On the Semantics and Pragmatics of Linguistic Feedback

Abstract

This paper is an exploration in the semantics and pragmatics of linguistic feedback, i.e., linguistic mechanisms which enable the participants in spoken interaction to exchange information about basic communicative functions, such as contact, perception, understanding, and attitudinal reactions to the communicated content. Special attention is given to the type of reaction conveyed by feedback utterances, the communicative status of the information conveyed (i. e., the level of awareness and intentionality of the communicating sender), and the context sensitivity of feedback expressions. With regard to context sensitivity, which is one of the most characteristic features of feedback expressions, the discussion focuses on the way in which the type of speech act (mood), the factual polarity and the information status of the preceding utterance influence the interpretation of feedback utterances. The different content dimensions are exemplified by data from recorded dialogues and by data given through linguistic intuition. Finally, two different ways of formalizing the analysis are examined, one using attribute-value matrices and one based on the theory of situation semantics.

Conversation, Construction Grammar, and cognition

“…That is, although oh diff ers from the other lexical items used in the same slot, i.e., turn-initial before an assessment, because of its symbolic meaning (cf. Fischer, 2000 ), its occurrence in example (1) is similar to examples (13)- (15) in that all markers in this position acknowledge the partner's turn by signalling successful perception and understanding and continued attention, as well as a continuation of the same topic (Allwood, Nivre, & Ahlsén, 1992 ); i.e., they claim that the current utterance relates relevantly to the previous (cf. Fischer, 2010).…”

Co-constructing Grounded Symbols—Feedback and Incremental Adaptation in Human–Agent Dialogue

“…' Contrary to common belief, communicative feedback is not merely a way of signalling the interlocutor to continue speaking, but a powerful mechanism that enables listeners to express their mental state towards the speaker's utterance. According to Allwood and colleagues [1,19], communicative feedback signals express the basic communicative functions 1 'contact' (being "willing and able to continue the interaction"), 'perception' (being "willing and able to perceive the message"), 'understanding' (being "willing and able to understand the message"), and 'attitudinal reactions' (being "willing and able to react and (adequately) respond to the message") such as 'acceptance' or 'agreement' [1, p. 3]. These functions are related to each other hierarchically [1,11] such that higher functions imply lower functions (when signalling feedback of type understanding, for example, successful perception and contact are implied) and lower functions block higher functions (e.g., feedback of failed perception entails a problem in understanding).…”

“…Our attentive speaker agent 'Billie' is therefore equipped with a minimal 'Theory of Mind' that allows it to reason about the mental state that the user was most likely in when producing a feedback signal. This model, which we call 'attributed listener state' (ALS), is conceptualised in terms of the same mental categories that Allwood and colleagues [1,19] assume to underlie the basic communicative functions of feedback.…”

“…The hierarchical relationship between the underlying mental states (Allwood and colleague's hierarchy of feedback functions/Clark's ladder of actions [1,11]) are reflected in the way the five ALS-variables influence each other. C influences P, P influences U, and U influences AC and AG (see Figure 2 for a graphical depiction of the model and these influences).…”

“…To reduce the number of parameters that need to be specified, the conditional probability tables of the ALS-variables are Figure 2 The 'attributed listener state' (ALS) and its effect on the grounding status GR of an entity in the information state: five ALSnodes C (contact), P (perception), U (understanding), AC (acceptance), and AG (agreement) model the underlying mental states of Allwood and colleagues' basic communicative functions of feedback [1,19]. The influences between the nodes model the hierarchical relationship between these functions [1,11]. The grey dashed arrows indicate influences from feedback signal and discourse context (cf.…”