David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):169-190 (2004)
Traditional mechanistic accounts of language processing derive almost entirely from the study of monologue. Yet, the most natural and basic form of language use is dialogue. As a result, these accounts may only offer limited theories of the mechanisms that underlie language processing in general. We propose a mechanistic account of dialogue, the interactive alignment account, and use it to derive a number of predictions about basic language processes. The account assumes that, in dialogue, the linguistic representations employed by the interlocutors become aligned at many levels, as a result of a largely automatic process. This process greatly simplifies production and comprehension in dialogue. After considering the evidence for the interactive alignment model, we concentrate on three aspects of processing that follow from it. It makes use of a simple interactive inference mechanism, enables the development of local dialogue routines that greatly simplify language processing, and explains the origins of self-monitoring in production. We consider the need for a grammatical framework that is designed to deal with language in dialogue rather than monologue, and discuss a range of implications of the account. Key Words: common ground; dialogue; dialogue routines; language comprehension; language production; monitoring; perception-behavior link.
|Keywords||common ground dialogue dialogue routines language comprehension language production monitoring perception-behavior link|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Hanne De Jaegher & Ezequiel Di Paolo (2007). Participatory Sense-Making. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 6 (4):485-507.
T. Florian Jaeger & Neal E. Snider (2013). Alignment as a Consequence of Expectation Adaptation: Syntactic Priming is Affected by the Prime's Prediction Error Given Both Prior and Recent Experience. Cognition 127 (1):57-83.
Nick Chater & Christopher D. Manning (2006). Probabilistic Models of Language Processing and Acquisition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10 (7):335-344.
Deborah Tollefsen & Rick Dale (2011). Naturalizing Joint Action: A Process-Based Approach. Philosophical Psychology 25 (3):385-407.
Peer Christensen, Riccardo Fusaroli & Kristian Tylén (2016). Environmental Constraints Shaping Constituent Order in Emerging Communication Systems: Structural Iconicity, Interactive Alignment and Conventionalization. Cognition 146:67-80.
Similar books and articles
Allan Mazur (2004). Beyond Linguistic Alignment. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):205-206.
Stephen D. Goldinger & Tamiko Azuma (2004). Resonance Within and Between Linguistic Beings. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):199-200.
Robert J. Hartsuiker & Martin J. Pickering (2001). A Common Framework for Language Comprehension and Language Production? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):887-888.
J. Cooper Cutting (2004). A Call for More Dialogue and More Details. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):194-194.
Susan E. Brennan & Charles A. Metzing (2004). Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Partner-Specific Effects in a Psychology of Dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):192-193.
Martin J. Pickering & Simon Garrod (2004). The Interactive-Alignment Model: Developments and Refinements. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):212-225.
Hadas Shintel & Howard C. Nusbaum (2004). Dialogue Processing: Automatic Alignment or Controlled Understanding? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):210-211.
Dale J. Barr & Boaz Keysar (2004). Is Language Processing Different in Dialogue? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):190-191.
Simon Garrod & Martin J. Pickering (2003). Linguistics Fit for Dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (6):678-678.
Sam Glucksberg (2004). Dialogue: Can Two Be Cheaper Than One? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):199-199.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads56 ( #65,018 of 1,780,587 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #166,011 of 1,780,587 )
How can I increase my downloads?