked because their answers help to
resolve the questioner's decision problem, and that this
assumption helps us to interpret interrogative
sentences. Interrogative sentences are claimed to have a
semantically {\it underspecified} meaning and this
underspecification is resolved by means of the decision
problem.
- Presupposition: An (un)common attitude? ; (In Bauerle et al. (eds.), Presupposition and Discourse, Elsevier, Amsterdam)
pdf
file
In this paper I argue that
presupposition should be thought of as a propositional
attitude. I will separate questions on truth from
questions of presupposition satisfaction by making use
of a two-dimensional analysis. The update of what is
presupposed will be accounted for by eliminating arrows,
which also makes possible an appealing analysis of modal
subordination. (The paper `A modal analysis of modal subordination' is an extension of this paper)
- Signalling games select Horn strategies; (Linguistics and Philosophy, 2004, 27: 493-527, written mainly in 2001 and finished in 2002, An earlier version appeared in the Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 2001). Here is an almost final version:
pdf
file
In this paper I will discuss why (un) marked expressions
typically get an (un)marked interpretation: Horn's
division of pragmatic labor. It is argued that it is a
{\it conventional} fact that we use language this way.
This convention will be explained in terms of
the equilibria of {\it signalling games} introduced by
Lewis (1969), but now in an {\it evolutionary} setting. I
will also relate this signalling game analysis with
Parikh's (1991, 2000, 2001) game-theoretical analysis of
successful communication, which in turn is compared with
Blutner's (2000) bi-directional optimality theory.
- Relevance Only (In J. Bos et al. Proceedings of Edilog, 2002); pdf
file
In this paper, a single notion of exhaustivity will be defined in terms of {\it relevance} that accounts for (i) standard exhaustification; (ii) scalar readings; and the intuition that mention-some answers can sometimes be completely resolving. It will be shown that this notion of exhaustivity leaves something to be done for `only'. Moreover, an analysis will be given of `only' in terms of relevance that is stronger than exhaustivity in a subtle way. Finally, it will be suggested how exhaustivity and `only' could interact with disjunctions. (Note: the exhaustivity operator defined in `Exhaustification' is an improvement of the corresponding notion used in this (earlier) paper)
- The dynamics of questions and focus; With Maria Aloni, In: B. Jackson (ed.), Salt 12: Semantic and Linguistic Theory}, 2002, Ithaca, NY, Cornell University. Here is an almost final version: ps
file
This article presents a {\it dynamic} account of questions and focus which combines the logical appeal of the {\it partition theory} of questions with the empirical strength of the {\it structured meaning} account of questions and focus.
- Negative Polarity Items in Questions: Strength as Relevance; (Journal of Semantics, 2003, 20: 239-273). Here is an almost final version: pdf
file
The traditional approach towards (negative)
polarity items is to answer the question in which
contexts NPIs are licensed. The inspiring
approaches of Kadmon \& Landman (1990, 1993) (K\&L) and
Krifka (1990, 1992, 1995) go a major step further: they
also seek to answer the question of {\it why} these
contexts license NPIs. To explain the appropriate use
of polarity items in questions, however, we need to
answer an even more challenging question: why is an NPI
{\it used} in a particular utterance in the first place?
K\&L and Krifka go some way to answer this question as
well, but I seek to give the question a somewhat
`deeper' explanation.
- Relevance and Bidirectional OT; In R. Blutner and H. Zeevat (eds.), {\it Pragmatics in Optimality Theory}, Palgrave Macmillan, 2003, 173-210. Here is an almost final version: pdf
file
In this paper I show how a formal, decision theoretic notion
of utility, in combination with bidirectional OT, can
account for a number of conversational implicatures and
how it relates to (i) Sperber
\& Wilson's psychologically inspired notion of cognitive
relevance; (ii) the Stalnakerian assertability
conditions; (iii) the Gricean maxims of conversation,
and (iv) the so-called
$Q$ and $I$ principles of neo-Gricean pragmatics (Horn
1984; Levinson, 2000).
- Relevance of Communicative Acts; (Proceedings of Tark 2001) pdf
file dvi
file
This was my first paper where I argued that decision and game theory can be used to measure the {\it relevance} of
a speech act. In this paper
I argue that (i) the relevance of a speech act depends
on the `language game' one is involved in; (ii)
notions of relevance can be defined using
decision, information and game theory, and can be used
for linguistic applications; and (iii) the strategic
considerations of participants in a conversation deserve
our attention, especially when we consider mixed-motive
games of imperfect information, for instance, to
establish the common ground.
- Conversational implicatures and Communication Theory; In. J. van
Kuppevelt \& R. Smith (eds.), {\it Current and New
Directions in Discourse and Dialogue}, 2003, Dordrecht
(Kluwer). pdf
file
- The Utility of Mention-some Questions; (In Research on Language and Computation, 2004, 2, 401-416.). Here is an almost final version: pdf
file
{In this paper I argue that the `ambiguity'
between mention-all and mention-some readings of
questions can be resolved when we relate it to the {\it
decision problem} of the questioner. By relating
questions to decision problems, I (i) show how we can
measure the utilities of both mention-all and
mention-some readings of questions, and (ii) give a
natural explanation under which circumstances the
mention-some reading is preferred.
- Asserting to Resolve Decision problems ; (Journal of Pragmatics, 2003, 35, 1161-1179)
In this paper I use our notion of relevance to resolve the potentially underspecified meaning of attitude
attributions. Assuming that belief attributions
are made to explain unexpected actions, and that
assertions have to be relevant, it is shown that
potentially ambiguous, or underspecified, {\it de re}
belief attributions can be disambiguated by taking the assertion to be informative with respect to the decision problem under discussion.
- Bi-directional optimality theory; an application of Game Theory (Journal of Semantics 2000, 17: 217-242. with Paul Dekker) Note: my paper `Signalling games select Horn strategies' connects (evolutionary) game theory with Bi-directional OT in a much more satisfing way
- Permission to Change (Journal of Semantics, 2000, 17, pp. 119-145) pdf
file
In this paper I discuss how to account for the
performative effects of imperatives, and concentrate
mainly on permission sentences. In the first part of the
paper I argue that the performative effects of
permission sentences should be accounted for in terms of
a context change theory by making use of {\it
contraction} defined in terms of an ordering relation,
and show also how this ordering relation evolves from
permission to permission. In the second part a problem
for this analysis is discussed, i.e. the problem of
conjunctive permission sentences. I develop two ways to
solve this problem. First, I suggest that this problem
is due to the wrong way of accounting for contraction,
and propose an alternative way in which contraction can
be defined that accounts for the performative effects of
conjunctive permissions in a more satisfactory way.
Although the analysis is appealing, I will argue that we
should account for the problem by means of a type-shift
analysis.
- Some analyses of pro-attitudes. In: H. de Swart (ed.) Logic, Game Theory, and Social Choice, Tilburg University Press, Tilburg, 1999; pdf
file
According to the pragmatic or functional conception of attitudes, we can say that John desires $A$ iff John behaves such that he tends to bring it about that the actual world is an $A$-world, if his beliefs are true. This puts certain constraints on how to analyse desire attributions, but it leaves open a number of alternative analyses. Several alternatives will be discussed and compared in this paper. It will be suggested that for the {\it semantic} analysis of desire attributions it is useful to look at recent analyses of belief revision and theories of action and rational choice.
- Exhaustivity in Dynamic Semantics; Referential and Descriptive Pronouns (Linguistics and Philosophy, 2001, 24: 621-657)pdf
file
In this paper I argue that {\it anaphoric
pronouns} should always be interpreted {\it
exhaustively}. I propose that pronouns are either used
{\it referentially} and refer to the speaker's referents
of their antecedent indefinites, or {\it descriptively}
and go proxy for the description recoverable from its
antecedent clause. I show how this view can be
implemented within a dynamic semantics, and how it can
account for various examples that seemed to be
problematic for the view that for all unbound pronouns
there always should be a notion of
exhaustivity/uniqueness involved. The uniqueness
assumption for the use of singular pronouns is also
shown to be important to explain what the discourse
referents used in dynamic semantics represent.
- Modal Subordination in Questions (Twendial '98, Recently, Something very close to this analysis has become popular via work of Adrian Brasoveanu) pdf
file
In this paper it is discussed how questions should change information
states in dynamic semantics. The main claim is that the meaning of
following utterances can be dependent on questions in a similar way as
these meanings can be dependent on quantificational sentences, or more
broadly, that this dependence is one of Ômodal subordinationÕ. The most
important contribution of this paper, however, is to show how this dependence
between questions and later utterances can be accounted for in a
general and systematic way.
- Attitudes and Changing Contexts (This was basically my dissertation of 1997) pdf
file
Except for chapter four and various details, this was basically my dissertation. It is about propositional attitudes, theories of reference and dynamic semantics, and uses analyses of conditinals and belief revision
E-mail: |
R.A.M.VanRooijATuva.nl |