Skip to main content

Dialogue Game Rules

  • Chapter
Dialogue Games

Part of the book series: Synthese Language Library ((SLAP,volume 17))

Abstract

The simplest theory of dialogue would have just one rule: any player may put forward any sentence in any order. Such a rule should not fall all too short of being observationally adequate: there are few absolute restrictions as to what sequences of sentences might by hook or crook be construed as possible dialogues. One can do a lot by judicious choice of background assumptions and interpolation of suppressed steps of reasoning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Adams, E., ‘The logic of conditionals’, Inquiry 8 (1965), 166–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Adams, E., ‘Subjunctive and indicative conditionals’, Foundations of Language 6 (1970), 89–94.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Adams, E., The Logic of Conditionals, D. Reidel, Dordrecht 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ayers, M., ‘Counterfactuals and subjunctive conditionals’, Mind 74 (1965), 347–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Belnap, N., ‘Conditional assertion and restricted quantification’, Noûs 4 (1970).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Braine, M., ‘On some claims about if-then’, Linguistics and Philosophy 3 (1979), 35–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Butterworth, B., ‘Maxims for studying conversations’, Semiotica 24 (1978), 317–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chisholm, R., ‘The contrary-to-fact conditional’, Mind 55 (1946), 289–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dascal, M., ‘Conversational relevance’, Journal of Pragmatics 1 (1977), 309–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. van Dijk, T., ‘Relevance assignment in discourse comprehension’, Discourse Processes 2 (1979), 113–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gärdenfors, P., ‘On the logic of relevance’, Synthese 37 (1978), 351–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Goffman, E., ‘Replies and responses’, Language in Society 5 (1976), 257–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Goodman, N., ‘The problems of counterfactual conditionals’, Journal of Philosophy 44 (1947), 113–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Harper, W., R. Stalnaker and G. Pearce (eds.), Ifs, D. Reidel, Dordrecht 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Karttunen, L., ‘Counterfactual conditionals’, Linguistic Inquiry 2 (1971), 566–569.

    Google Scholar 

  16. von Kutschera, F., ‘Indicative conditionals’, Theoretical Linguistics 1 (1974), 257–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lewis, D., Convention: A Philosophical Study, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Ma. 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lewis, D., Counterfactuals, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Ma. 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Morgan, J., ‘Two types of convention in indirect speech acts’ in P. Cole (ed.), Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 9: Pragmatics, Academic Press 1978, pp. 261–280.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Pollock, J., Subjunctive Reasoning, D. Reidel, Dordrecht 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Poythress, V., ‘A formalism for describing rules of conversation’, Semiotica 1 (1973), 285–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Rescher, N., ‘Belief-contravening suppositions and the problem of contrary-to-fact conditionals’, Philosophical Review 60 (1961), 176–196.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Rescher, N., Hypothetical Reasoning, North-Holland, Amsterdam 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sadock, J., ‘Queclaratives’, CLS 7, Chicago Linguistics Society, 1971, 223–232.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Sadock, J., Toward a Linguistic Theory of Speech Acts, Academic Press, New York 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Sperber, D., and D. Wilson, ‘Language and relevance’, forthcoming.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Stalnaker, R., ‘A theory of conditionals’, in N. Rescher (ed.), Studies in Logical Theory, Blackwell, Oxford 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Strawson, P., ‘Intention and convention in speech acts’, Philosophical Review 73 (1964), 439–460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Tichy, P., ‘A new theory of subjunctive conditionals’, Synthese 37 (1978), 433–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Weiner, S. and D. Goodenough, ‘A move toward a psychology of conversation’, in R. Freedle (ed.), Discourse Production and Comprehension, Ablex, Norwood, N.J., 1977, pp. 213–225.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Werth, P., ‘The concept of relevance in conversational analysis’, in P. Werth (ed.), Conversation, Speech, and Discourse, Croom Helm, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Wilson, D., and D. Sperber, ‘On defining “relevance”’, to appear in R. Grandy (ed.), Festschrift for Paul Grice.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1983 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Carlson, L. (1983). Dialogue Game Rules. In: Dialogue Games. Synthese Language Library, vol 17. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-3963-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-3963-0_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-277-1951-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-015-3963-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics