<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="W93-0240">
  <Title>Closing the Gap Between Discourse Structure and Communicative Intention</Title>
  <Section position="1" start_page="0" end_page="152" type="abstr">
    <SectionTitle>
1 Introduction
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> Ill tile past, quite a few phenomena related to discourse structures have been studied, such as lexica\] cohesion (HMliday and Hasan, 1976), coherence relation (Hobbs, 1985; Wu and Lytinen, 1989), and rhetorical relation (Mann and Thompson, 1988). On the other hand, there Mso exists al)uadaut research on communicative intention such as speech act theory (Searle, 1968) and relevance maxim (Wilson and Sperber, 1986). One logical question to ask is then: What is the relationship between discourse structures and communicative intention? In tile following, we shall l, ake a.n objective approach to bridging tile gap between these two s(~ts o\[' I)henomena. More specifically, certain discourse structures and communicative intentio,,s are tak('~,.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> as literally as possible, from their &amp;quot;native&amp;quot; theories; Then, without any i)redefined fram(,wol'k, w(' observe the emergence of an integral discourse model encompassing these structures and iJltellt.i()lls via necessary &amp;quot;bridging&amp;quot; knowledge and inferences. Thus, on the one hand, our integrative vi(,ws toward discourse structures and intentions are similar to (Grosz and Sidner, 1986) and (Moore a ll(I Pollack, 1992) in the sense that we hold * The separation of attentional and intentional &amp;quot;tracks&amp;quot; of discourse \] .</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="2"> * The stratification of coherence (informational) and rhetorical (intentional) rela.ti(Jlls.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="3"> On the other hand, unlike previous work, we formulate knowledge sources which expl:,i.l, how the, emergence of integrated discourse model is possible, rather than just identifying such integrati()=~.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="4"> hi particular, the following knowledge sources are identified: KN-LC which associate concepts denoted by words (anchoring Lexi(:a.l Cohesion) KN-SA which interpret utterances in terms of the speaker's mental models whi(:h consist or I)r(,I)~,sitions embedded in attitude contexts (anchoring Speech Acts) KN-CR which specify a. domain theory of physical world (anchoring Coherence Relal.ious) KN-RR which specify a domain theory of mental dynamics (anchoring Rhetorical Relatiom~s) The above four knowledge sources in turns are governed by the ultimate principles of R.elevall('(' Maxim (KN-RM). In short, by explicating the knowledge behind discourse structures and illt('tlti(,Hs. we a.(lvoc~tte that the stratification of discourse structures and intentions is motivatod/stll~l)~='t(,~l by modularized, but related, knowledge sources.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="5"> 1This, howcver, will not bc discussed here; interested readers are referred to (Wu, 1993) for some' (I dis~'u.~siol~.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>