Intrinsic misalignment in dialogue: Why there is no unique context in a conversation

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (2):197-199 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Pickering & Garrod's (P&G's) claim that conversationalists do not explicitly keep track of their interlocuters' information states is important. Nonetheless, via alignment, they seem to create a virtually symmetrical view of the information states of speaker and addressee – a key component of their accounts of collaborative utterances and of self-monitoring. As I show, there is significant evidence for intrinsic contextual misalignment between conversationalists that can persist across turns.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,672

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Intrinsic Value.Bill Hook - 2003 - Environmental Ethics 25 (4):359-373.
Irreplaceability and Unique Value.Christopher Grau - 2004 - Philosophical Topics 32 (1&2):111-129.
What Is a Belief State?Curtis Brown - 1986 - Midwest Studies in Philosophy 10 (1):357-378.
Hyperventilating about intrinsic value.Fred Feldman - 1998 - The Journal of Ethics 2 (4):339-354.
Defending transitivity against zeno’s paradox.Ken Binmore & Alex Voorhoeve - 2003 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 31 (3):272–279.
On the representation of context.Robert Stalnaker - 1998 - Journal of Logic, Language and Information 7 (1):3-19.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
24 (#653,725)

6 months
3 (#962,988)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references