Relevance Theory

Relevance Theory
Relevance Theory

Brief Introduction to Relevance Theory

Formally proposed by Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson in their book Relevance: Communication and Cognition in 1986, relevance theory, intended to improve Gricean maxims by reducing redundant maxims to one single princip le, has arisen heated discussions for years since it was first proposed.

This presentation, accordingly, will give a brief introduction to relevance theory, its origin, its core notions, its main principles, and its current assessment, the significant contributions it has made to pragmatics and the limitations that needed to be overcome in future study.

Relevance Theory: its communicative view

As for the definition of language, most linguists tend to regard language as a grammar-governed representational system used for communication.Therefore, language is to express and explain meaning, and the basic function of language is to communicate.

However, Sperber and Wilson believe that although language can be used for communicative purpose, its communicative function has not revealed the essential features of language.

In their opinion, human activities involved language is in essence for cognition. Cognition is to absorb information, to obtain the knowledge. So the basic function of language is to retrieve and process information.

Thus relevance theory regard communicative activities, verbal or nonverbal, as cognitive activities. The intention of speaker can be perceived by the audience because of the shared cognitive environment. The success of communication will depend on the manifestness and mutual manifestness of each other's cognitive environment. Human cognition tends to be geared to the principle of relevance, and the comprehension of utterances follow ostensive-inferential model.

Revision of Two models of Communication: Code model & Inferential model Code model

From Aristotle through to modern semiotics initiated by Saussure, all theories of communication was based on a single model, which we will call the code model. According to the code model, communicative function is the main function of language and that communication is achieved by encoding and decoding messages. Several notions:

A code, is a system which pairs messages with signals, enabling two information-processing devices (organisms or machines) to communicate.

A message is a representation internal to the communicating devices.

A signal is a modification of the external environment which can be produced by one device and recognized by the other.

A widely quoted diagram of Shannon and Weaver (1949), slightly adapted in figure1, shows how communication can be achieved by use of a code.

message源发信息signal received signal received message接收信息| | | |

source信源encoder编码channel信道decoder解码destination信的

noise

This diagram shows how a message originating in an information source can be duplicated at a destination as the result of a communication process. As a matter of fact, Shannon and Weaver's diagram is inspired by telecommunications techenology. Thus, communication is achieved by encoding a message, which cannot travel, into a signal, which can, and by decoding this signal at the receiving end. Noise along the channel (electrical disturbances) can destroy or distort the signal. Otherwise, as long as the devices are in order and the codes are identical at both ends, successful communication is guaranteed.

Thus language is seen as a code which pairs phonetic and semantic representations of sentences. This view of communication has been proven to be explanatory for some forms of weak communication, such as Morse codes of traffic lights, however, its main defect lies in its inadequacy in description of verbal communication, and it can never touch the core of verbal communication, for verbal communication is far more the simple encoding and decoding process.

Inferential model

The alternative of code model is the inferential model of communication. Still assuming that the code model provides the framework for a general theory of communication and verbal communication, the inferential model described comprehension as an inferential process. Thus communication has been described as a process of inferential recognition of the communicator's intentions.

The inferential and decoding processes are quite different.

According to the code model, communication is achieved by encoding and decoding messages.

According to the inferential model, communication is achieved by the communicator providing evidence of her intentions and the audience inferring her intentions from the evidence, on the basis of the shared common knowledge (shared contextual elements).语码模式认为交际是对信息的编码和解码的过程;推理模式认为,交际是说话人提供他要表达的意图的证据(前提)、听话人根据这些证据,结合“共有知识”(即共有的语境部分)而推断出说话人意图的过程。

An inferential process starts from a set of premises and results in a set of conclusions which follow logically from, or are at least warranted by, the premises.

A decoding process starts from a signal and results in the recovery of a message which is associated to the signal by an underlying code.

推理过程起始于前提,终结于结论,这些结论从前提按逻辑推断出来,其可信性至少由前提得到一定的保证。而解码过程起始于信号,终结于复原的信息,这一信息由于隐含的语码而与该信号相联系。

Then are these two models of the same thing? Or of quite different things? Can they be amalgamated in some way? How are the two related?

In fact, most theorists see communication as a unitary phenomenon, to be described by a single model. The code model is very well entrenched in the western scholarly tradition, the inferential model also appeals to common sense . When an appealing new approach is put forward, the temptation is to treat it not as an alternative to the old approach but as an elaboration of it.

However, both of the two model have limitations.

The code model has the merit of explaining how communication could in principle be achieved. However, it fails on the descriptive side: cannot explain more complicated thought.

The inferential model, although provides a description of human communication which rings true, has several technical problems.

Relevance Theory Model of Communication

On the basis of the two model, and by drawing the theoretical source of cognitive theory from The Unit Structure of Human Brain by A. J. Ford, Sperber and Wilson put forward the notion of Ostensive-Inferential Communication, regarding there are two aspects of communication: ostensive&inference.

Thus ostensive-inferential communication can be defined as follows:

the communicator produces a stimulus which makes it mutually manifest to communicator and audience that the communicator intends, by means of this stimulus, to make manifest or more manifest to the audience a set of assumptions I.

说话人发出一种刺激信号,使之对交际双方互相显映(mutually manifest),通过这种刺激信号,说话人意欲向听话人显映或更加清晰地显映一系列的命题{I}.

We will explain it in detail in the next part.

The Two Principles of Relevance Theory

Relevance theory altogether develops two general claims or principles about the role of relevance in cognition and in communication.

Cognitive Principle of Relevance: human cognition tends to be geared to the maximisation of relevance.

Communicative principle of relevance: every act of communication conveys a presumption of its own optimal relevance.

认知关联原则:人类认知倾向于追求关联最大化。

交际关联原则:任何明示性交际行为都意味着本交际行为所传递的假设,具有最佳关联性。The first principle of relevance

when we claim that human cognition tends to be geared to the maximisation of the relevance, we mean that cognitive resources tend to be allocated to the processing of the most relevant inputs available, whether from internal (assumptions) or external (stimuli) sources.

In other words, human cognition tends to be geared to the maximisation of the cumulative relevance of the inputs it processes. It does this not by pursuing a long-term policy based on computation of the cumulative relevance achieved over time, but by local arbitraries, aimed at incremental gains, between simultaneously available inputs competing for immediately available resources.

The reason of why human cognition tends to be geared to the maximisation of relevance comes in two stages: one to do with the design of biological mechanisms in general, the other with efficiency in cognitive mechanisms.

The second principle of relevance

We firstly have to clarify several notions

Ostensive communication: they agree with Grice that communication is not simply a matter of encoding and decoding, it also involves inference. But they maintain that inference has only to do with the hear. From the speaker's side, communication should be seen as an act of making clear one's intention to express something. This act they call ostensive communication.

In other words, a complete characterization of communication is that it is ostensive-inferential, and ostensive communication, or inferential communication is a shorthand.

To explain presumption of optimal relevance, we shall first have a look at the three definitions of relevance, each providing both classificatory and comparative items.

1st definition: relating it to context

An assumption is relevant in a context if and only if it has some contextual effect in that context.

当且仅当一个设想在一种语境中具有语境效应时,这个设想在这个语境中才具有关联性。However, relevance is also a comparative concept. Some assumptions may be more relevant than others. What's more, "the assessment of relevance, like the assessment of productivity, is a matter of balancing output against input". It does not only depend on the effect produced by it but also on the effort required to process it. So they have improved on the previous definition by adopting an extent-condition format.

Extent condition1: an assumption is relevant in a context to the extent that its contextual effects in this context are large.

Extent condition2: an assumption is relevant in a context to the extent that the effort required to process it in this context is small.

程度条件1:如果一个设想在一个语境中的语境效应大,那么这个假设在这个语境中就具有关联性。

程度条件2:如果一个设想在一个语境中所需的处理努力小,那么这个设想在这个语境中就具有关联性。

As for context, it is not given, but chosen, and the size of it is determined by the assumption to process.What is given is relevance. People generally assume that the assumption they are processing is relevant (otherwise they would not bother to process it), then try to find a context in which its relevance will be maximized.

2nd definition: relating it to an individual

An assumption is relevant to an individual at a given time if and only if it is relevant in one or more of the contexts available to that individual at that time.

当且仅当一个设想在某个时刻,在某人可及的一种或多种语境中具有关联性时,这个设想才在当时与那个个体想关联。

Extent condition1: an assumption is relevant to an individual to the extent that the contextual effects achieved when it is optimally processed are large.

Extent condition2: an assumption is relevant to an individual to the extent that the

effort required to process it optimally is small.

Thus the notion of relevance to an individual is featured in terms of effect and effort. When we talk of the relevance of an assumption to an individual, we will mean the relevance achieved when it is optimally processed. Achieving maximal relevance involves selecting the best possible context in which to process an assumption: that is, the context enabling the best possible balance of effort against effect to be achieved.

3rd definition: relating it to a phenomenon

A phenomenon is relevant to an individual if and only if one or more of the assumptions it makes manifest is relevant to him.

当且仅当某个现象显映的一个或多个设想与某个体相关时,这个现象才与该个体有关联。And this last definition involves the characterization of relevance "not just as property of assumptions in the mind, but also as a property of phenomena(stimuli, e.g. utterance) in the environment which lead to the construction of assumptions."

A communicator cannot directly present an audience with an assumption. All a speaker, or a writer, can do is to present a stimulus in the form of a sound, or a written mark. The presentation of this stimulus changes the cognitive environment of the audience, making certain facts manifest, or more manifest. As a result, the audience can mentally represent these facts as strong or stronger assumptions, and even use them to derive further assumptions.

Thus, by presumption of optimal relevance(slightly revised later) is meant:

(a)The set of assumption I which the communicator intends to make manifest to the addressee is relevant enough to make it worth the addressee's while to process the ostensive stimulus.

(b)The ostensive stimulus is the most relevant one the communicator could have used to communicate I.

(a)发话者意欲向听话者显映的设想集I,具有足够的关联性,使听话人值得花时间去处理该明示性刺激信号。

(b)该明示性刺激信号,是发话者传递设想集I时所能运用的关联性最大的信号。

That is, every utterance comes with a presumption of the best balance of effort against effect. On the one hand, the effects achievable will never be less than is needed to make it worth processing. On the other hand, the effort required will never be more than is needed to achieve these effects. In comparison to the effects achieved, the effort needed is always the smallest. This amounts to saying "of all the interpretations of the stimulus which confirm the presumption, it is the first interpretation to occur to the addressee that is the one the communicator intended to convey."

Assessment of Relevance Theory

Relevance theory proposed by Sperber and Wilson, the revision and further exploration of Grice's Cooperative Principle, has given a relatively systemic interpretation of ostensive-inferential communication, by regarding that communication is an ostensive and inferential process, in which, one is only geared to the principle of relevance instead of having to comply with the Cooperative Principle. Significant contributions made to pragmatics

(a) has given a more precise definition of communication, by combining decoding and

inferential process together, thus providing a general framework for the pragmatic interpretation of communication

(b) has given a sound revision and complement to pragmatic theories by Grice

(a)has broaden the research scope of traditional pragmatics to a more open communication interpretation one

Limitations needed to be overcome

(a)has no clear explanation of the necessity and probability of the outcome of utterance understanding

(b)cognitive context and ostensiveness are too objective and hard to definite

(c)generalization of communication is too general to include any concrete pragmatic rules

Implications:

To be continued.

References

何兆熊,新编语用学概要,上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002。

胡壮麟,语言学教程(修订版),北京:北京大学出版社,2001。

胡壮麟,语言学教程(修订版中译本),北京:北京大学出版社,2001。

刘绍忠,关联理论的交际观,《现代外语》第2期,第13-19页,1997。

Sperber. D & Wilson. D, Relevance: Communication and Cognition (second edition), Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2001.

软件可靠性

软件可靠性是个大问题 闵应骅 如果说计算机体系结构描写了计算机的躯体,那么,软件就是计算机的灵魂。软件可靠性对可信计算起着举足轻重的作用。几十年来,硬件技术特别是集成电路技术飞速发展,但软件技术在产品质量、生产力、成本及性能等众多方面都滞后于硬件技术的发展。随着软件系统规模和复杂性的增加,其开发成本以及由于软件故障而造成的经济损失也正在增加,软件质量问题已成为制约计算机发展的关键因素之一。 软件可靠性是个大问题 不要认为,软件仅仅是一个计算机指令序列,它是为用户提供所需信息处理能力的逻辑上的信息处理设备。用户需要的是一个满意的软件产品。但是,不要把软件的产品实现和开发管理混为一谈,或者顾此失彼。产品实现包括从需求描述、系统设计、系统实现、测试验证到运行维护的整个生命周期。但是,几十年的经验表明,要实现一个高质量的软件产品,开发管理极其重要。软件生命周期定义了软件过程的框架和原则,但没有描述软件过程的活动、组织形式、工具和操作规程,以及开发方针和约束。这些正是当下所谓软件过程技术要研究的。由于当今的软件,无论是系统软件、中间件或应用软件,都不是一个单位、一个人能够完成的,需要合作和协同,因此,软件产业需要国际标准。20世纪80年代,卡内基-梅隆大学的软件工程研究所在美国国防部的支持下,提出了评价软件供应商过程能力的能力成熟度模型(CMM)。一个软件组织的能力成熟度的高低,就看该组织是否能站在比软件项目更高的层次上考察其实施软件开发所使用的软件过程。能够定义该软件过程者为成熟度三级;如能度量和管理,则达到成熟度四级;如果还能优化该过程,则达到了成熟度五级。只有在成熟的软件过程管理之下,才能生产出高质量的软件产品。CMM模型现在还在不断地丰富和改进。质量和生产率是软件工程的两个核心目标。CMM等已被公认为软件质量保证方面的事实标准。它强调软件过程的管理与控制,忽略软件人员个人的主动性和创造性。所以,进入二十一世纪,在美国成立了Agile联盟,提出了敏捷软件开发方法,以适应那些需求不够确定、软件开发团队不是很大的软件开发项目。在2000年,美国政府和商业机构公布了CMM水平评估结果。在第一、二级者超过一半,30%达到第三级,只有17%达到第四、五级。实际情况可能比这还要糟。CMM现在正发展成CMMI,以更广泛地评估一个单位创造复杂软件系统的能力。一个信息技术(IT)项目经理最重要的责任是为各种活动分配资源。其他责任还有项目计划和评估、控制、组织、合同管理,质量管理,风险管理,通讯和人力资源管理。项目经理的错误决策也许是今天软件失效的主要原因。技术管理的失误引起技术差错,但可以纠正,而错误的项目管理决策,例如雇用程序员太少或合同类型的错误,可能引起全盘皆输。 2005年9月IEEE Spectrum 杂志专门报导了用户定制的企业软件及许多软件失效的问题,这些失效导致公司破产、政府和工业界每年损失在美国达到600-750亿美元,这类计划的15-20%不是中途停止,就是完成后很快被抛弃。问题在那里?为什么软件会失败?没有过程文档或者很糟的过程文档、不可能满足的需求、很差的或者不断更改的规格说明和质量控制。最大的问题可能在于人,用户无法说清究竟他希望要什么,卖主无法控制,管理者看到这种情况只有另图别路。我们不妨举几个典型的例子来说明问题。 ①最著名的一个软件失效是美国联邦调查局(FBI)的“虚拟案件文件系统”。这个用户软件希望自动化该局的纸上工作环境,允许下属通过计算机网络分享与调查相关的信息。但是,

浅谈软件系统可靠性

浅谈软件系统可靠性 1 概述 近年来,随着计算机在军用与民用产品上的应用日益增多,软件缺陷所引发的产品故障,甚至灾难性事故也越来越严重,软件故障已成为高新技术产品发展的瓶颈。在这种情况下,一旦计算机系统发生故障,则其效益就会大幅度地消减,甚至完全丧失,从而使社会生产和经济活动陷入不可收拾的混乱状态。因此可以说,计算机系统的高可靠性是实现信息化社会的关键。 计算机系统硬件可靠性方面已有六十余年的发展历史,冗余技术、差错控制、故障自动检测、容错技术和避错技术等可靠性设计技术已经成熟。相比之下,软件可靠性的研究只有三十几年的发展历史,加上软件生产基本上仍处于作坊式的手工制作,其提高软件可靠性的技术与管理措施还处于十分不完善的状况。20 世纪70 年代末至80 年代初,软件可靠性的研究集中于对软件可靠性模型进行比较和选择。90 年代以来,软件可靠性研究工作进展较快,主要集中在软件可靠性设计、软件可靠性测试与管理以及软件可靠性数据的收集这三个方面。 2 软件可靠性的基本概念 2.1 软件可靠性的定义 1983年,美国IEEE计算机学会软件工程技术委员会对软件可靠性的定义如下: a)在规定的条件下,在规定的时间内,软件不引起系统失效的概率,该概率是系统输入和系统使用的函数,也是软件中存在的错误的函数;系统输入将确定是否会遇到已存在的错误。 b)在规定的时间周期内,在所述条件下程序执行所要求的功能的能力。 软件可靠性定义中提到的“规定的条件”和“规定的时间”,在工程中有重要的意义。 定义中的“时间”有3种度量。第一种是日历时间,指日常生活中使用的日、周、月和年等计时单元;第二种是时钟时间,指从程序运行开始到运行结束所用的时、分、秒;第三种是执行时间,指计算机在执行程序时实际占用的CPU 时间。 定义中所指的“条件”,是指环境条件,包括了与程序存储、运行有关的计算机及其操作系统。 2.2 影响软件可靠性的主要因素 软件可靠性表明了一个程序按照用户的需求和设计的目标,执行其功能的正确程度。这要求一个可靠的程序应是正确的、完整的、一致的和健壮的。软件可靠性的决定因素是与输入数据有关的软件差错,正是因为软件中的差错引起了软件故障,使软件不能满足需求。影响软件可靠性的因素主要包括: 1、软件开发的支持环境; 2、软件的开发方法;

软件可靠性技术发展与趋势分析

软件可靠性技术发展及趋势分析 1引言 1)概念 软件可靠性指软件在规定的条件下、规定的时间内完成规定的功能的能力。 安全性是指避免危险条件发生,保证己方人员、设施、财产、环境等免于遭受灾难事故或重大损失。安全性指的是系统安全性。一个单独的软件本身并不存在安全性问题。只有当软件与硬件相互作用可能导致人员的生命危险、或系统崩溃、或造成不可接受的资源损失时,才涉及到软件安全性问题。由于操作人员的错误、硬件故障、接口问题、软件错误或系统设计缺陷等很多原因都可能影响系统整体功能的执行,导致系统进入危险的状态,故系统安全性工作自顶至下涉及到系统的各个层次和各个环节,而软件安全性工作是系统安全性工作中的关键环节之一。 因此,软件可靠性技术解决的是如何减少软件失效的问题,而软件安全性解决的是如何避免或减少与软件相关的危险条件的发生。二者涉及的范畴有交又,但不完全相同。软件产生失效的前提是软件存在设计缺陷,但只有外部输入导致软件执行到有缺陷的路径时才会产生失效。因此,软件可靠性关注全部与软件失效相关的设计缺陷,以及导致缺陷发生的外部条件。由于只有部分软件失效可能导致系统进

入危险状态,故软件安全性只关注可能导致危险条件发生的失效。以及与该类失效相关的设计缺陷和外部输入条件。 硬件的失效,操作人员的错误等也可能影响软件的正常运行,从而导致系统进入危险的状态,因此软件安全性设计时必须对这种危险情况进行分析,井在设计时加以考虑。而软件可靠性仅针对系统要求和约束进行设计,考虑常规的容错需求,井不需要进行专门的危险分析。在复杂的系统运行条件下,有时软件、硬件均未失效,但软硬件的交互 作用在某种特殊条件下仍会导致系统进入危险的状态,这种情况是软件安全性设计考虑的重点之一,但软件可靠性并不考虑这类情况。2)技术发展背景 计算机应用范围快速扩展导致研制系统的复杂性越来越高。软硬件密切耦合,且软件的规模,复杂度及其在整个系统中的功能比重急剧上升,由最初的20%左右激增到80%以上。伴随着硬件可靠性的提高,软件的可靠性与安全性问题日益突出。 在军事、航空航天、医疗等领域,核心控制软件的失效可能造成巨大的损失甚至威胁人的生命。1985年6月至1987年1月,Therac-25治疗机发生6起超大剂量辐射事故,其中3起导致病人死亡。1991年海湾战争。爱国者导弹在拦截飞毛腿导弹中几次拦截失败,其直接原因为软件系统未能及时消除计时累计误差。1996年阿里亚娜5型运载火箭由于控制软件数据转换溢出起飞40秒后爆炸,造成经济损

计算机软件技术中的不可靠性分析

计算机软件技术中的不可靠性分析 摘要随着计算机全面普及,计算机已被广泛应用于各行业和领域中,人们的生产生活也逐渐离不开计算机。再这样的背景下,人们对于计算机软件技术可靠性提出更高的要求,为了满足人们对各项计算机软件的需求,确保计算机软件的安全和稳定。本文对计算机软件技术中存在的不可靠性展开探讨,这无疑对于提高计算机软件的可靠性,确保计算机软件运行的安全和稳定具有理论性的意义。 关键词计算机;软件技术;不可靠性 前言 计算机软件技术由于自身的方便、快捷、覆盖面广等特点,近年来发展迅速,并对人们生活、工作、学习等产生了深远影响。然而计算机软件开发设计程序比较复杂,并且与计算机系统软件系统紧密相连,一旦计算机软件跟不上软件开发技术,计算机软件很容易出现问题。计算机软件不可靠性,已经严重影响了计算机软件技术的发展。 1 计算机软件技术中存在的不可靠性 1.1 软件技术较为落后 计算机传入我国的时期较晚,至上世纪80年代我国才逐渐普及计算机。就目前,我国计算机行业发展状况而言,我国缺乏计算机软件开发的高端科技人员,从事计算机软件开发的人员多数是基础性的技术人员,使得我国计算机软件技术的水平和开发能力有限,开发人员的综合素质参差不齐。对于计算机软件的创新和研发能力不足,使得我国计算机软件技术和国外相比相对落后,导致计算机软件技术存在较多不可靠性[1]。 1.2 未对计算机软件开发过程进行评审 为了保证软件技术开发各个阶段的正确性,促使其满足开发设计的要求,要按照相应的程序进行软件开发工作,则需要及时地组织软件评审,对每个阶段的标准进行明确。设计师、管理人员以及总体人员均是评审的主要成员,同时需要不同领域的专家都参与到评审过程中去。在评审过程中针对软件开发的实际情况提出相应的意见,确保软件开发的可靠性。但是,在实际软件開发过程中,大多数软件开发企业没有重视软件评审的作用,导致软件开发出现不可靠性问题 1.3 尚未建立有效的软件质量检测机制 在早些年,我国就已经建立了一些软件开发技术的规范性操作方式。但是,我国仍然没有建立起质量测试、评价修改以及技术改良相关的工作内容。硬件系

相关文档
最新文档