A Formal Analysis of Iconic Gesture Alex Lascarides Joint work with - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

a formal analysis of iconic gesture
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

A Formal Analysis of Iconic Gesture Alex Lascarides Joint work with - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion A Formal Analysis of Iconic Gesture Alex Lascarides Joint work with Matthew Stone and Katya Alahverdzhieva School of Informatics University of Edinburgh Stanford 2013 university-logo Alex Lascarides


slide-1
SLIDE 1

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

A Formal Analysis of Iconic Gesture

Alex Lascarides Joint work with Matthew Stone and Katya Alahverdzhieva

School of Informatics University of Edinburgh

Stanford 2013

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-2
SLIDE 2

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Outline

1

Data and Motivation

2

Analysis using techniques from Linguistics Coherence relations and dynamic semantics Underspecification Grammar

3

Conclusion

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-3
SLIDE 3

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Iconic Gesture: An Example

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-4
SLIDE 4

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Iconic Gesture: An Example

So that these very low-level phonological errors tend not to get

  • reported. . .

. . . because they are being produced continually by an iterative process below our level of awareness.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-5
SLIDE 5

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Iconic Gesture: An Example

Now one thing you could do is totally audiotape hours and

  • hours. . .

. . . so that you get a large amount of data that you can think of as laid out on a time line.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-6
SLIDE 6

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Iconic Gesture: An Example

And exhaustively go through and make sure that you really pick up all the speech errors . . . by individually analysing each unit of analysis along the timeline of your data.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-7
SLIDE 7

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Iconic Gesture: An Example

Allow two different coders to go through it. . . . . . and moreover get them to work independently and reconcile their activities.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-8
SLIDE 8

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Iconic Gesture: An Example

speech because gesture speech so that gesture speech by gesture speech and moreover gesture

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-9
SLIDE 9

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Speech resolves gesture meaning

(1) So that these very low-level phonological errors tend not to get reported (2) The mouse ran on the wheel

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-10
SLIDE 10

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Gesture resolves linguistic meaning

Describing cotter pins in a lock being held in position: (Engle, 2000) (3) They have SPRINGS.

Right pinched hand (as if holding a small vertical object) is just above left pinched hand (as if holding small vertical object).

Speech only: collective vs. distributive. Gesture depicts a single pin and single spring:

ambiguous as to which hand depicts which. Interpretation stems from its iconicity and an inference that it elaborates the speech.

This resolves speech to a distributive interpretation.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-11
SLIDE 11

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Discourse Coherence

The current contribution to a discourse is related to a prior contribution by:

elaborating it, explaining it, drawing a contrast, continuing a narrative etc.

Relations’ semantics go beyond compositional semantics, resolving ambiguities, anaphora etc. John said that Bill kissed Mary. Peter did too/But Peter did. The relations structure the context, identifying what’s

  • salient. New contributions must connect to salient bits.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-12
SLIDE 12

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Advantages in gesture analysis

Uniform pragmatic theory for communicative actions, in whatever medium. Supports gestures contributing distinctive content:

speech because gesture Explanation

Predicts multimodal anomalies:

You walk out the doors. Linguistic analogy: You walk out the doors. Turn right. ???Push the door handle down.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-13
SLIDE 13

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Gesture interacts with prosody

Ill formed! (4) * Your MOTHER called Syncopation and boogie woogie in music, but not communication!

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-14
SLIDE 14

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Gesture interacts with linguistic syntax

From (Kendon 2004, p.129): (5) First of all they made everything GREASY in the whole room place. Exhaustiveness of greasy stuff. . . . . . even if gesture temporally synchronous with made But not if gesture temporally overlaps only First or they.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-15
SLIDE 15

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Multimodal Grammar

Construction rules attach gesture to a phrase: Syntax: Constraints on time, prosody and syntax. Semantics: Introduce an underspecified coherence relation between the content of the speech daughter and the gesture daughter. So timing, syntax and prosody constrain what bits of speech content a gesture can be semantically related to. Typically have attachment ambiguity, but some readings ruled out by form.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-16
SLIDE 16

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Formalisation

Form-meaning mapping: Use Ivan’s Work! RMRS: to capture the meaning of gesture that’s revealed just by the form of the hand movement(s). HPSG: to articulate how multimodal form constrains meaning. Context and Interpretation: Discourse Coherence: helps resolve underspecified content revealed by form to a specific interpretation in context. Dynamic Semantics: constrains co-reference between speech and gesture and across gestures. Won’t talk about that here.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-17
SLIDE 17

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Formalisation

Form-meaning mapping: Use Ivan’s Work! RMRS: to capture the meaning of gesture that’s revealed just by the form of the hand movement(s). HPSG: to articulate how multimodal form constrains meaning. Context and Interpretation: Discourse Coherence: helps resolve underspecified content revealed by form to a specific interpretation in context. Dynamic Semantics: constrains co-reference between speech and gesture and across gestures. Won’t talk about that here. Re-using linguistic formalisms yields uniform approach to interpreting communicative acts, whatever their modality.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-18
SLIDE 18

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Gesture Form

(Kopp et al, 2004)

Gesture’s form has components:

Hand shape, finger direction, palm direction, position (relative to torso), path of movement. . .

and each of these potentially reveals stuff about meaning. Gesture for (1):             

rh-depict

HAND-SHAPE

asl-s

FINGER-DIRECTION

down

PALM-DIRECTION

left

TRAJECTORY

sagittal-circle

MOVEMENT-DIRECTION

  • iterative, clockwise
  • LOCATION

central-right

            

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-19
SLIDE 19

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Underspecifying Linguistic Meaning: MRS

Semantic ambiguity without syntactic ambiguity:

semantic scope, word senses. . .

Underspecified LF is a partial description of logical form.

(6) a. Every french bank has some money. b. every(x, french(x) ∧ banks1(x), some(y, money(y), haves2(e, x, y)) some(y, money(y), every(x, french(x) ∧ banks2(x), haves1(e, x, y)) . . . c. l1 : every(x, h2, h3), l4 : french(x), l4 : bank(x) l5 : some(y, h6, h7), l8 : money(y), l9 : have(e, x, y) h2 ≥ l4, h6 ≥ l8

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-20
SLIDE 20

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Underspecifying Iconic Meaning: RMRS

Factorisation of Elementary Predications l9 : have(e, x, y) becomes l9 : a : have(e), ARG1(a, x), ARG2(a, y) RMRS can underspecify more stuff: what arity predicates have (cf. subcat info) missing ARGs what sort and value of arguments they take i the argument position of a variable ARGn(a, x) dependencies missing variable equalities All needed for mapping gesture form to content.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-21
SLIDE 21

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Underspecified semantics of gesture

Each element in gestural form conveys an analogous bit of descriptive content. Convention yields the underspecified predicates from the feature structure: l1 : a1 : hand_shape_asl-s(i1) No ARGs or variable equalities

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-22
SLIDE 22

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Hierarchy for Resolving Underspecified Predicates

l : a : hand_shape_asl-a(i)

✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏✏ ✏

❅ ❅ ❅ ❅ ❅ P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P

⊤ l : a : something_held(x)

✟ ✟ ❍ ❍

l : a : marker_point(x) . . . l : a : event_of_holding(e)

✟✟✟✟ ✟ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍ ❍

l : a : literal_holding(e) . . . l : a : metaphorical_holding(e)

✟✟ ✟ ❍ ❍ ❍

l : a : carry*(e)

✟✟ ✟ ❍ ❍ ❍

l : a : sustain(e) . . . . . . . . .

marker_point: 1-place predicate sustain: 3-place predicate

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-23
SLIDE 23

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Example construction rule (simplified)

Situated Spoken Phrase Constraint A gesture can attach to a temporally overlapping constituent and any of its higher projections. They made everything GREASY in the whole room. greasy ⇑ whole clause They made everything greasy in the whole room. they The cable unexpectedly and abruptly snapped unexpectedly ⇑ whole clause

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-24
SLIDE 24

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion Coherence Relations Underspecification Grammar

Example construction rule (simplified)

                                                           

phrase time ( 8 >

10 ) ∧ ( 11 > 7 )

time start earlier( 7 , 10 ) time end later( 8 , 11 ) phon

3

synsem

    

cat

5

cont

  

hook hook rels

  • Srel ⊕

Grel ⊕ Crel

hcons

Shc ⊕ Ghc

       

s-dtr

                  

phrase time start

7

time end

8

phon

3

mtr(τ)

dom list

1

dte

1 marked

  • synsem

      

cat

5

 

head pos val

  • spr

<> comps <>

  • spr

synsem comps <>

cont

  • rels

Srel

hcons

Shc

                        

g-dtr

           

hand-functional time start

10

time end

11

synsem

      

cat

  • g-feature

value . . .

  • cont

 

hook hook rels

Grel

hcons

Ghc

                    

c-cont

Crel

                                                           

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-25
SLIDE 25

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

Conclusion

Gestural meaning that’s derivable from its form is highly

  • underspecified. RMRS flexible enough to formalise this.

Speech and co-speech gesture should be integrated in the

  • grammar. HPSG flexible enough to formalise this.

Coherence relations are needed to model gesture because:

Underspecified content is resolved via reasoning about the coherence of the gesture performance; Discourse structure constrains what can be gestured now.

Dynamic semantics constrains gesture reference.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture

slide-26
SLIDE 26

university-logo Data and Motivation Analysis Conclusion

References

  • R. Engle. Toward a Theory of Multimodal Communication: Combining Speech,

Gestures, Diagrams and Demonstrations in Structural Explanations. PhD thesis, Stanford University, 2000.

  • A. Kendon. Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance. Cambridge University Press, 2004.
  • S. Kopp, P

. Tepper, and J. Cassell. Towards integrated microplanning of language and iconic gesture for multimodal output. In Proceedings of ICMI, 2004.

Alex Lascarides Semantics of Gesture