<?xml version="1.0" standalone="yes"?>
<Paper uid="P89-1026">
  <Title>HEARER Suzanne ACTION (USE-LANGUAGE AGENT Suzanne LANG is1))) (ASK-ACT AGENT Mrs. de Prado HEARER Suzanne PROP (ABLE-STATE AGENT Suzanne ACTION (USE</Title>
  <Section position="8" start_page="218" end_page="218" type="concl">
    <SectionTitle>
5. Conclusion
</SectionTitle>
    <Paragraph position="0"> To determine what an agent is doing by making an utterance, we must make use of not only general reasoning about actions in context, but also the linguistic features which by convention are associated with specific speech act types. To do this, we match patterns of linguistic features as part of the standard linguistic processing. The resulting partial interpretations axe merged, and then filtered by determining the plausibility of their conversational implicatures. Assuming no errors on the part of the speaker, the final interpretation is constrained to lie within the range so specified.</Paragraph>
    <Paragraph position="1"> If there is not a plausible interpretation, full plan reasoning is called to determine the speaker's intentions. Remaining ambiguity is not a problem but simply a more complex basis for the heater's planning processes. Linguistic patterns and plan reasoning together constrain speech act interpretation sufficiently for discourse purposes.</Paragraph>
  </Section>
class="xml-element"></Paper>