5-1338msg1.txt

运用贝叶斯网编的一个识别垃圾邮件的程序

Subject: summary : in other word

dear netter , i have post several query a few month ago . about ten member of the linguist list answer me by e-mail . i must show great thanks especially to prof . welchsler , prof . jewett , prof . edward ( who send me example of iow from london - lund corpus ) , prof . patriki , prof . spackman , prof . macraki , prof . alvarez - caccamo , prof . harri , prof . huettner , and dr . georgium green ( who introduce me " two type of convention in indirect speech act " by j . l . morgan , contain in the volume : _ syntax and semantic , vol . 9 : pragmatic _ edit by peter cole ( 1978 , new york : academic press ) . the follow be my own summary . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * in this summary , i propose the hearer 's implicature / implication - interpretation process ( prof . alvarez - caccamo 's suggestion ) , which constrain on the use of in other word ( iow ) in english . i would distinguish between speaker 's intend implicature and hearer 's interpret implicature . thus , speaker a may have the intention to implicate x , but hearer b may very well fail to recognize such implus - cature or else may interpret some other . even if b correctly interpret a 's intention , b 's interpretation depend largely upon the context and / or background assumption . the use of iow be such a case . a dictionary edit by ball ( 1986 ) call such usage " inferential function " , though he use the term rather informally in the dictionary . i will follow his terminology just for the sake of convenience . the inferential use of iow frequently occur between the two people 's dialogue . ( 1 ) a : i ' m afraid there be n't much i can help you with . b : _ in other word _ , you do n't want to be bother . although the interpretation process of ( 1 ) be very close to what be call " conventional " use , i . e . it may be process spontaneously , without any inferential process in the hearer 's mind , b guess a 's real intent , which be not directly infer from a 's utterance , but indirect - ly from a 's implicature . in order for b to necessitate iow , b exploit his / her background assumption / encyclopedic knowledge , implicate that a be busy now , or a do n't feel at ease with b . let the implicature just explain be c , then a sequential flow of consciousness / inferential process such as a $ @ " * ( jc $ @ " * ( jb emerge . iow be a visible index of the hearer 's implicature-interpretation process . speaker / hearer 's background assumption vary between common sense and the knowledge which be only valid between the speaker and hearer . ( 2 ) a : i love schubert 's late piano sonata . b : _ in other word _ , you do n't like the beethoven sonata ? iow in ( 2b ) be derive by the use of a restrict set of background assumption in which b have already admire the beethoven sonata . b assume that a be also an admirer of beethoven , but contrary to b 's assumption a declare an admiration for schubert . so , b feel criticism in a 's word . b 's background assumption become an old information , conflate a 's new information and enable iow to create a = b . " non - conventional " , rather complicate use of iow be the follow . ( 3 ) a : i ' m go to kill you . b : _ in other word _ , you 'd like it if i move my car . for example , b 's car stand in the way of a 's car , so that a get infuriate at b . the situation like the above get a to utter such harsh word ; kill you . a 's real intent , in this case implicature / implication , be " i ' m go to kill you if you do n't move your car " , or simply " move your car " , which be label as c again . b , begin with iow , paraphrase c by b 's own word . again in order for b to use iow , h / she must infer that a assume / implicate c . background assumption mitigate b 's process effort . if not , b process too much effort and cannot interpret a 's word . b 's job here be to process the flow of the dialogue like a $ @ " * ( jc $ @ ! a ( jb . b 's failure to process / infer the flow of the dialogue sometime occur . ( 1 ' ) a : i ' m afraid there be n't much i can help you with . b ' : ? _ in other word _ , you need to be help . in the context where a really need help , s / he do n't bother to say that s / he can't help b ' . if a 's hand be full of the parcel and he visibly need help , so that s / he say s / he can't help b ' , there be a possibility of b ' say it be you who need to be help . however , this be a very insult comment , because b ' actually imply that if you can't help me , you be not a capable person . so , you be the one who need help . another completely mislead example of inference be the follow . ( 4 ) a : sorry , i can't help you now , because i ' m busy . b : * _ in other word _ , you ' re busy . unacceptability of b come from a 's word _ because i ' m busy _ , where a have already speak out his own implicature c . mere repetition cannot be allow in iow 's case . if something extra can be imply in b 's response , type of ( 4 ) be ok . ( 5 ) a : sorry , i can't help you now . b : _ in other word _ , you can't . ( - ) ' you really can't . ' ) in summary , an utterance " a . in other word , b " have an inferential process / hearer 's interpretive process " a $ @ " * ( jc ; in other word c $ @ ! a ( jb " . iow can be campare with 's o ' and ' then , ' etc . the follow result be the above contributor ' reaction . ( * ) means that there be some who judge a sentence acceptable and other unacceptable . ' so ' : $ @ ! ! ( j ( 6 ) a . there be $ 5 in his wallet . { _ so _ / ( * ) _ in other word _ } he have n't spend all the money . b . she 's your teacher . { _ so _ / ( * ) _ in other word _ } you must respect her . $ @ ! ! ( j ( 7 ) play the french horn . a : anyway , the horn make funny noise . { _ so _ / ( * ) _ in other word _ } it 's a treacherous instrument , be n't it ? it 's something that be very hard for you to control . why be that ? too much spit , or what ? b : i ' m glad you ' ve use that term . because it 's not difficult . it be treacherous . so be the player , of course . but that 's another story . $ @ ! ! ( j ( 8 ) tom eat condemn meat . { _ so _ / * _ in other word _ } he feel ill . $ @ ! ! ( j ( 9 ) bill insult mary . { _ so _ / _ in other word _ } she leave . in contrast with resultative 's o 's ' in ( 6 ) and ( 7 ) , two 's o 's ' in ( 8 ) and ( 9 ) be sequential . in the case of iow , one be ok and the other be out . ( 9 ) can be interpret that bill 's insult mary alway lead to her leave ( here ) , so that iow be permit . iow in ( 8 ) be n't ok because eat condemn meat alway equal to his feel ill , in which case iow in such situation be redundant / meaningless / uninformative . ' then ' : $ @ ! ! ( j ( 10 ) an insurance man visit a girl he know . he have bring her a policy application for signature . they talk about her husband . girl : i ' m expect robert home soon . insurance salesman : oh ! why ? is he in trouble ? g : no . he 's think of set up in business on his own . is : oh , good for him . g : you think it 's a good idea ? is : ye , why not ? g : small business be go bust all over the place . is : so , there be million of people on the dole right now who think they be safe and secure work for someone else . { _ so _ / _ in other word _ / ( * ) _ then _ } , now 's the time to have a go . there 's nothing else to lose anyway . g : think so ? is : ye . ' in that case ' : $ @ ! ! ( j ( 11 ) a : i ' m afraid there be n't much i can help you with . b : { _ in that case _ / ( * ) _ in other word _ } i shall have to ask someone else . ' that be ' : $ @ ! ! ( j ( 12 ) they take refreshments , { _ that be _ / * _ in other word _ } , sand - witch , coffee , beer , fruit juice , and chocolate . ball ( 1986 ) explain that ' that be ' be open-end and iow be close - end . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * if you have further comment on my analyisis of iow above , please do n't hesitate to e-mail me . thank very much for all the help you have give . sincerely , hiroakus tanaka associate professor , tokushima university , japan . e-mail : gca01363 @ niftyserve . or . jp