Comments on Map Task Dialog d204
General Comments
email mcore@cs.rochester.edu to add your comments.A's comments: what's the forward function of Okay or of repetitions that indicate agreement? like utt15, utt45. can't be commit (no action)
Editor's response: Does there have to be a forward function? In this case, I'd say no.
Comments on Individual Utterances
1 G: Okay.
B - don't know what happened before, can't label
(note this is start of dialog, nothing happened before)
2 Do you have a start X?
3 F: [Yeah](0)
4 G: [up top?](0)
5 F: [Up](0) by sandy shore.
6 G: By sandy shore.
Y - I think this utterance was just to provide grounding, and isn't
a reassert according to the criteria in the manual (I think it
fails the true/false test).
A-is it a reassert? or other forward function? 36 is reassert
7 Just below that do you have a well
8 F: No.
9 G: Oh.
C - could be self-talk
10 Great.
Y - This one is interesting. If we equate this utterance with
"That's great." then it can be responded to with "No it isn't.",
and so by our criteria it is a statement. But I don't think the
speaker is trying to change the belief of the addressee -
he's just giving a reaction/opinion. It's also interesting that
he means the opposite of what he says.
Z - Comment on the state of the task?
B - this is an assessment; i'm not sure how to mark its backwards function
A=can it be considered an assert? like if it were 'that's bad'
11 Do you have any land marks just below
12 F: Uh no.
13 About half about a quar- th-
A=not sure about abandoned. 'about' is used to understand utt14
14 third of the way down I have some hills.
Y - I didn't tag this as an answer to utt11 since utt11 is a yes/no
question, a direct answer was given in utt12.
15 G: Okay.
A=which forw-function? could it be Reassert?
16 F: And I got a uh
17 local resident
D - Intonation indicates for utt16 to 18 that these utterances belong to the
same communicative function. For this reason they are tagged
identically here.
18 and an iron bridge.
19 G: An iron bridge.
Y - Seems to be repeating to show that he "heard" what was said
but his intonation indicates that he hasn't accepted the
information, and perhaps that he'd like elaboration.
Z - There's something else in the intonation. He doesn't see it.
C - he understands "iron bridge", but to put "repeat-rephrase" would
be misleading --- this signals a problem.
A=could it be other-stat, instead of other-FF? not reassert because G doesn't
have bridge (cant hear sound for utt19)
20 F: In the middle of the map
21 right at the top
22 G: Okay
D - forward function is maintaining the communication, why is okay separated
here and not in 28?
C - not really separate enough intonationally that I like coding ss
ack.
23 I don't have the iron bridge.
24 F: Do you got the [My](1)
C - utt 24 not abandoned --- just stumbles when interrupted
info-request=yes
25 G: [Do](1) y-
26 F: You got the local resident?
D -utt24 and utt 26 parts of the same speech act
27 G: Yes I do.
28 F: Okay, my iron bridge is right above that
Y - This could be separated into 2 utterances
29 G: [Oh, okay](2)
D - forward function maintaining communication
A=usual problem with Okay (as in 15, 45)
30 F: [like it's](2) like uh ...
A=not sure how to deal with 30-33. 30-31 dont seem to contribute to dialogue,
32-33 yes
31 [going across](3)
32 G: [It crosses](3)
K-utts 32 and 33 are treated as a single utt; also, this is really
more of a simultaneous "chant" than a repetition acceptance
A=utt32-utt33 together. don't think they're abandoned, as F says
yeah in 35
33 [the bay](4)
34 F: [go-](4)
D - interpreted as part of 36 and tagged identically,
35 Yeah
D - not considered to be part of segment 22, F starts his description in 34,
answers the question in 35 and restarts his description, then s
C - simultaneously half answers, but he didn't bother understanding
question, I think --- just brushed off G
A=like Okay's
36 Going across the the river there.
Y - There is actually a little correction going on here -
"bay " to "river"
37 Like
Y - utt37-utt40 should be joined.
I wasn't sure how to tag this. He's just refering to an area on
the map, he hasn't said anything about it. Does this actually
"make a statement about the world?"
C - don't know why says this; discourse marker?
D - can't see how to tag 37 separate from 38, 39 from 40 and 41 from 42
seems different from "take the people to delta"
38 below the local residents
39 about an inch
40 to the left
41 G: Is
42 the hills?
Y - He's guessing at what the other participant
was going to say about the map location refered to.
K-utts 41-42 treated as single utt. Question implies presence of hills
43 F: I got the h-
44 That's where my hills are
A=not sure whether it's answer. intonation doesn't indicate answer
C - ignores proferred completion
45 G: Okay.
E - i called this task because in the maptask domain, an ok implies
that Follower has it too)
A=as usual, what's forward function of "okay"
46 F: Um to the
D - because of restart in utt47, neither a forward nor backward function is
seen in 46
47 if you go right of the iron bridge
48 I have a woodland
49 G: See Okay.
A=FF as in 45 etc
50 F: [Okay](5)
Z - This one sounded like a cue phrase to me.
51 G: [I have a](5)
52 F: if you follow
53 if you follow the brook down
Y - utt53 and utt54 should be joined. Again, he's refering to a map
location, but hasn't actually made an assertion yet.
54 [the babbling brook](6)
55 G: [The forked stream](6)
C - sort of mini-misunderstanding correction
56 F: The babbling brook
57 or whatever
A=??? seems to accept different descr of stream in 55
58 I have a dead tree
59 Do you have that
60 G: I have the dead tree at the fork.
61 F: Yeah
A=without rest of dialogue difficult to understand what utt61 is doing
Last change: 13 March 98 by mcore
Click here to send in comments or questions.
Back to the Dialog Annotation Page