PSY 369: Psycholinguistics

PSY 369: Psycholinguistics

Conversation & Dialog: Language Production and

Comprehension in conjoined action

Announcements Homework 8 (Due April 29) – Article summary: Griffin & Bock

(2000) – using eye-movements to investigate language production processes

“Yes” even with the reduced number of homeworks (11->8), I still plan to drop the lowest grade in this category (so your top 7 homework grades are what will count).

Exam 3 Extra extra credit opportunity: Up to 30 points added to your exam score 2 additional journal summaries (due April 29th)

Taft and Hambly (1986) – 15 pts Perfetti et al (1987) – 15 pts

Conversational interaction ABBOTT: Super Duper computer store. Can I help you? COSTELLO: Thanks. I'm setting up an office in my den, and I'm thinking about buying a

computer. ABBOTT: Mac? COSTELLO: No, the name is Lou. ABBOTT: Your computer? COSTELLO: I don't own a computer. I want to buy one. ABBOTT: Mac? COSTELLO: I told you, my name is Lou. ABBOTT: What about Windows? COSTELLO: Why? Will it get stuffy in here? ABBOTT: Do you want a computer with windows? COSTELLO: I don't know. What will I see when I look in the windows? ABBOTT: Wallpaper. COSTELLO: Never mind the windows. I need a computer and software. ABBOTT: Software for windows? COSTELLO: No. On the computer! I need something I can use to write proposals, track

expenses and run my business. What have you got? ABBOTT: Office.

Conversational interaction COSTELLO: Yeah, for my office. Can you recommend anything? ABBOTT: I just did. COSTELLO: You just did what? ABBOTT: Recommend something. COSTELLO: You recommended something? ABBOTT: Yes. COSTELLO: For my office? ABBOTT: Yes. COSTELLO: OK, what did you recommend for my office? ABBOTT: Office. COSTELLO: Yes, for my office! ABBOTT: I recommend office with windows. COSTELLO: I already have an office and it has windows!OK, lets just say, I'm sitting at

my computer and I want to type a proposal. What do I need? ABBOTT: Word. COSTELLO: What word? ABBOTT: Word in Office. COSTELLO: The only word in office is office. ABBOTT: The Word in Office for Windows.

Conversational interaction COSTELLO: Which word in office for windows? ABBOTT: The Word you get when you click the blue "W.” COSTELLO: I'm going to click your blue "w" if you don't start with some straight

answers. OK, forget that. Can I watch movies on the Internet? ABBOTT: Yes, you want Real One. COSTELLO: Maybe a real one, maybe a cartoon. What I watch is none of your

business. Just tell me what I need! ABBOTT: Real One. COSTELLO: If it’s a long movie I also want to see reel 2, 3 and 4. Can I watch them? ABBOTT: Of course. COSTELLO: Great, with what? ABBOTT: Real One. COSTELLO; OK, I'm at my computer and I want to watch a movie. What do I do? ABBOTT: You click the blue "1.” COSTELLO: I click the blue one what? ABBOTT: The blue "1.” COSTELLO: Is that different from the blue "W"? ABBOTT: The blue 1 is Real One and the blue W is Word. COSTELLO: What word?

Conversational interaction ABBOTT: The Word in Office for Windows. COSTELLO: But there are three words in "office for windows"! ABBOTT: No, just one. But it’s the most popular Word in the world. COSTELLO: It is? ABBOTT: Yes, but to be fair, there aren't many other Words left. It pretty much wiped out

all the other Words. COSTELLO: And that word is real one? ABBOTT: Real One has nothing to do with Word. Real One isn't even Part of Office. COSTELLO: Stop! Don't start that again. What about financial bookkeeping you have

anything I can track my money with? ABBOTT: Money. COSTELLO: That's right. What do you have? ABBOTT: Money. COSTELLO: I need money to track my money? ABBOTT: It comes bundled with your computer. COSTELLO: What's bundled to my computer? ABBOTT: Money.

Conversational interaction COSTELLO: Money comes with my computer? ABBOTT: Yes. No extra charge. COSTELLO: I get a bundle of money with my computer? How much? ABBOTT: One copy. COSTELLO: Isn't it illegal to copy money? ABBOTT: Microsoft gave us a license to copy money. COSTELLO: They can give you a license to copy money? ABBOTT: Why not? THEY OWN IT!

(LATER) COSTELLO: How do I turn my computer off?? ABBOTT: Click on "START".

Conversational interaction“the horse raced past

the barn”

Conversation is more than just two side-by-side monologues.

“the kids swam across the river”

Conversational interaction“The horse raced past

the barn”

Conversation is a specialized form of social interaction, with rules and organization.

“Really? Why would it do that?”

Conversation Fillmore (1981)

“The language of face-to-face conversation is the basic and primary use of language”

(pg. 152)

So all instances of language usage can (should) be compared to conversation

What is the impact of the presence or absence of different features of face-to-face conversation?

Conversation Herb Clark (1996)

Face-to-face conversation - the basic setting Features

Co-presence Visibility Audibility Instantaneity

Evanescence Recordlessness Simultaneity

Extemporaneity Self-determination Self-expression

Immediacy Medium Control

Other settings may lack some of these features e.g., telephone conversations take away co-presence and

visibility, which may change language use


Joint action Autonomous actions

Things that you do by yourself Participatory actions

Individual acts only done as parts of joint actions People acting in coordination with one another

Doing the tango Driving a car with a pedestrian crossing the street

The participants don’t always do similar things


Speaking and listening Traditionally treated as autonomous actions

Contributing to the tradition of studying language comprehension and production separately

Clark proposed that they should be treated as participatory actions


Speaking and listening Component actions in production and

comprehension come in pairs

Speaking Listening A vocalizes sounds for B A formalizes utterances for B A means something for B

B attends to A’s vocalizations B identifies A’s utterances B understands A’s meaning

The actions of one participant depend on the actions of the other


Arena’s of language use - places where people do things with language

Meaning and understanding Establishing Common Ground

Identifying participants Layers Conversation is structured

Meaning and understanding Common ground

Common ground is necessary to coordinate speaker’s meaning with listener’s understanding

Knowledge, beliefs and suppositions that the participants believe that they share

Members of cultural communities Shared experiences

This includes shared languages, shared lexicons, etc. What has taken place already in the conversation

Lack of successful communication was due to lack of common ground Starting around 1:20

http://www.veoh.com/collection/s274425/watch/e1077915X5GNatn

http://www.veoh.com/collection/s274425/watch/e1077915X5GNatn

EavesdropperAll listeners

Identifying participants Conversation often takes place in situations that

involve various types of participants and non-participants

BystanderSide

participantsAll participants

Speaker Addressee

EavesdropperAll listeners

Identifying participants

BystanderSide

participantsAll participants

Speaker Addressee

Humor came in part because we (eavesdroppers) share common ground that Lou and Bud didn’t)

Layers Conversations may have several layers

Layer 1 The primary conversation

Layer 2 A commentary about Layer 1

Each layer needs to be coherent (within the layer) as well as be connected to other layers in a relevant way

Layer 2: “I'm going to click your blue "w" if you don't start with some straight

answers. OK, forget that.”

Conversations are purposive and unplanned Typically you can’t plan exactly what you’re going to say

because it depends on another participant Conversations look planned only in retrospect

Conversations have a fairly stable structure

Structure of a conversation

Opening the conversation Identifying participants Taking turns Negotiating topics Closing conversations

Joe: (places a phone call) Kevin: Miss Pink’s office - hello Joe: hello, is Miss Pink in Kevin: well, she’s in, but she’s

engaged at the moment, who is it? Joe: Oh it’s Professors Worth’s

secretary, from Pan-American college Kevin: m, Joe: Could you give her a message

“for me” Kevin: “certainly” Joe: u’m Professor Worth said that, if

Miss Pink runs into difficulties, .. On Monday afternoon, .. With the standing subcommittee, .. Over the item on Miss Panoff, …

Structure of a conversation Kevin: Miss Panoff? Joe: Yes, that Professor Worth would

be with Mr Miles all afternoon, .. So she only had to go round and collect him if she needed him, …

Kevin: ah, … thank you very much indeed,

Joe: right Kevin: Panoff, right “you” are Joe: right Kevin: I’ll tell her, Joe: thank you Kevin: bye bye Joe: bye










Opening the conversation










Exchanging information









Joe: right Kevin: Panoff, right “you” are Joe: right Kevin: I’ll tell her, Joe: thank you Kevin: bye bye Joe: byeExchanging a message









Joe: right Kevin: Panoff, right “you” are Joe: right Kevin: I’ll tell her, Joe: thank you Kevin: bye bye Joe: byeClosing the conversation

Opening conversations Need to pick who starts

Turn taking is typically not decided upon in advance Potentially a lot of ways to open, but we typically restrict

our openings to a few ways Address another Request information Offer information Use a stereotyped expression or topic

Opening conversations

Has to resolve: The entry time

Is now the time to converse? The participants

Who is talking to whom? Their roles

What is level of participation in the conversation? The official business

What is the conversation about?

Need to pick who starts Turn taking is typically not decided upon in advance Potentially a lot of ways to open

Taking turns Typically conversations don’t involve two (or more)

people talking at the same time Individual styles of turn-taking vary widely Length of a turn is a fairly stable characteristic

within a given individual’s conversational interactions

Standard signals indicate a change in turn: a head nod, a glance, a questioning tone


people talking at the same time

These principles are ordered in terms of priority The first is the most important, and the last is the least

important Just try violating them in an actual conversation (but

debrief later!)

Three implicit rules (Sacks et al, 1974) Rule 1: Current speakers selects next speaker Rule 2: Self-selection: if rule 1 isn’t used, then next

speaker can select themselves Rule 3: current speaker may continue (or not)


people talking at the same time

Use of non-verbal cues Drop of pitch Drawl on final syllable Termination of hand signals Drop in loudness Completion of a grammatical clause Use of stereotyped phrase

“you know”

Negotiating topics Keep the discourse relevant to the topic (remember

Grice’s maxims) Coherence again

Earlier we looked at coherence within a speaker, now we consider it across multiple speakers

Must use statements to signal topic shifts

Closing conversations Closing statements

Must exit from the last topic, mutually agree to close the conversation, and coordinate the disengagement

Signal the end of conversation (or topic) “Okay”

Justifying why conversation should end “I gotta go”

Reference to potential future conversation “Later dude”

Dialog is the key Why so little research on dialog?

Most linguistic theories were developed to account for sentences in de-contextualized isolation

Dialog doesn’t fit the competence/performance distinction well

Hard to do experimentally Conversations are interactive and largely unplanned

Pickering and Garrod (2004) Proposed that processing theories of language

comprehension and production may be flawed because of a focus on monologues

Processing models of dialog Pickering and Garrod (2004)

Interactive alignment model Alignment of situation

models is central to successful dialogue

Alignment at other levels is achieved via priming

Alignment at one level can lead to alignment at another

Model assumes parity of representations for production and comprehension

Assumptions of the model1. Alignment of situation models comes about via an automatic, resource-free priming mechanism

2. Representational parity between comprehension and production

3. Alignment at one level leads to alignment at other (interconnected) levels

4. There is no need for explicit perspective-taking in routine language processing


Garrod & Anderson (1987) The maze game Pairs played a co-operative computer game

Move position markers through a maze of boxes connected by paths

Each player can only see his/her own start, goal and current positions

Some paths blocked by gates (obstacles) which are opened by switches

Gates and switches distributed differently for each player

Players must help their partner to move to switch positions, to change the configuration of the maze


Garrod & Anderson (1987) The maze game

1-----B: .... Tell me where you are?2-----A: Ehm : Oh God (laughs)3-----B: (laughs)4-----A: Right : two along from the bottom one up:5-----B: Two along from the bottom, which side?6-----A: The left : going from left to right in the second box.7-----B: You're in the second box.8-----A: One up :(1 sec.) I take it we've got identical mazes?9-----B: Yeah well : right, starting from the left, you're one along:10----A: Uh-huh:11----B: and one up?12----A: Yeah, and I'm trying to get to ...



41----B: You are starting from the left, you're one along, one up? (2 sec.)

42----A: Two along : I'm not in the first box, I'm in the second box:43----B: You're two along:44----A: Two up (1 sec.) counting the : if you take : the first box as

being one up :45----B: (2 sec.) Uh-huh :46----A: Well : I'm two along, two up: (1.5 sec.)47----B: Two up ? :48----A: Yeah (1 sec.) so I can move down one:49----B: Yeah I see where you are:



Path descriptions (36.8%) See the bottom right, go two along and two up

Co-ordinate descriptions (23.4%) I’m at C4

Line descriptions (22.5%) I’m one up on the diagonal from bottom left to

top right

Figural descriptions (17.3%) See the rectangle at the bottom right, I’m in the

top left corner of that



Pairs converge on different ways of describing spatial locations

Entrainment on a particular conceptualization of the maze

But little explicit negotiation Entrainment increases over the course of a game

Description schemes as local ‘languages’ Rules for mapping particular expressions onto

interpretations with respect to a common discourse model

Once the meaning of a particular expression is fixed, players try to avoid an ambiguous use of that expression

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yysnkY4WHyM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yysnkY4WHyM



Entrainment emerges from a simple heuristic Formulate your output using the same rules of

interpretation as those needed to understand the most recent input

Representations used to comprehend an utterance are recycled during subsequent production

Leads to local consistency Helps to establish a mutually satisfactory description

scheme with least collaborative effort

Assumptions of the model2. Representational parity between comprehension and production

Parity important for interactive alignment We don’t go around repeating other people’s utterances!

Comprehension-to-production priming (BPC, 2000) Priming from sentences which were only heard Suggests that representations shared across modalities

Equivalent to production-to-production effects? E.g. Bock (1986), syntactic priming in language production tasks

Assumptions of the model3. Alignment at one level leads to alignment at other (interconnected) levels

Cleland & Pickering (2003) Semantic boost

Primes either pre (the red sheep) or post nominally (the sheep that is red) modified NPs

Same (sheep to sheep), semantically related (goat to sheep), unrelated (knife to sheep)

00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

RED SHEEP RED GOAT RED KNIFE

Prop

ortio

n "r

ed s

heep

" tar

get r

espo

nses

The red XXX The XXX that's red

Bigger priming effect when the prime noun is semantically related to the noun in the target

Branigan, Pickering, & Cleland (2000) Lexical boost similar effect with same verb

Assumptions of the model4. There is no need for explicit perspective-taking in routine language processing

If communication is successful, interlocutors’ situation models come to overlap

Implicit common ground

Overlap may be small to begin with

But via alignment, it increases over the course of a conversation

What looks like audience design is simply a by-product of good alignment

Full common ground only consulted when there are sufficient processing resources available

Summary “People use language for doing things with

each other, and their use of language is itself a joint action.” Clark (1996, pg387) Conversation is structured

But, that structure depends on more than one individual Models of language use (production and

comprehension) need to be developed within this perspective

Interactive Alignment model is a new theory attempting to do just this

Documents

PSY 369: Psycholinguistics