Explaining vague language

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2404.18154v1
• Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2024 12:11:34 GMT
• Title: Explaining vague language
• Abstract summary: Vagueness may be rationalized if it can be shown that vague language is more useful to speaker and hearer than precise language. We argue that the semantic account of vagueness is needed, and more adequate and explanatory of vagueness.
• Score: 1.6114012813668932
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Why is language vague? Vagueness may be explained and rationalized if it can be shown that vague language is more useful to speaker and hearer than precise language. In a well-known paper, Lipman proposes a game-theoretic account of vagueness in terms of mixed strategy that leads to a puzzle: vagueness cannot be strictly better than precision at equilibrium. More recently, \'Egr\'e, Spector, Mortier and Verheyen have put forward a Bayesian account of vagueness establishing that using vague words can be strictly more informative than using precise words. This paper proposes to compare both results and to explain why they are not in contradiction. Lipman's definition of vagueness relies exclusively on a property of signaling strategies, without making any assumptions about the lexicon, whereas \'Egr\'e et al.'s involves a layer of semantic content. We argue that the semantic account of vagueness is needed, and more adequate and explanatory of vagueness.

Related papers

• A Formal Limitation on Learning Human Language From Textual Corpora [54.22186267212778]
  We derive upper bounds on the probability that a decoder recovers a speaker's intended meaning from a representation of the utterance.<n>Experiments on artificial languages, Mandarin zero-pronoun resolution, and color reference provide empirical evidence in support of the theory.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-08-28T17:38:24Z)
• Floating or Suggesting Ideas? A Large-Scale Contrastive Analysis of Metaphorical and Literal Verb-Object Constructions [53.690096725532726]
  We analyze 297 English verb-object pairs (e.g., float idea vs. suggest idea) in 2M corpus sentences.<n>Using five NLP tools, we extract 2,293 cognitive and linguistic features capturing affective, lexical, syntactic, and discourse-level properties.<n>Cross-pair results show literal contexts have higher lexical frequency, cohesion, and structural regularity, while metaphorical contexts show greater affective load, imageability, lexical diversity, and constructional specificity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-04-09T14:08:57Z)
• A new kid on the block: Distributional semantics predicts the word-specific tone signatures of monosyllabic words in conversational Taiwan Mandarin [0.4078247440919472]
  We investigate how the pitch contours of monosyllabic words are realized in spontaneous conversational Mandarin.<n>We find that the effect of word remains a strong predictor of tonal realization.<n>For phonetics, distributional semantics is a new kid on the block.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-21T15:56:58Z)
• On the Same Wavelength? Evaluating Pragmatic Reasoning in Language Models across Broad Concepts [69.69818198773244]
  We study a range of LMs on both language comprehension and language production.<n>We find that state-of-the-art LMs, but not smaller ones, achieve strong performance on language comprehension.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-08T17:59:32Z)
• Calibrating Verbal Uncertainty as a Linear Feature to Reduce Hallucinations [51.92795774118647]
  We find that verbal uncertainty'' is governed by a single linear feature in the representation space of LLMs. We show that this has only moderate correlation with the actual semantic uncertainty'' of the model.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-18T17:51:04Z)
• Improving Cooperation in Language Games with Bayesian Inference and the Cognitive Hierarchy [0.8149787238021642]
  In language games, failure may be due to disagreement in the understanding of either the semantics or pragmatics of an utterance. We model coarse uncertainty in semantics using a prior distribution of language models and uncertainty in pragmatics using the cognitive hierarchy. To handle all forms of uncertainty we construct agents that learn the behavior of their partner using Bayesian inference.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-16T23:24:12Z)
• Surprise! Uniform Information Density Isn't the Whole Story: Predicting Surprisal Contours in Long-form Discourse [54.08750245737734]
  We propose that speakers modulate information rate based on location within a hierarchically-structured model of discourse. We find that hierarchical predictors are significant predictors of a discourse's information contour and that deeply nested hierarchical predictors are more predictive than shallow ones.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T14:42:37Z)
• Do Pre-Trained Language Models Detect and Understand Semantic Underspecification? Ask the DUST! [4.1970767174840455]
  We study whether pre-trained language models (LMs) correctly identify and interpret underspecified sentences. Our experiments show that when interpreting underspecified sentences, LMs exhibit little uncertainty, contrary to what theoretical accounts of underspecification would predict.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-19T19:49:29Z)
• Quantifying the redundancy between prosody and text [67.07817268372743]
  We use large language models to estimate how much information is redundant between prosody and the words themselves. We find a high degree of redundancy between the information carried by the words and prosodic information across several prosodic features. Still, we observe that prosodic features can not be fully predicted from text, suggesting that prosody carries information above and beyond the words.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-28T21:15:24Z)
• Learning Descriptive Image Captioning via Semipermeable Maximum Likelihood Estimation [67.2892626924334]
  With maximum likelihood estimation as the training objective, the captioning model is penalized whenever its prediction mismatches with the label. In this work, we introduce Semipermeable MaxImum Likelihood Estimation (SMILE), which allows richness optimization while blocking conciseness optimization.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-23T12:03:07Z)
• Neighboring Words Affect Human Interpretation of Saliency Explanations [65.29015910991261]
  Word-level saliency explanations are often used to communicate feature-attribution in text-based models. Recent studies found that superficial factors such as word length can distort human interpretation of the communicated saliency scores. We investigate how the marking of a word's neighboring words affect the explainee's perception of the word's importance in the context of a saliency explanation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-04T09:50:25Z)
• What Drives the Use of Metaphorical Language? Negative Insights from Abstractness, Affect, Discourse Coherence and Contextualized Word Representations [13.622570558506265]
  Given a specific discourse, which discourse properties trigger the use of metaphorical language, rather than using literal alternatives? Many NLP approaches to metaphorical language rely on cognitive and (psycho-)linguistic insights and have successfully defined models of discourse coherence, abstractness and affect. In this work, we build five simple models relying on established cognitive and linguistic properties to predict the use of a metaphorical vs. synonymous literal expression in context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-23T08:08:53Z)
• It's not Rocket Science : Interpreting Figurative Language in Narratives [48.84507467131819]
  We study the interpretation of two non-compositional figurative languages (idioms and similes) Our experiments show that models based solely on pre-trained language models perform substantially worse than humans on these tasks. We additionally propose knowledge-enhanced models, adopting human strategies for interpreting figurative language.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-08-31T21:46:35Z)
• Speakers Fill Lexical Semantic Gaps with Context [65.08205006886591]
  We operationalise the lexical ambiguity of a word as the entropy of meanings it can take. We find significant correlations between our estimate of ambiguity and the number of synonyms a word has in WordNet. This suggests that, in the presence of ambiguity, speakers compensate by making contexts more informative.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-05T17:19:10Z)
• On the Optimality of Vagueness: "Around", "Between", and the Gricean Maxims [0.0]
  We argue that the use of vague expressions can offer an optimal tradeoff between truthfulness and informativeness. We focus on expressions of approximation such as "around", which are semantically vague. That is, vague sentences can be more informative than their precise counterparts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-08-26T21:57:25Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.