Documentation

Studies.RuytenbeekEtAl2017

Ruytenbeek et al. (2017): Indirect request processing, sentence types and illocutionary forces #

This file formalizes the paper's test of speech-act literalism, on which a sentence type encodes an illocutionary force, so that a directive reading of a non-imperative sentence is secondary, mediated by the encoded force, unless the construction is a conventionalised indirect request. Non-literalism instead makes a directive reading primary whenever the sentence shares the semantic features that make imperatives suited to directives: the deontic necessity of [Kau12]'s imperative, the questioning of the addressee's ability that is [Cla79]'s convention of means, or the enablement the possibility modals encode. The two accounts are predicates on the constructions of the paper's two French experiments (Literalist.DirectivePrimary, NonLiteralist.DirectivePrimary), with conventionalisation read off the paper's corpus counts and the modal semantics off the French fragment. In both experiments directive interpretations came with no fixations on the answer buttons and with response times matching the imperative, and they came for exactly the constructions non-literalism predicts (nonLiteralist_predicts); the non-conventionalised Est-il possible de VP? and the deontic Vous devez VP received them although literalism makes those readings secondary (literalist_refuted).

Implementation notes #

The corpus counts, the response-time estimates and the paper's findings on each construction's interpretations are Data/Experiments/RuytenbeekEtAl2017; the stimulus sentences are Data/Examples/RuytenbeekEtAl2017.json. A construction is directive when it received directive interpretations at all, and unactivated when the paper reports no fixations on the answer buttons and response times equal to the imperative's for those interpretations; the regression coefficients stay in prose. The paper's ranking of directive rates, Vous devez above Vous pouvez above Il est possible, which it attributes to the permission reading of pouvoir, is not derived.

References #

Constructions and forces #

source
def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.Construction.sentenceType :
Construction → Clause.SentenceType

The sentence type of a construction; its interrogatives are polar questions.

Equations
Instances For
    source
    def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.Construction.modal :
    Construction → Option Modality.ModalItem

    The modal of a construction, from the French fragment.

    Equations
    Instances For
      source
      def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.Construction.queriedPrep :
      Construction → Option Discourse.SpeechAct.PreparatoryCondition

      The preparatory condition a construction questions, which for the two interrogative requests is the addressee's ability.

      Equations
      Instances For

        The corpus and conventionalisation #

        source
        def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.Construction.form :
        Construction → Option Form

        The interrogative request of the corpus count a construction instantiates.

        Equations
        Instances For
          source
          def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.Conventionalised (c : Construction) :
          Prop

          A construction is conventionalised as a request when it is counted in the corpus and its directive uses outnumber its question uses there.

          Equations
          Instances For
            source
            @[instance_reducible]
            instance RuytenbeekEtAl2017.instDecidableConventionalised (c : Construction) :
            Decidable (Conventionalised c)
            Equations
            source
            theorem RuytenbeekEtAl2017.conventionalised :
            Conventionalised Construction.canYou ∧ ¬Conventionalised Construction.isItPossible

            Pouvez-vous VP? is conventionalised as a request and Est-il possible de VP? is not.

            The two accounts #

            source
            def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.Literalist.DirectivePrimary (c : Construction) :
            Prop

            Under literalism a directive reading is primary only when the sentence type encodes directive force or the construction is a conventionalised indirect request; any other directive reading is secondary and activates the encoded force.

            Equations
            Instances For
              source
              def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.NonLiteralist.DirectivePrimary (c : Construction) :
              Prop

              Under non-literalism a directive reading is primary when the construction shares the imperative's directive-making semantics: the imperative's own deontic necessity, the questioning of the addressee's ability, or a possibility modal's enablement.

              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Instances For
                source
                @[instance_reducible]
                instance RuytenbeekEtAl2017.instDecidableDirectivePrimary (c : Construction) :
                Decidable (Literalist.DirectivePrimary c)
                Equations
                source
                @[instance_reducible]
                instance RuytenbeekEtAl2017.instDecidableDirectivePrimary_1 (c : Construction) :
                Decidable (NonLiteralist.DirectivePrimary c)
                Equations
                source
                theorem RuytenbeekEtAl2017.accounts_differ (c : Construction) :
                (Literalist.DirectivePrimary c ↔ NonLiteralist.DirectivePrimary c) ↔ c.modal = none ∨ Conventionalised c

                The accounts agree on the constructions without a modal and on the conventionalised request, and differ on every other modal construction.

                The observations #

                source
                def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.Directive (r : Interpretation) :
                Prop

                The construction received directive interpretations.

                Equations
                Instances For
                  source
                  @[instance_reducible]
                  instance RuytenbeekEtAl2017.instDecidableDirective (r : Interpretation) :
                  Decidable (Directive r)
                  Equations
                  source
                  def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.Unactivated (r : Interpretation) :
                  Prop

                  The directive interpretations came without activation of the encoded force, with no fixations on the answer buttons and response times equal to the imperative's.

                  Equations
                  Instances For
                    source
                    @[instance_reducible]
                    instance RuytenbeekEtAl2017.instDecidableUnactivated (r : Interpretation) :
                    Decidable (Unactivated r)
                    Equations
                    source
                    theorem RuytenbeekEtAl2017.directive_unactivated (r : Interpretation) :
                    r ∈ interpretations → Directive r → Unactivated r

                    Every construction that received directive interpretations received them without activating the force its sentence type encodes.

                    source
                    theorem RuytenbeekEtAl2017.nonLiteralist_predicts (r : Interpretation) :
                    r ∈ interpretations → (Directive r ↔ NonLiteralist.DirectivePrimary r.construction)

                    Non-literalism predicts primary directive readings for exactly the constructions that received directive interpretations.

                    source
                    theorem RuytenbeekEtAl2017.literalist_refuted (r : Interpretation) :
                    r ∈ interpretations → ¬Literalist.DirectivePrimary r.construction → Directive r → Unactivated r

                    Literalism is refuted on both of the paper's predictions. The non-conventionalised Est-il possible de VP? and the deontic Vous devez VP, like the two possibility declaratives, received directive interpretations without activating the question or the assertion, although literalism makes those readings secondary.

                    source
                    theorem RuytenbeekEtAl2017.literalist_secondary_found (c : Construction) :
                    c = Construction.isItPossible ∨ c = Construction.youMust ∨ c = Construction.youCan ∨ c = Construction.itIsPossible → ¬Literalist.DirectivePrimary c ∧ ∃ r ∈ interpretations, r.construction = c ∧ Directive r

                    The secondary readings literalism posits are the ones the experiments found primary.

                    source
                    def RuytenbeekEtAl2017.rt (s : Study) (c : Construction) (r : Response) :
                    Option ℕ

                    The estimated response time of a response to a construction in a study, in milliseconds, when the paper reports one.

                    Equations
                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                    Instances For
                      source
                      theorem RuytenbeekEtAl2017.canYou_question_slower :
                      ∃ a ∈ rt Study.one Construction.controlInterrogative Response.yes, ∃ b ∈ rt Study.one Construction.canYou Response.yes, a < b

                      Answering the conventionalised request as a question is slower than answering a control question, which the paper reads as interference from its entrenched directive use.