Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Game Theory and Grice Theory of Implicatures: Anton Benz
Game Theory and Grice Theory of Implicatures: Anton Benz
Anton Benz
Scalar Implicatures
Gricean Pragmatics
Grice distinguishes between: What is said. What is implicated.
Some of the boys came to the party.
said:
Conversation is a cooperative effort. Each participant recognises in their talk exchanges a common purpose. Example: A stands in front of his obviously immobilised car. A: I am out of petrol. B: There is a garage around the corner. Joint purpose of Bs response: Solve As problem of finding petrol for his car.
Make your conversational contribution such as is required, at the stage at which it occurs, by the accepted purpose or direction of the talk exchange in which you are engaged.
Game Theory
In a very general sense we can say that we play a game together with other people whenever we have to decide between several actions such that the decision depends on:
the choice of actions by others our preferences over the ultimate results.
how it is taken up by its addressee the overall purpose of the current conversation.
100%
1; 1 0; 0
50% > 0; 0
50% >
50% >
1; 1 0; 0 1; 1
50% <
some
all most
50% >
1; 1 1; 1
50% <
some
1; 1
In all branches that contain some the initial situation is 50% <
A: I am out of petrol. B: There is a garage around the corner. (G) Implicated: The garage is open. (H) How should one formally account for the implicature? Set H*:= The negation of H
1. 2. 3. 4.
B said that G but not that H*. H* is relevant and G H* G. Hence if G H*, then B should have said G H* (Quantity). Hence H* cannot be true, and therefore H.
B said that G but not that H. H is relevant and G H G. Hence if G H, then B should have said G H (Quantity). Hence H cannot be true, and therefore H*.
I: Where can I buy an Italian newspaper? E: At the station and at the palace. Decision problem of A: Where should I go to in order to buy an Italian newspaper.
Decision Making
The Model:
: a (countable) set of possible states of the world. PI, PE: (discrete) probability measures representing the inquirers and the answering experts knowledge about the world. A : a set of actions. UI, UE: Payoff functions that represent the inquirers and experts preferences over final outcomes of the game.
Decision criterion: an agent chooses an action which maximises his expected utility: EU(a) = v P(w) U(v,a)
An Example
John loves to dance to Salsa music and he loves to dance to Hip Hop but he can't stand it if a club mixes both styles. It is common knowledge that E knows always which kind of music plays at which place. J: I want to dance tonight. Where can I go to? E: Oh, tonight they play Hip Hop at the Roter Salon. implicated: No Salsa at the Roter Salon.
A game tree for the situation where both Salsa and Hip Hop are playing
stay home
1 0 1 0 1 0
RS = Roter Salon
go-to RS
1 0
both
go-to RS
go-to RS
0
2 2
Salsa
Salsa
go-to RS
Salsa
Salsa
go-to RS
Hip Hop
Hip Hop
go-to RS
In all branches that contain Salsa the initial situation is such that only Salsa is playing at the Roter Salon.
Describe the utterance situation by a game (in extensive form, i.e. tree form).
The game tree shows:
Possible states of the world Utterances the speaker can choose Their interpretations as defined by semantics. Preferences over outcomes (given by context)
2.
3.
Simplify tree by backward induction. Read off the implicature from the game tree that cannot be simplified anymore.
Another Example
J approaches the information desk at the city railway station. J: I need a hotel. Where can I book one? E: There is a tourist office in front of the building. (E: *There is a hairdresser in front of the building.) implicated: It is possible to book hotels at the tourist office.
The situation where it is possible to book a hotel at the tourist information, a place 2, and a place 3.
1 0 1 0
s. a. : search anywhere
s. a.
place 3 go-to pl. 3
1/2
0
s. a.
1 0
place 3
1/2
-1 1
tourist office
place 2
go-to pl. 2
place 3
go-to pl. 3
1/2
place 2
go-to pl. 2
Conclusions
Advantages of using Game Theory: provides an established framework for studying cooperative agents; basic concepts of linguistic pragmatics can be defined precisely; extra-linguistic context can easily be represented; allows fine-grained predictions depending on context parameters.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5. 6. 7.
It holds p1 p2 but not p2 p1. There are two expression e1, e2 of comparable complexity. e1 means p1 and e2 means p2. The speaker said e2. If p1 is the case, then the use of e1 is preferred (by 1. and Quantity). The speaker didnt say e1, hence p1 is not the case. Therefore p2 p1 is the case.
S has said that p; it is mutual knowledge that S and H play a certain (signalling) game G; in order for S to say that p and be indeed playing G, it must be the case that q; (hence) it is mutual knowledge that q must be the case if S utters p; S has done nothing to stop H, the addressee, thinking that they play G; therefore in saying that p S has implicated that q.