Meaning negotiation
(2015) p.79-94- Abstract
While “meaning negotiation” has become an ubiquitous term, its use is often confusing. A negotiation problem implies not only a convenience to agree, but also diverging interest on what to agree upon. It implies agreement but also the possibility of (voluntary) disagreement. In this chapter, we look at meaning negotiation as the process through which agents starting from different preferred conceptual representations of an object, an event or a more complex entity, converge to an agreement through some communication medium. We shortly sketch the outline of a geometric view of meaning negotiation, based on conceptual spaces. We show that such view can inherit important structural elements from game theoretic models of bargaining – in... (More)
While “meaning negotiation” has become an ubiquitous term, its use is often confusing. A negotiation problem implies not only a convenience to agree, but also diverging interest on what to agree upon. It implies agreement but also the possibility of (voluntary) disagreement. In this chapter, we look at meaning negotiation as the process through which agents starting from different preferred conceptual representations of an object, an event or a more complex entity, converge to an agreement through some communication medium. We shortly sketch the outline of a geometric view of meaning negotiation, based on conceptual spaces. We show that such view can inherit important structural elements from game theoretic models of bargaining – in particular, in the case when the protagonists have overlapping negotiation regions, we emphasize a parallel to the Nash solution in cooperative game theory. When acceptable solution regions of the protagonists are disjoint, we present several types of processes: changes in the salience of dimensions, dimensional projections and metaphorical space transformations. None of the latter processes are motivated by normative or rationality considerations, but presented as argumentation tools that we believe are used in actual situations of conceptual disagreement.
(Less)
- author
- Warglien, Massimo and Gärdenfors, Peter LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2015-01-01
- type
- Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
- publication status
- published
- subject
- host publication
- Applications Of Conceptual Spaces : The Case For Geometric Knowledge Representation - The Case For Geometric Knowledge Representation
- editor
- Zenker, Frank and Gärdenfors, Peter
- pages
- 79 - 94
- publisher
- Springer
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:84943805684
- scopus:85117152904
- ISBN
- 9783319150208
- 9783319150215
- DOI
- 10.1007/978-3-319-15021-5_5
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 8416b5f7-4757-4800-aeeb-8332c6fc9e8a
- date added to LUP
- 2019-06-12 16:38:37
- date last changed
- 2024-07-09 17:54:00
@inbook{8416b5f7-4757-4800-aeeb-8332c6fc9e8a,
abstract = {{<p>While “meaning negotiation” has become an ubiquitous term, its use is often confusing. A negotiation problem implies not only a convenience to agree, but also diverging interest on what to agree upon. It implies agreement but also the possibility of (voluntary) disagreement. In this chapter, we look at meaning negotiation as the process through which agents starting from different preferred conceptual representations of an object, an event or a more complex entity, converge to an agreement through some communication medium. We shortly sketch the outline of a geometric view of meaning negotiation, based on conceptual spaces. We show that such view can inherit important structural elements from game theoretic models of bargaining – in particular, in the case when the protagonists have overlapping negotiation regions, we emphasize a parallel to the Nash solution in cooperative game theory. When acceptable solution regions of the protagonists are disjoint, we present several types of processes: changes in the salience of dimensions, dimensional projections and metaphorical space transformations. None of the latter processes are motivated by normative or rationality considerations, but presented as argumentation tools that we believe are used in actual situations of conceptual disagreement.</p>}},
author = {{Warglien, Massimo and Gärdenfors, Peter}},
booktitle = {{Applications Of Conceptual Spaces : The Case For Geometric Knowledge Representation}},
editor = {{Zenker, Frank and Gärdenfors, Peter}},
isbn = {{9783319150208}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{01}},
pages = {{79--94}},
publisher = {{Springer}},
title = {{Meaning negotiation}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-15021-5_5}},
doi = {{10.1007/978-3-319-15021-5_5}},
year = {{2015}},
}